My pet duck: Why does fate smile on some but not others?
By Gina Spadafori
October 24, 2009
Three weeks ago, Bernadette was a training duck, destined to give her life to teach another generation of working retrievers how to do their jobs.
Now, she’s living in my chicken pen. And she was the one who changed her own fate.
Before I tell her story, I must insert my views about meat and about hunting, which are, um, fairly unusual among self-identified animal lovers, the majority of whom are just fine with cruelty to food animals as long as they don’t have to watch the living and the dying and the price at the supermarket is cheap (well, if you don’t count the true cost of cheap food, and more on that in a bit).
I support ethical hunting. That’s not canned hunts, not trophy hunts, not bloodfests where as many planted birds as can be blasted in an afternoon are killed for the “fun” of it. But besides those aberrations, I support hunting.
Why?
Because if you’re going to eat meat — and I do, and so do my dogs and cats — you’re going to kill or have something killed on your behalf. (Actually, that’s even true of vegans: Countless numbers of small birds and animals are killed when those soy fields are harvested. It’s a fact: It you live, something will die. It’s the circle of life, folks, and one day you, yes you and me, too, will be the food for maggots, beetles and bacteria.)
For me, that means the choice regarding meat is to be as humane as possible. That means eating little meat (me, not the dogs/cats), and sourcing the meat/dairy I do buy to true family farms that respect their animals and their land. That’s not true of most meat, dairy and eggs, which come from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), industrial-grade corporate entities which are cruel, dangerous to our health (building antibiotic resistance and the possibility of new viral mutations) and devastating to the environment (the waste from these operations is a death plume). This sort of farming also requires the use of a lot of fossil fuel (both to run the operations and to replace natural fertilizer with synthetic since the drugged-up livestock are no longer near the fields they once enriched), and its centralized nature is a natural target for those who’d love to harm us. These last bits make factory farming a national security issue, as well. And that’s even before food-safety concerns.
Not looking so “cheap” anymore, is it?
Now look at hunting.
Ethical hunters don’t destroy the land — they save it. Hunting interests are responsible for the conservation of countless hundreds of thousands of acres of critical habitat. The animals they kill lived wild, natural lives until they died, and you can find them afterward in the freezers, dehydrators and stewpots of hunters. Ethical hunters are honest about their food, and they understand how it got there. They’re also respectful, and grateful. As far as national security, well, they’re also armed.
Are there idiot hunters? Well, of course. But there are also idiot animal advocates, and in general, I run into a lot more of the latter than the former. People who don’t think — they feel. Which is why they feel that hunting is cruel but don’t think about the lives of the chickens who are unrecognizable as such, now neatly packed as skinless, bloodless breasts in a shrink-wrapped styrofoam tray at the nearest mega-super-store.
Whenever anyone trashes hunting to me, I ask them what they had for dinner last night. Chicken? There is no hell on earth like that for a factory-farmed chicken, and that’s where all chicken meat comes from unless you’re researching your source. A hunted bird lives free and dies flying. Which is more humane, and environmentally sustainable?
Yes, I think and I feel. And that’s why I support humane animal agriculture with my food dollars and don’t trash hunting. What I don’t do is buy factory-farmed meat, dairy or eggs.
I also have retrievers, field-bred retrievers. Using dogs to pick up shot birds reduces waste during a hunt, so a duck or a pheasant doesn’t die for nothing. Protecting the working ability of dogs is important to me, because these working abilities are part of our culture and heritage. Frankly, that also means my dogs are probably smarter, more active and more athletic than yours. They weren’t born to be couch potatoes, and I appreciate how living with dogs like these is a personal challenge for me. They’re sweet and good-natured, but they’re not all that easy to live with, these smart, active working dogs of mine.
But I am healthier in mind and body because of them.
That said, I don’t much like that you have to introduce bird dogs to live birds for the dogs to understand their work as they are trained. These birds are pen-raised, and in comparison to the number of factory-farmed chickens killed in this country their numbers are incredibly small and their treatment largely humane.
But they still don’t have a great life — not like their wild cousins — and I’m uncomfortable with that, to say the least.
So it is that I now have a pet duck. She was one of the ducks at a hunting training seminar I took my dogs to, but she was so darn determined to take absolutely no crap from any person or dog that she was truly unsuitable to the task she had been assigned.
Everyone there felt “The Mean Duck” had earned her life, but where to live it? She couldn’t be turned loose or she’d be hawk food. She doesn’t know how to be a wild duck. Returning her to the game farm would mean another round as a training bird.
We thought she deserved something else.
I thought about it a few days, and then asked for “The Mean Duck.” If she could get along with the chickens, I figured, she’d be fine here. If not, well … we gave her a chance – and I’d give her a swift, humane end.
“The Mean Duck” — now named Bernadette – has been here a few days now and is fitting in fine. She and the chickens are getting along well. She utterly hates the dogs (understandable) and isn’t very fond of me (also understandable). But she let me hold her and clip her flight feathers, and she’s already starting to recognize me as the person who brings the really good food every morning. I suspect she’ll always hate dogs (not a bad thing for her), but she’ll get over hating me.
There’s no more reason for her to be alive than any other of the ducks with whom she was raised; no reason, that is, except that she stood out in a way that made her an individual. She was the duck who wasn’t in the right place, according to our own admittedly capricious world view. She saved her own life.
But I doubt Bernadette — it’s Gaelic for “brave as a bear” according to Teh Interwebs — cares how she ended up where she did. The human efforts to saving her and getting her to this place a couple hours from where she was born and an hour from where she almost died? Not interesting to her.
She’s gobbling down corn and learning her way around her new flock mates. There’s lots of room to walk around, a little pool and lots of food, and no dog will ever pick her up — or try to — again.
She’s a duck. She doesn’t think about much, really. But now, she’s a duck with a name and a home.
I think she likes it.
(Bottom photo by Xan Latta, who cared for “The Mean Duck” until she could get her to me.)
Good for you, Gina. As part of a “not very smart” idea from my grade school science teacher, all of my siblings incubated eggs (Mallard and Canada Goose). MacDonald Duck was a singleton so he grew up thinking he was a dog thanks to our German Shorthair Pointer. We could not send him back to the bird sanctuary where we got the eggs because he really didn’t know what he was. MacDonald loved grasshoppers, nightcrawlers, moths, cracked corn and Gaines burger. He treed the utility guy forcing the treed to yell to us to “call off our duck”. He also walked to school more than once. Since my Dad didn’t know that you only trim one wing to keep them grounded, MacDonald was seen on neighborhood rooftops quite often. MacDonald Duck, named for my brother’s baseball team, lived to a ripe old age of 13. I stack that up to being an ornery, blood blister creating attack duck. Thanks for bringing back memories of MacDonald and thanks for rescuing Bernadette. The dogs thank you too. Well, maybe not your dogs. LOL
Comment by Jill — October 24, 2009 @ 2:51 pm
Gina, thanks for this great story as well as for your thoughtful views on ethical hunting and, for that matter, ethical eating.
I’m so glad Bernadette found a home with you!
Comment by Glenye Oakford — October 24, 2009 @ 2:57 pm
Masterfully told, Gina.
Comment by Susan — October 24, 2009 @ 3:28 pm
I’m with you completely on this (pro ethical hunting and pro Bernadette).
We also do what we can to eat ‘ethical’ meat. Next month, Felix, an adorably cute pig we helped raise will go into our freezer along with one or two lambs the dogs worked at a friend’s farm. Next summer I plan to raise a small flock of meatbirds in the front yard. The lives of the animals we choose to eat may be short, but they don’t need to be brutal.
Comment by Mean Janeen — October 24, 2009 @ 3:39 pm
yes, good for you for saving Bernadette (gotta appreciate a feisty duck); I’m also with you on ethical hunting.
Comment by EmilyS — October 24, 2009 @ 4:31 pm
Granted, I’ll probably be in the minority here, and certainly my intent is not to insult anyone. That said…
It’s “fine” to support less cruel hunting or less cruel farming practices. But please don’t couch it in terms of kindness and “humaneness”. In my view, those are euphemisms to make humans feel better and do not necessarily reflect the unnecessary suffering involved in hunting and farming, no matter how “less cruel” some forms may be.
I wish Bernadette a good, happy life. I imagine all those other ducks have similar desires to her own.
(The number of wildlife deaths associated with a vegan diet can never compare to the magnitude of death associated with farming.)
Comment by Rinalia — October 24, 2009 @ 5:06 pm
That’s my puppy Kiefer and he had quite the time with Ms Bernadette although he was never frightened of her. He found her entertaining, bewildering and challenging. I, too, felt that she deserved to live following several rounds with Kiefer. I was extremely worried that Kiefer had a hard mouth and would “dispatch” any duck he was given. Luck of the draw he got the meanest duck on the planet. In the end he managed to pick up Ms. Bernadette and to my great delight I found that he was very gentle with her, despite her continued efforts to take out his eyes.
Bottom line, Bernadette deserved to live and I am so glad she found a home with you.
Comment by Cathie Newitt — October 24, 2009 @ 5:11 pm
It’s “fine” to support less cruel hunting or less cruel farming practices. But please don’t couch it in terms of kindness and “humaneness”.
Comment by Rinalia — October 24, 2009
We all die, Rinalia. That’s a fact. Your massive monoculture fields of synthetically fertilized, mechanically harvested vegan soy aren’t doing the environment or the ecosystem animals need to survive any favors. That’s another fact.
If you’re living, others are dying. Whether you’re eating them or taking their resources. That’s the final fact, choose to accept it or not. Don’t, and you’re just kidding yourself … or just feeling better about yourself, which is also my point.
You can minimize your impact through your choices, but you have to be honest about those choices and what they really mean.
I am well aware of the hatred animal rights activists feel for the trend towards so-called “happy meat.” Better dead than fed and all that.
But I believe in stewardship and compassion, not animal-rights dogma. We have the ability to make the lives of food animals normal and comfortable, and their deaths humane. Not “less cruel,” but actually humane: No fear, no pain, dead.
Having attended too many deaths recently, including my father and my heart dog, I am comfortable with “a good death” and wish it for all sentient beings, myself included.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — October 24, 2009 @ 5:18 pm
“The number of wildlife deaths associated with a vegan diet can never compare to the magnitude of death associated with farming.”
Comment by Rinalia @5:06 pm.
I’m curious - where does your food come from in not from farming?
Personally, I prefer species-appropriate diets for myself and my dog - so omnivore for me, and carnivore for him. He eats more meat than I do (even though he’s only 20 pounds, I eat nowhere the 1/2 pound of meat a day he does). So, does having carnivorous pets fit in with a “humane” lifestyle?
And Gina, I never knew retrievers were started on live birds - interesting!!
Comment by K.B. — October 24, 2009 @ 5:21 pm
Sorry, Cathy, didn’t mean to slight Kiefer. He was not backing down from “The Mean Duck,” and that’s a fact!
Comment by Gina Spadafori — October 24, 2009 @ 5:35 pm
Loved your story Gina. Thanks for sharing. Congratulations on your new life Bernadette!
Comment by Diane Camardello — October 24, 2009 @ 5:38 pm
Animals, and that includes humans too!, do select themselves out for survival.
Bernadette clearly subscribes to the “No surrender, no retreat” school of thought! Good for you both. :-)
as for the notion that you can somehow avoid the taking of lives on this planet, well, no.
Come watch the “crush” at a winery some time, you’d be simply amazed at what gets caught up, even though many grapes are still harvested by hand. And that does not count the countless reptiles, amphibians, insects, small mammals and birds killed or displaced when the vineyards are plowed and tilled.
the production of most large scale cereal crops is absolutely deadly to small animals. In the California central valley, it was actually hunting based groups like Wildlife Unlimited and others who, in conjunction with Fish and Game, persuaded farmers to either collect the eggs of displaced birds or allow others to do so, sometimes only minutes before the harvesters come through. The eggs are incubated and hatched and the birds raised and released.
I buy grass fed beef and lamb. I have worked on several ranches and I have seen the profusion of wildlife of all sizes on well managed range land. When cattle were not present, limited hunting was allowed too. I went back to one several years ago that has now been turned into houses and shops and golf courses. Other than a few deer and coyotes, it is a sad sterile place compared what it once was.
Done right, sustainable animal agriculture can reap huge conservation benefits and help land maintain a value NOT dependent on development.
Comment by JenniferJ — October 24, 2009 @ 7:59 pm
Great column, Gina, and well-said. My grandfather was a ranger-naturalist and huge conservationist who loved the outdoors, and loved animals. He taught us that we’ve gotten rid of so many predators that we need to harvest some of the wild game so that the animals don’t starve to death. The deer are more plentiful now than ever before in history, and if we don’t hunt them, they become ill and starve. Better to live a healthy and natural life, and get dropped with a shot. Thanks for another perspective.
Comment by Becky — October 25, 2009 @ 12:01 am
“We have the ability to make the lives of food animals normal and comfortable, and their deaths humane. Not “less cruel,” but actually humane: No fear, no pain, dead.”
Gina … really? As you might remember, I recently decided to eat only chickens who were raised on small local farms. I interviewed two farmers at length about their slaughter practices. Nothing I heard sounded like absence of fear and pain. The chickens see and/or hear the other chickens being killed, whether by hand or by knife. I would think that would incite fear. Also, if we’re talking breaking or slicing necks, do we really know how long consciousness lasts? How long the animal might continue to experience the event?
Even euthanisias I’ve seen at vet offices … as gentle as the last one was it still involved pain from the initial injection, and perhaps some fear. The little guy bolted to me across the exam table.
And to be shot while flying. That HAS to hurt, and the journey to the ground seems like it would be pretty frightening.
Better to starve or be hit by a car or live in a factory farm? Of course not. But I can’t think of many ways that being killed would be painless and free of fear, save maybe being shot in the back of the head by a very precise marksman.
Comment by Mary Mary — October 25, 2009 @ 6:37 am
You’re right. Less.
Less pain. Less fear. And a normal life for the animal.
All of which are more “humane” than a “natural” death — from disease, starvation or predation.
What disturbs me is that we are most of us so very separate from the realities of our food, and we either ignore that, or take our information from biased sources — animal-rights organizations or corporate agri-biz and gun-advocacy groups. All of which are about money — raising it or earning it.
We need to really look, ask questions, understand reality and then decide what decisions we are to make on our own. The place to start, as always, is to take apart the assumptions we’ve carried for years, look at issues with a fresh eye to what we’re really seeing, ask questions, discuss and decide.
The decision can run from being a vegan to being an ethical omnivore, as long as the choice is made consciously. The default is to do nothing, think about nothing, but pretend it’s all good. I’m fine with the decisions people make after asking real questions. I respect those decisions, and ask the same in return.
It’s the “default” that I don’t care for, especially when it involves uninformed condemnation of those who actually have thought these issues through.
Few people like to do that that thinking. Pre-fab opinions are so much easier, and ignoring the issues easier still.
Mary, I continue to appreciate that you do think, ask questions, challenge dogma and are willing to discuss. I like even more that for the most part all the regulars here do the same.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — October 25, 2009 @ 7:25 am
Gina, here is the point I tried to make that you end up making yourself: “Less pain. Less fear. And a normal life for the animal.”
There is not more “humane”, it is just less painful, less fearful. Less cruel.
I’ve been in small slaughterhouses. I would not want my loved one to end up there, be they canine, feline or human. Why would I want an equally sentient pig or cow or goat to go through that process if I do not need that animal to survive? And if I did, I would call a spade a spade - I would not say it was more humane or humane.
I’m honest with my own personal inconsistencies. I’m cognizant of the reality that no harm is impossible. Less harm, yes. I’m also aware of the effects monoculture has on the environment (and I would point out 40-50% of all soy is fed to livestock). That still does not make a dietary choice free of animal products equal or as harmful to the planet, our health or the animals as a non-vegan diet. All the research studying the effects of animal agriculture on the environment seem to indicate that it is far more harmful than non-animal agriculture in every meaningful way.
K.B. - I’m vegan. My food comes from my family garden and a local CSA. Sometimes it comes in cans and packages at the supermarket. I never claimed to be perfect, I just do my best to hurt as few creatures as possible.
My dogs are biological carnivores, behavioral omnivores. I feed my dogs a raw meat diet sourced from less cruel farms. I don’t kid myself into thinking this is an ethically correct decision. The inherent worth of a cow is no more or less than my dog - I’ve just placed more value on my dog than the unknown cow - it’s a moral inconsistency of my own that I have to deal with. Since *I* do not need meat, dairy or eggs to survive, I have no interest in personally participating in the consumption of animals, their breast milk or their eggs.
Comment by Rinalia — October 25, 2009 @ 12:06 pm
Rinalia, we’re pretty close on the same continuum, aren’t we? And thinking along the same lines.
Less.
Look, we could all in do with a lot less of most of what we want, couldn’t we? Isn’t that the lesson so many of us are going through now?
As for the “humane” aspect …
I have killed a gravely injured chicken myself (she tangled herself in the fence and was nearly torn to bit by her flock mates when I found her — I dislocated her vertebrae), have watched a pig slaughtered and butchered in his own pasture, and gone with a steer taken on trailer he had been on several times before to a small slaughterhouse, walked in on a halter and been killed just inside the door. All three were unconscious in a second, and dead shortly thereafter.
I’m quite frankly OK with that. I understand why others wouldn’t be, even though all three of those animals died iwith far less pain and fear than my own grandmother did — and over a much briefer period.
I know that a lot of my vegan friends are profoundly disturbed by the “betrayal” aspect — the death of an animal you knew, named and who trusted you. (The chicken’s name was Charlotte.) But animals don’t know know “betrayal.” What they do know is a comfortable environment where they can be themselves and exhibit normal behavior. And beyond that, anything we can do to reduce fear and pain is what we should do.
It’s the living that matters to me, for all sentient beings. The dying should be as swift as we can make it, with as little pain and fear as we can get. What happens after to the remains, I don’t much care about myself.
Let me say, though, as I also told Mary Mary, that I appreciate what you bring to this discussion.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — October 25, 2009 @ 12:25 pm
What’s interesting about a lot of retrievers is that they will put pigeons, New World quail, and pheasants in their mouths, but most require some encouragement to pick up an oily duck that smells terrible (even to a dog!)
My view on retrievers is they are actually humane hunting tools. If you cripple a bird that is shot and it gets away, the dog can find it and it can be humanely dispatched.
I have never believed hunting is about aggression.
Now, I’m as progressive as just about anyone. On just about any issue, I’m a lefty.
But on this particular one, I tend to stray from the flock.
I think that everyone of a progressive persuasion should check out Erich Fromm’s analysis on hunting behavior in our species:
http://www.ucalgary.ca/~powles.....sadism.txt
Comment by retrieverman — October 25, 2009 @ 4:28 pm
Oh, yes, retriever pups are often introduced to live pigeons to learn to carry a live bird for the introductory courses.
Ducks are for AP classes.
Comment by retrieverman — October 25, 2009 @ 4:40 pm
Thanks, Gina. I do like sharing ideas and opinions, and I’ve been working hard on not getting overly passionate about some issues.
I understand I’m a rather sensitive person and it’s hard for me to get past the fact that billions of animals are mistreated every day. I too believe that the living is far more important than the dying (unless the dying is so egregiously cruel and prolonged). I know it’s very “new-agey” but I really just want everyone to live good, happy lives, no matter their species. :)
Comment by Rinalia — October 25, 2009 @ 5:26 pm
AP classes? What is that?
My dogs are introduced to live pigeons at a very early age, live ducks at about four months of age, and pheasants shortly after. If they are going to hunt chukhar or quail, they’re introduced to them as well.
Comment by Patti S. — October 25, 2009 @ 5:31 pm
AP in learning how to handle birds.
Not AP in learning how to be a working retriever.
Comment by retrieverman — October 25, 2009 @ 7:47 pm
But the definition of “AP”, please? Advanced Placement? Associated Press? What does the A stand for, and what does the P stand for?
Comment by Patti S. — October 25, 2009 @ 8:19 pm
The female mallad ducks I’ve known have been wonderful, gentle creatures. I must say the ducks I’ve raised and known have created my soft spot for ducks. The first I raised from a hatchling, swimming in a meatloaf pan. She was then raised as a preschool duck in a lovely country yard where I taught in rural Los Gatos. Then there was Camelia who flew in to our garden from a nearby duck pond. She was not yet confident in her flight skills and I feared a dog would get her. She lived in our bath tub for a week or so until house guests arrived and she proved she could fly just fine. Bottom line, enjoy your new duck. Ducks are wonderful. If you have a snail problem, she’s your solution. Enjoy her!
Comment by Susan Tripp — October 25, 2009 @ 11:04 pm
Thanks Gina - both for an eloquent defense of contemporary hunting practices, and for taking on Bernadette.
It is truly unfortunate that hunting has become stereotyped as a redneck, conservative, backcountry, whathaveyou sport. I often encounter folks who believe that my hunting must reveal some unchecked aggression or maladjustment. While I must admit finding great joy in hunting, it derives not from some demented desire to kill things, but from the glimmer of connectedness I feel tromping through an upland field, or sitting in a duck blind at the crack of dawn, all while watching every nuanced movement of my dogs for ‘game on.’ I feel connected to my place in time, to my surroundings, to my heritage, to my sustenance, and to my humanness. Most people need drugs to feel that.
Before being green was a fad (and a great fad it is), there were hunters. They were the crazy old curmudgeons you’d encounter in rural bars, talking about how ‘wild’ California once was, before all city slickers paved over everything. They’d share stories of the slough where they’d jump-shoot a dozen mallards with their best spaniel, but that is now a mini-mart and gas station. They fought every proposed development that came their way. They lost most of the time.
My grandfather was among these crazy bustards. I’ve spent years working for environmental causes to varying degrees (NPOs, policy, academia, etc.), and I’ve yet to meet anyone quite so passionate about the environment as me ‘pa. He was born poor; so poor that hunting was essential to his family’s survival. Though I was much more fortunate in my suburban upbringing, I nonetheless have childhood memories filled with weekend hunting trips, Thanksgiving goose, deer carcasses hanging in the garage, and weeks on end eating venison cooked seven ways ‘til Sunday. All this so his grandkids would understand that “meat don’t grow in plastic packages on trees” and “animals need wild places, just like people do.”
Today, I choose to know, really know, where food comes from and how it got in my cupboard and refrigerator. I don’t support the NRA and I don’t yearn to kill things, but I do hunt. At Norcal’s duck opener last Saturday I shot a limit of mallards. The week before that, I dined on chuckar and pheasant from the prior weekend’s upland hunt. This supplements leftovers from the summer harvest already sitting in my freezer.
Perhaps, one day, I’ll be the the crazy old woman in the backcountry bar with a retriever at my feet, sipping whiskey and telling tall tales of the epic duck hunting over Sac valley rice fields that have since been reduced to golf course ponds. For now, I guess I’m okay being the shotgun-toting-psycho-hunter-chick. If my ‘pa were here, he’d laugh at that, and be proud.
Comment by Xan — October 26, 2009 @ 12:46 am
Great Article. Go Bernadette. Victor and Ilsa in my bird pen just had their living quarters winterized over the weekend and send their regards.
Comment by Verde — October 26, 2009 @ 8:18 am
Great article. With the urbanization of the world, there’s just fewer and fewer children who (like me) grew up with hunting and farming as part of every day life.
It’s not that it makes you callous, you just grow up with a better understanding of death in general (and biology, for that matter; Every time I help my dad gut and skin an animal, it’s a free anatomy lecture).
Comment by suzanne — October 26, 2009 @ 11:03 am
Wonderful post, Xan. Wish I’d known your ‘pa.
Comment by LauraS — October 26, 2009 @ 6:18 pm
I think I want to print this out and hand it to people who don’t understand how a person who has been vegetarian for 18 years has a photo of her dog on the wall with a duck in it’s mouth. I personally cannot eat meat….it just isn’t gonna happen. But I greatly respect hunters, they have made the choice to not be blind to the reality behind those Tyson chicken breasts in their nifty little packages. Your views on this are identical to mine and you explain it so well. Great post from Xan as well.
Love the photo. Would have loved to have seen that duck telling everyone to step away, now!!
Comment by Jen Metzger — October 26, 2009 @ 9:54 pm
I was anti-hunting as a youngster, until I learned many good lessons from hunters when I was a newspaper reporter in southern Maine in the late 1980s. There, property rights were the issue, not animal rights. Talking to hunters opened my eyes to many issues I had never given any thought to - such as where food comes from. I don’t do as well with my own eating ethics as you do, Gina, but I do much better than I used to thanks in part to those hunters.
Comment by keenwell — October 27, 2009 @ 12:56 pm
LOVE this. And a big amen to the sentiment about hunting, too.
Comment by LauraL — October 28, 2009 @ 8:01 pm
That’s a very clear and fascinating point of view Gina. The true life cycle of life is maintaining the balance and also the preservation, so the true hunter criminals are hunters of the endangered.
Comment by Hannah Serrano — December 28, 2009 @ 2:16 am