title

On my third read through of @whatlurksbean, this time dragging my two dear friends along to watch their hearts break like mine did >:))

1) Are those stairs up to code?

Just by looking at them: no. Open risers are a tripping hazard, I don’t see any tread grips so they’ll become a death trap in wet conditions, and those treads don’t look thick enough, supported enough, or even level. But hey, maybe it’s just a bad photo. But how far do the railing support posts go underground? Are they below the frost line? Were they properly supported in concrete? Was the concrete prepared right and given enough time to cure properly? Is the wood properly treated for weather resistance? Did he take into account the ground shifting on such a steep grade?

Even IF he did all that and the stairs were 100% up to code, the city has no way to verify that. So no, the city can’t just leave them there.

2) Who cares if the steps are up to code?

I saw a concerning amount of this in the notes. I thought we were all on the same page re: Cities have a moral obligation to make sure their structures aren’t deathtraps waiting to happen, and that’s what codes are for. I promise you, you WANT buildings and structures to follow codes and regulations. But in any case, they definitely have a legal obligation for it, so if they leave those stairs up on public land and someone trips, the city could be on the hook for millions in damages. So no, the city can’t just leave them there.

3) There’s no way stairs cost that much, it’s just the city stuffing its pockets:

$65,000 definitely seems on the steep side to me, and I’d want to see a breakdown of expenditure. But I also don’t know the scope of the project. For a set of stairs like the ones above? Yeah, that’s a lot. To excavate the entire grade and put in a concrete structure that includes stairs, an ADA compliant ramp, and good quality weather resistant material? That sounds more reasonable.

But the city also likely needs to have the following: a ground survey of the build site, architects to draw the plans, civil engineers to OK the plans, and the contractors - typically union, and therefore more expensive - to excavate and then build the structure. All of those steps are going to take a LOT of people and a LOT of time and therefore, a LOT of money.

4) Labor doesn’t cost that much, someone is just giving the job to his contractor buddy who’s inflating the price:

Labor does cost that much. Stop telling people to unionize and demand the value of their labor and then getting mad when people do it.

Anyway, in my city at least, contracts are done by blind bid and the lowest bid wins. Under most circumstances, my city legally cannot take a higher bidder, explicitly to prevent the above circumstance.

TL;DR:

Americans have one of the highest obesity rates in the world, yet they hold the most Olympic medals. They have a horrible education system, yet eclipse the rest of the world in scientific research. The country is filled with clueless philistines, yet their culture permeates every society, in some way, across the planet. The country is still less than three centuries old, but has spent most of it at war. They are universally hated or feared by nearly every other country on the planet, yet the first to offer help during a disaster. Their people are stubborn and never content with the way things are, and for better or worse, all of them imagine how things could be better. Every American is a bankrupt billionaire, a prince in exile, a grounded astronaut, a disgraced scientist. There are the people who do not settle for who they are, but for what they may become.

The country has her problems. Certainly their government has a lot of blood on its hands. But there is something charming about the people I can’t quite place. Even the delusional leftists or the out of touch neocons. There is a certain magic about the place that you don’t find elsewhere. There are bad parts and bad people, to be sure, but there are just as many good parts and good people. It is a land of extremes. But even the poor aren’t really that poor. Much better to be a homeless American living on the beach than literally freezing to death at a metro station in Moscow.

Interviewer: What do you think about starting an initiative on campus here at UK, to be more inclusive to women who have penises? So we can put urinals in the womens restroom for them.

Student: Sounds fantastic.

Interviewer: Oh, does it?

Student: Yeah.

Interviewer: What about- Let’s take it one step closer, y'know more- for inclusivity here on campus, but free tampons and pads in the mens restroom for men who have periods?

Student: Sounds great.

Interviewer: Ok- You dont see anything wrong with those statements?

Student: No.

Interviewer: What men do you know with periods?

Student: I generally use- ones like in Willy T* have pads, I use them pretty often.

bennett: so do you think we should put tampons and pads in the men’s restroom? dude: sure, I mean, I don’t really care. if a dude needs a tampon, he can have one. bennett: but would he need one? like, what would he use it for? dude, thoroughly unimpressed: I don’t know, that’s his problem.

vet-and-wild here.

Yes and no. I mean, everyone may have different opinions but here’s mine as a former farm laborer and Animal Science grad. Sorry this will be long, I have a whole lot of thoughts on this. “Factory farm” is honestly kind of a scary buzzword people use to describe any large farm, but a lot of times it’s just used as a blanket term for large scale farming rather than being owned by a company. The overwhelming majority of US farms are still family owned. Some of the really big farms have the newest technology to decrease their environmental impact and increase animal welfare (i.e. methane digesters, robotic milkers, etc) and end up being more efficient per pound of product produced. Some small farms have a handful of messy, stinky cows that only get seen by a vet when they’re already super sick. I’ve seen both. I’ve also seen small hobby farms where animals are treated like royalty and large scale farms that are messy and inefficient. BUT, doing anything large scale tends to lead to welfare issues (for both humans and animals) and sustainability issues. The state of animal agriculture in this country is a hot mess. Farmers have to produce massive quantities of cheap product to make a living. The problem isn’t that farmers are some evil animal haters that want to poison the planet, it’s that they literally can’t make a living without mass scale production. That needs to change. It’s bad for the farmers, their animals, and the environment. So go after legislators and corporations that allow this to happen, not poor farm laborers.

Animal welfare, particularly for production animals, was a huge part of my degree focus so that’s the area I’m most familiar with. There are obviously a whole bunch of other comments that can be made about environmental impact and human welfare conditions, but I’ll let someone who knows more than me talk about it. As part of my degree, veterinary training, animal welfare studies, and job experience, I’ve been on a lot of farms. Swine, poultry, dairy, beef, meat goat, dairy goat, meat sheep, dairy sheep, mink (fur), and camelid. I’ve been to organic, backyard, research, feedlots, tie-stall, free-stall, large scale, petting zoos, heritage breed, and every kind of imaginable in between privately owned farm. Even vegan farm animal sanctuaries. I’ve been in meat processing plants and have seen first hand what the processes is. So I’ve seen a lot. And you know what? They all have pros and cons. Back when I was in undergrad we were using the Five Freedoms of animal welfare to assess animals. The Five Freedoms are freedom from hunger and thirst, freedom from fear and distress, freedom to express natural behaviors, freedom from pain/injury/disease, and freedom from discomfort. Farms of any scale can meet those requirements, or fail horribly. Personally, I think confinement housing fails horribly, and that’s a practice generally associated with large scale farming. There are actual benefits (i.e. less inter-animal aggression, tailored nutrition, easier monitoring), but you very much take away freedom to express natural behavior and I would argue freedom from discomfort as well. And you know what? I try to be objective, but my personal feelings are that an animal should have enough room to turn around and not stand in their own waste. I don’t think that should be controversial. Animal agriculture is (for the most part) failing horribly with enrichment and ability to express natural behaviors, and that happens to be very important to me as an animal owner so I know I project that onto agriculture. Some species industries are better than others (i.e. dairy), while some are so far behind (i.e. poultry and swine). I’m not vegan or vegetarian. I don’t have a problem with eating meat, but I think the system needs drastic improvements.

People honestly tend to focus on issues that are not really big issues because showing videos of an animal not being knocked insensible before slaughter is much more gut wrenching than a pig without enrichment. But you know what? There are multiple behavioral and welfare issues with pigs not being provided adequate stimulation, including increased tail chewing (which is why pigs are tail docked), aggression, and stereotypic behaviors. Whereas the rate of successful 1st time stunning in processing plants is actually extremely high, and needs to be to pass inspections. PETA shows a video of dead piglets and it makes people outraged, but the issue isn’t animal abuse, it’s poor biosecurity that caused an outbreak of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus that has a near 100% mortality rate for young pigs. That is a real example. People should be upset. They should be upset that biosecurity protocols weren’t followed. But again, a video of a transport truck not being properly sanitized doesn’t really make for a good animal rights video. Public pressure is of course important for change, but people need to actually take the time to learn about what’s really an issue. Y’all can debate whether or not eating meat is ethical, but that’s not the question here, and it ignores the bigger picture. The fact is, there are animals alive right now and that will be born in the future that are harmed by a shitty system. Personally I’d rather focus on relevant welfare issues to improve their lives rather than comparing factory farming to genocide or whatever scare tactics animal rights groups are using nowadays.

Ferox here.

Following on from that note, comparing animla agriculture to genocide is a particular oet hate of mine. Genocide aims to kill and therefore eliminate a specific group of people, which animal agriculture has caused the populations of domestic animals to boom in far greater numbers than their wild counterparts. The goals are literally opposite.

Meat industry:

Ranchers:

supporting zoos does not support animals

supporting zoos does not support animals

supporting zoos does not support animals

supporting zoos does not support animals

supporting zoos does not support animals

supporting zoos does not support animals

Birds are reptiles 

Or crocodilians (and probably turtles) ARENT 

Because you can’t group (lizards, snakes, tuatara, turtles, crocodilians) without also including (birds) 

So if you don’t want to include birds in reptiles then you have to leave out some things we’ve called reptiles 

And, the common ancestor of [lizards, snakes, tuatara, turtles, crocodilians] by definition is also the common ancestor of birds. It is NOT the common ancestor of mammals. 

…which evolved from amphibians

Meat industry:

Ranchers:

Zoos don’t look like this anymore.

They look like this:

Good zoos do not keep their animals in “tiny spaces” with no enrichment.  I’m not pro-roadside zoo.  I’m pro-accredited zoo.  Zoos are incredibly important for conservation and education.

Are Zoos Necessary?

The Importance of Zoos: Resource Post

Why Zoos and Aquariums Matter: Assessing the Impact of a Visit to a Zoo or Aquarium

Why I Want to be a Keeper

Except the sea lions are blind. One was found as an adult after suffering a gun shot wound to the face that destroyed his eyes. The other was found as an adolescent, weak and starving because it had been blinded and unable to hunt. So they were rescued and introduced and the zoo built them a nice pool where they can swim and sunbathe and people toss them fish. It’s not the biggest exhibit, or the fanciest. But it’s a home for them, where they’re safe and well fed. Sea lions aren’t the most romantic of animals, but they’re a part of SF culture and a lot of us have a soft spot for the loud, bulbous things. And because of zoos, these two get to live long, happy lives.

They also do work with camel populations because the local human population use the camels for food sources the zoos help monitor the camels health.

Another zoo, I want to say it’s the Oregon zoo but don’t quote me on that, is helping female inmates. The zoo works with the female prisons by encouraging the inmates to assist in the breeding and raising of endangered species of butterflies. They plant the specific plants that the butterflies and catapillars need, raise them, and release them. These inmates get noted in any scientific journals that get published. They are giving these inmates a sense of accomplishment and validation.

Zoos not only save species but bring together and assist communities in an effort to save the environment. Zoos, good zoos, are essential to the future and I will fight anyone who tries to say otherwise.