Susan Kehoe is at it again

[klg neighbor]

[SIZE=+1]Vernon woman accused of interfering with bear biologists [NJ bear nut Susan Kehoe nailed again!][/SIZE]
<SMALL>The Star-Ledger ^| 10/9/08 | Jim Lockwood/The Star-Ledger </SMALL>

<SMALL>Posted on Friday, October 10, 2008 7:03:11 PM by NewJerseyJoe</SMALL>

An animal-rights activist from Vernon has been charged with obstruction and resisting arrest when she interfered with state wildlife biologists who were trying to tranquilize a black bear to change a satellite-radio collar used to track the bear, police said today.
Susan Kehoe, 58, was charged Wednesday at 4:16 p.m. when she interfered and prevented a biologist from firing a tranquilizer dart at the bear, police said in a press release. They did not specifically say how Kehoe interfered, and police and state officials could not immediately be reached for comment. Reached by telephone, Kehoe also declined to comment.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

She was protecting the animals' right not to be studied to better enable proper protection and conservation? :dizzy:

Sometimes animal rights activists do more harm than good. I remember reading about a group of them who liberated a mink farm in england. The minks proceeded to terrorize the countryside eating livestock and generally destroying stuff(apparently a group of minks will take down a cow???). Just goes to show you how disconnected people get from the consequences of their actions. Some degree of animal rights activism is a good thing IMHO. For example, Proctor and Gamble doesn't need to skin rabbits alive to test their razors and I support the animal rights activists who protest that. Preventing biologists from studying bears is counterproductive.

 

[DoubleHaul]

Bears here in the Adirondacks, we just shoot 'em. Mighty tasty wrapped in bacon and cooked on the grill.
:guns::guns:After a while you get sick of buying new trash cans. :guns: :guns:

Couple years back the animal wackos in the county just south of mine tried to drive the deer away from hunters by walking thru a hunt banging on pans. That worked great till the deer made it to the next watch line then BANG. :rofl:
Just goes to show- gotta know how to play the game if you expect to win. :dizzy:

 

[Drossi]

Bears here in the Adirondacks, we just shoot 'em. Mighty tasty wrapped in bacon and cooked on the grill.
:guns::guns:After a while you get sick of buying new trash cans. :guns: :guns:

Couple years back the animal wackos in the county just south of mine tried to drive the deer away from hunters by walking thru a hunt banging on pans. That worked great till the deer made it to the next watch line then BANG. :rofl:
Just goes to show- gotta know how to play the game if you expect to win. :dizzy:

LMAO, sweet they created a tailor made "drive". Stupid is as stupid does.

What drives me nuts about these animal idiots is that for all the "compassion" they preach towards animals, you never hear about them helping HUMANS. If they want to use their time wisely why don't they donate it to helping single parent inner city kids. A mentor goes a long way in stearing kids away from gangs and such. But nope that makes too much sense.

 

[Hllywd76]

Bears here in the Adirondacks, we just shoot 'em. Mighty tasty wrapped in bacon and cooked on the grill.
:guns::guns:After a while you get sick of buying new trash cans. :guns: :guns:

Couple years back the animal wackos in the county just south of mine tried to drive the deer away from hunters by walking thru a hunt banging on pans. That worked great till the deer made it to the next watch line then BANG. :rofl:
Just goes to show- gotta know how to play the game if you expect to win. :dizzy:

I've heard around here they collect hair from the salon's they go to and put it out in the woods to scare the deer out of a section. cool the perfect cover I can walk around and there used to me already... Sometimes their so stupid. :devious:

Hllywd

 

[GEORGE6149]

Probably had to take away animal habitat to build houses where she lives

 

[AKSkim]

you never hear about them helping HUMANS.

Sad but very true.

 

[Joe D]

Some degree of animal rights activism is a good thing IMHO. For example, Proctor and Gamble doesn't need to skin rabbits alive to test their razors and I support the animal rights activists who protest that.

These are the same animal rights terrorists that want to stop your fishing

http://fishinghurts.com

A look around the internet found nothing about P&G skinning rabbits alive. So I guess you're right, they don't need to do it, so they don't.

 

[Pete]

Joe D:
I put some "code" tags around the link you posted. I don't think we want PETA's hit counter to list us as a "referer".

Anyone who wants to see the propaganda, can copy the url and paste it in his/her browser's address bar.

BTW: Every post made in the "News" section appears to require moderator approval. If your post doesn't show up immediately, you don't need to post again.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

These are the same animal rights terrorists that want to stop your fishing

http://fishinghurts.com

A look around the internet found nothing about P&G skinning rabbits alive. So I guess you're right, they don't need to do it, so they don't.

My point, if you actually read what I said, is that some degree of animal rights activism is ok, but nowhere did I embrace wide recognition of the movement.

There's a time and place for everything. Fishing, hunting, eating meat are all part of the natural order of things. The food chain isn't something the USDA created to get people to eat meat, we evolved that way.

My post was meant to highlight the excesses of animal rights activism that lead to ridiculous results. Susan Kehoe is a perfect example, she's doing more harm to the bears by preventing biologists from conducting further research that will be used to HELP the bears, and more effectively manage their populations and habitat.

I used P&G as an example of needless cruelty to animals for cosmetic purposes. I say needless because often times the use of animals for testing purposes is unnecessary because effective testing on something as innocuous as a disposable razor can be accomplished simply by giving out free samples and having people report their experiences. On the other hand, an item that poses health risks to potential users should be subjected to testing in a setting that minimizes that risk. It's debatable whether animal testing is even useful for this, but if it prevents unnecessary human deaths then I am all for it.

There is plenty of information out there about P&G and their animal testing policies. A massive popular campaign and boycott that started in the 80's has actuall effected the company's policies. Based on the nature of your post I am assuming that you've already made up your mind on the issue and that you won't countenance any information provided by an animal rights group (feel free to prove me wrong). Skinning rabbits is but one example, and if they don't do it anymore it's because of successful public advocacy.

The bottom line is that not all animal rights activists are bad. I agree that some are downright stupid. All I was trying to say is that sometimes it's not such a bad thing to limit the amount of suffering in the world, human and animal.

 

[Ryan R]

She was protecting the animals' right not to be studied to better enable proper protection and conservation? :dizzy:

Sometimes animal rights activists do more harm than good. I remember reading about a group of them who liberated a mink farm in england. The minks proceeded to terrorize the countryside eating livestock and generally destroying stuff(apparently a group of minks will take down a cow???). Just goes to show you how disconnected people get from the consequences of their actions. Some degree of animal rights activism is a good thing IMHO. For example, Proctor and Gamble doesn't need to skin rabbits alive to test their razors and I support the animal rights activists who protest that. Preventing biologists from studying bears is counterproductive.

Sorry, IMHO animal rights activists and their supporters are a dangerous enemy to conservationists. Ignorance feeds their propagdanda.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Sorry, IMHO animal rights activists and their supporters are a dangerous enemy to conservationists. Ignorance feeds their propagdanda.

No need to apologize, you're entitled to your opinion and I'd agree with you 90% of the time. I'm just trying to be optimistic that every now and then these people might have something valid to say at some point. But hey, to each his own.

 

[Joe D]

My point, if you actually read what I said, is that some degree of animal rights activism is ok, but nowhere did I embrace wide recognition of the movement.

There's a time and place for everything. Fishing, hunting, eating meat are all part of the natural order of things. The food chain isn't something the USDA created to get people to eat meat, we evolved that way.

My post was meant to highlight the excesses of animal rights activism that lead to ridiculous results. Susan Kehoe is a perfect example, she's doing more harm to the bears by preventing biologists from conducting further research that will be used to HELP the bears, and more effectively manage their populations and habitat.

I used P&G as an example of needless cruelty to animals for cosmetic purposes. I say needless because often times the use of animals for testing purposes is unnecessary because effective testing on something as innocuous as a disposable razor can be accomplished simply by giving out free samples and having people report their experiences. On the other hand, an item that poses health risks to potential users should be subjected to testing in a setting that minimizes that risk. It's debatable whether animal testing is even useful for this, but if it prevents unnecessary human deaths then I am all for it.

There is plenty of information out there about P&G and their animal testing policies. A massive popular campaign and boycott that started in the 80's has actuall effected the company's policies. Based on the nature of your post I am assuming that you've already made up your mind on the issue and that you won't countenance any information provided by an animal rights group (feel free to prove me wrong). Skinning rabbits is but one example, and if they don't do it anymore it's because of successful public advocacy.

The bottom line is that not all animal rights activists are bad. I agree that some are downright stupid. All I was trying to say is that sometimes it's not such a bad thing to limit the amount of suffering in the world, human and animal.

"A massive popular campaign and boycott that started in the 80's has actuall effected the company's policies."

Who started and continued this boycott?

Uncaged.co.uk
idausa.org
peta.org "Why not let fish enjoy the beautiful day, too, by leaving your fishing gear at home?"

 

[jphardy]

A look around the internet found nothing about P&G skinning rabbits alive. So I guess you're right, they don't need to do it, so they don't.

Really?

I did a google search and 19, 800 results showed up. This thread was number 8.

 

[Joe D]

What you find are accusations by the animal rights terrorist and activist groups. You also find other tests P&G uses animals for, including rabbits, but nothing about skinning rabbits alive to test razor blades.

When I said, "A look around the internet found nothing about P & G skinning rabbits alive", I simply meant there was nothing of substance found. Sorry I had to explain that.

BTW, I did a Google search on jp hardy and 8,410,000 results showed up...

 

[klg neighbor]

Yesterday was suppose to be court day for Susan kehoe for feeding the bears. Can't find anything on the internet what happened. Anyone know?