Page 2
THE BATTALION
College Station, Texas Wednesday, November 17, 1971
CADET SLOUCH
by Jim Earle
gUTHE
SPIRIT
Movl
f’c.Prtc'Z S
BLITHE
SPIRIT
AJCW ( 5'
Blithe
spiral SPIRIT
Suthe
SPIRIT
Mol/ t‘5'' 2 ‘ <D
^Lb\)(S'-2'&
&S(S> IL?
rU^rBi^y
^io\) {^' za
T\r\
puKre^ L\L)
“Squirt, will you give me your word that you’ll never
P ke on another public relations job?”
The War Hymn
This week during pre-registration the Student Senate is running
an opinion poll. One of the questions in the poll, which we urge
everyone to fill out, deals with the singing of the first verse of the War
Hymn. ^ , L .
Currently, the student body sings only the second verse of the
song. This is the verse that downgrades the University of Texas.
Now we don’t have anything against downgrading the teasips. If
anyone deserves it, it is the Armadillos, those perennial Southwest
Conference champions—until this year that is. The thing is, we put
down the sips all the time, even when we play Arkansas or Tech or even
Baylor.
In this sense the term “dumb Aggies” applies.
We can just about imagine what the opposing side is thinking as
the students sing. “Good bye to who? Did they say Texas University?
Who’s that?”
To quote from Buck Weirus, executive director of the Former
Students Association, “It’s silly to talk about beating Texas when we
aren’t even playing them.”
Silly isn’t quite the word, stupid is better.
On top of that, why publicize the sips when we could be pulling
for A&M?
The words to the first verse go like this:
1 All hail! to dear old Texas A&M.
Rally around maroon and white;
Good luck to the dear old Texas Aggies,
They are the boys who show the fight.
That good old Aggie spirit thrills us
And makes us yell and yell and yell;
So let’s fight for dear old Texas A&M.
We’re going to beat you all to
Chig-ga-roo-gar-em!
Chig-ga-roo-gar-em!
Rough! Tough!
Real stuff; Texas A&M.”
It makes a bit more sense than singing about Texas. Vote for
singing the first verse.
Speak out
The Student Senate and the Great Issues Committee have come
up with another Soap Box Forum this year. It will be held Thursday
from 11 a.m. <: 1 p.m. at the review stand on the drill field.
These Soap Box Forums, which sometimes are effective and
sometimes aren’t, are a good way to hear what the students have to say
about certain things.
A good bet would be to expect Bonfire, voter registration,
athletic fees and the laundry to be discussed. All of these are issues that
students are concerned about.
Go to these things and listen and, if you have anything to say,
speak. Utilize your right to the freedom of speech—and who knows,
maybe you’ll get in a good argument.
Listen up
War and ecology conflict in classes
Editor:
The teaching 1 staff at Texas
A&M has changed as has some
of their attitudes. I would like
to show you to what degree. An
English class I attend is reading
The New Republic which ran an
article concerning Vietnamese
ecology and American security
in South Vietnam.
The journal reported American
bulldozers were clearing a large
area of jungle cover. The instruc
tor turned from the topic of Eng
lish and said she felt we were
wrong in doing this as we were
destroying the land. The entire
class felt she was right except
me. I said we were over there
to fight a war, not beautify the
country. No one sided with me.
She then tried her luck with
examples to back herself up, one
was Napoleon at Waterloo. She
said he fought in the area outside
town so no one except soldiers
would be hurt. Napoleon fought
outside the town because that was
where Wellington was. Welling
ton moved outside town because
Napoleon moved so slowly.
The students at A&M have
changed and so have the teachers.
This teacher deserved her stu
dents as they both felt ecology
comes before American lives, al
though neither deserve to be at
Texas A&M with this attitude.
Chris Outwin
Editor:
In the past few weeks, most of
the articles in “Listen Up” have
been so heavy, oppressive, and
earth-shatteringly controversial
(Groffe vs. Students, Students vs.
Bonfire, Non-regs vs. CT’s, CT’s
vs. women) that I feel it’s in
order to complain about some
thing downright down to earth—
gophers. Yeh, gophers. For those
unfamiliar with what a gopher
is, I invite them to take a look
at the lawn areas in front of the
campus at the southeast corner
on Highway 6. Just look for an
area that has the appearance of
having endured a three-day artil
lery barrage and you’ll have
found the spot.
Now don’t get me wrong. I don’t
have a personal grudge against
gophers, for they have a place
in nature and even have bene
ficial attributes (i.e., soil aera
tion) but their place is not lawns
or golf courses. (Take a look at
the golf course.)
A few months ago, I offered
to remove these gophers for the
school. This proposal was met
with enthusiasm both by the
Grounds Maintenance Dept, and
the campus golf course personnel.
However, the project fizzled and
the reasons given were, get this,
lack of funds. This makes me
wonder why a university that
pours untold thousands of dollars
into covering the campus with
concrete slabs (grounds improve
ment & land (or cement-scaping)
can’t spend a few dollars to im
prove the appearance of the few
remaining grassy areas that are
left. Possibly this area is also
slated for concrete-encrustation in
the near future.
Admittedly, this letter is not
written totally on altruistic moti
vation, for I hope it will provoke
some action and I can make some
money in the process. Meanwhile,
the gophers keep on digging and
I keep on waiting for someone
to take some initiative.
Don Baker
★ ★ ★
Editor:
Since everyone is now more
ecology conscious, and the colleges
wish to have this represented by
choosing a more passive, and if
possible, endangered species of
animal as school mascot.—For ex
ample, the University of Texas
(always first) has proposed
changing their mascot from the
deadly, grass-eating Longhorn to
the more passive and ecologically
beneficial Armadillo—Not far be
hind is the University of Houston
(never last) which has started
nominations for their replacement
mascot; replacing Shasta the cou
gar will be Arky the Ardvark—
Leading up the rear end (but al
ways progressing forward), We
of the Mclnnis Midnight Skulkers
wish to lead the way for a new
era in A&M’s ever-changing tra-
Steve Hayes
Poisoning: predator cure-all
The poisoning of predators on
an indiscriminate basis has
evolved as a cure-all to the live
stock industry, primarily the
sheep men. Control, mostly by
spreading highly toxic poisons in
easily accessible areas, has beeVi
perpetuated, despite objections,
because this practice is thought
of as an important management
tool by the livestock industry.
In the case of the cattle indus
try, some progressive cattlemen
have recognized the worth of
predatory animals as a control
agent over herbivorous animals
which compete with cattle for
grass. In fact, partly because of
many cattlemen’s practices, the
U. S. Department of the Interior
stated that “on rangelands occu
pied only by cattle there is little
justification for general coyote
control, and should be undertaken
only in areas where losses are
based on irrefutable evidence.
However, wool-growers con
tinue to border on fanaticism in
regard to predator control, and
they incessantly bemoan their fi
nancial losses purported to preda
tion. They are, in the words of
one Montana state senator, “. . . .
the best organized livestock group
of all.” He should know, for after
he introduced a bill which called
for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service merely to follow its own
rules in regard to poisoning prac
tices, the wool-growers success
fully organized a campaign
against the bill, and his next
election campaign. Sixteen years
of public elective service had end
ed for him.
Why are the wool-growers so
intently adhering to predator con
trol ? Financially, the wool indus
try is in serious trouble. Syn
thetics, imports and the rising
cost of labor are all important
factors to the decline of the U.S.
wool industry. In the last 30
years, the number of sheep in the
country has decreased 40 million.
Now only 16 million sheep are
raised per year.
Yet, although the wool-growers
provide less than half of our an
nual wool needs, they are the
principal recipients of predator
control programs, are paid a fed
eral subsidy, and are allowed to
graze their stock on public lands
at 10 per cent of the cost of graz
ing on private lands. In 1971 over
TRY
BATTALION CLASSIFIED
$65 million were paid in subsidies
to wool-growers.
Wool-growers do lose many of
their sheep each year to weather,
starvation, disease, abandonment
and predation. However, predation
is the only entity that can actual
ly be seen and engaged by man.
Since predator control programs
have developed, it has become
convenient for many livestock
growers to attribute most dead
animals to predation, and to ask
for more federal protection, with
the hope that an intensive control
program will aid in getting more
livestock to market. A coyote will
feed on carrion; however, because
the sheepman discovers only a
partially devoured carcass, the
coyote is considered guilty of ac
tually killing the sheep. As Jack
Olsen noted in his article, “The
Poisoning of the West,” “Every
year the reported stock losses
rise, the Wildlife Services budget
climbs proportionally and the
population of larger animals sinks
to a new low.”
If Jack Olsen is right, then
even a moron could see that a
decline in predators would mean
a decrease, not an increase in the
number of sheep lost to preda
tors. Thus, given the mass dis
tribution of poisons, and the near
extinction of many species of
predators, there is an inconsist
ency in the figures turned in by
wool growers.
To confuse matters even furth
er, the Division of Wildlife Serv
ices states that the federal con
trol program reduces predation to
the sheep industry by 60 per cent.
How did the DWS arrive at such
figures? Incredulously enough,
they are based on the judgment
of the wool-growers! That such
judgment is highly subjective is
emphasized by the case of the red
fox. Before the red fox was listed
as a predator in Wyoming, no one
mentioned it as a factor in preda
tion. Yet when it was placed on
a questionnaire sent out to ranch
ers, whammo, 800 lambs were lost
to the red fox.
Even with such obvious inac
curacies, the reported loss of
sheep to predators in 1970 was
submitted as 33,680, out of 2,095,-
000 sheep grazed on public lands.
This was only 1.68 per cent of the
entire sheep population grazed on
public lands. It seems odd that
our vast wilderness strongholds
should be subject to mass poison
ing when losses, even as subjec
tive as they are, already minimals.
Tomorrow: Why the federal
government continues to maintain
the status quo.
Cbe Battalion
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of The Battalion, a student newspaper at Texas A&M, is
„,e «,ulen< writers on,. The Battalion is a non-,ax-
supported, non-profit, self-supporting educational enter- May, and once a week during summer school.
prise edited and operated by students as a university and
c onnnunit) nticspaper. The Associated Press, Texas Press Association
LETTERS POLICY The Associated Collegiate Press
Letters to the editor must be typed, double-spaced, Mail subscriptions are $3.50 per semester; $6 per school
and 7io 7nore them 300 wovds in length. They 7nust be year; $6.50 per full year. All subscriptions subject to 5%
signed, although the writer’s name will be withheld by sales tax. Advertising rate furnished on request. Address:
arrangement with the editor. Address correspondence to ^exas^S"' ROOm 217 ’ Buildinf? ’ College Station '
Listen Up, The Battalion, Room 217, Services Building, ~—
College Station Texas 77843. The Associated Press is entitled exclusively to the use for
reproduction of all news dispatchs credited to it or not
— otherwise credited in the paper and local news of spontaneous
Member,_ o, the Sledort Publication, Board are, dim £&• ^ " PUbU “‘ 1 °” - *"
Rs’^biarSSSi l C D; W A'» r B. I -i b hSr, A K.: Second-Class ,o.ta g e paid at Colle„. Station, Team,.
S , A”i=oRure“.:o.“ r L.” < e i K™i. II ,';udYnt E ' T< '' 1 '' ic,I ■ Coll '" ! * S DIT °. R : HAYDEN WHITSETT
Represented nationally by National Educational Advertising News Editor Sue Davis
Services, Inc., New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles and San bports Editor ; John Curylo
Francisco. Assistant Sports Editor Bill Henry
TAMU Artist Showcase
Presents . . .
U. T. COLLEGIUM MUSICUM
Music of the medieval, renaissance, and
baroque eras performed with minstrel harp,
harpsicord, organ, and lute.
Wednesday, November 17, 1971—8:00 p.m.
MSC Ballroom
Town Hall season ticket and activity card holders ad
mitted free. No reserved seats.
A&M Student Date $1.00
Faculty, Staff, Patron $3.00
Other Students $1.50
Tickets & information — MSC Student Program Office
845-4671
dition. We feel that the following
list of passive animals would bet
ter represent the high ideals of
the A&M student body. We re
spectfully submit:
Animal Cheer
Anteater, Lick ’em Ags!
Gopher, Gopher a touchdown!
Whale, Whale, we lost anotM
one.
Do Do Bird, Go Go Do Do’s!
Whooping Crane, Whoop! (famj.
iar?)
Hipolito Canales, Jr. ’72
Mike Kellough, ’75
Jerry Levy ’73
PEANUTS
UHU4‘. I HAVE
A 51/RPRiSE
FOR YOU!
BUSIER - JONES AGENCY
REAL ESTATE • INSURANCE
F.H.A.—Veterans and Conventional Loans
FARM & HOME SAVINGS ASSOCIATION
Home Office: Nevada, Mo.
3523 Texas Ave. (in Ridgecrest) 846-3708
ROBERT HALSELL
TRAVEL SERVICE
AIRLINE SCHEDULE INFORMATION
FARES AND TICKETS
DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL
ci 1
WAS
Nixon
to take
terest
fights
Commi
leased
In
said, 0
kave n
grade
Hacks
Spanis
A t
titled,
Enforc
Later’
“Uni
given
rights
cancer
oidikel
The
ATTENTION
All Seniors and Graduate Students!
MAKE SURE YOUR PICTURE WILL BE
IN THE
1972
AGGIELiAND
YEARBOOK PICTURE SCHEDULE
V - W - X - Y - Z Nov. 15 - 19
Make-Up Week — Nov. 22 - Dec. 10
NOTE:
Students needing pictures for job-applications or ^
personal use may come ahead of schedule.
CORPS SENIORS: Uniform: Class A Winter - Blouse
or Midnight Shirt.
CIVILIANS: Coat and Tie.
PICTURES WILL BE TAKEN FROM 8: A.M. to 5: P- M ‘
NOTE: BRING FEE SLIPS
to
UNIVERSITY STUDIO
115 No. Main — North Gate
Phone: 846-8019
1:26
1 HAP IT IIOCEP, AW
NOW I'M HOOtED AGAIN. 1
By Charles M.
Schulz
I THOUGHT I WAS (XHNS
V THE RIGHT THIN6.
I