Page 4-Thursday, November 9, 1978-The Michigan Daily
El,
1 bt'.dt~tj4an 749atIy
420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Eighty-Nine Years of Editorial Freedom
Vol. LXXXIX, No. 55
News Phone: '764-0552
- -
6
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan
Meal consolidation
c
EAL CONSOLIDATION is a plan
to build one communal cafeteria
for use by students in the Hill dorms -
arkley, Mosher Jordan, Stockwell,
dad Alice Lloyd. At their November
meeting, the Regents will decide
whether to approve such a plan, even
over the protests of students currently
lving in these dorms. It is likely the
Regents will eidorse the plan, Which is
unfortunate since they have scarcely
considered the consequences or the
Ealternatives.-
.The administration backs the
:pioposal because it believes it will slow
tue rapid increase in dorm rates, and
ill also free up current cafeterias to
e converted into dorm space.,
While this certainly coincides with
ur goals, the housing office appears to
e overlooking the negative aspects of
$he plan. It would then be an extreme
6nconvenience to students, especially
n the harsh Michigan winters, to walk
to such a building in order to eat lunch
Or dinner. also, it would undermine the
special identity each dorm has. The
psychological effect of herding a few
'thousand students together for meals
pvould be detrimental. It would likely
)nake meals an assembly line
peration, rather than a convenient
lime to meet others in the form and
converse over a leisurely repast.
' For these reasons, it would seem,
superficially that we should oppose
meal consolidation. Such action now,
iowever, would be irresponsible; we
?an't make a decision without all the
acts.
We have protested every dorm rate
crease of the past five years, so it
Nvould be quixotic of us to ignore the
administration's claim that
onsolidation would slow the ever-
tncreasing dorm rates. The question
e have is whether there isn't a way to
old down dorm rates by cutting
dministrative costs rather than
glashing student services. Must
tudents always endure service cuts
vhile the administrative bureaucracy
DID OU SEE WRE~E TEY "hIRED"
DONALD DUCK AT THE DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT ?
NO!
feeds off our dorm and tuition fees?
The housing office is attempting to
present this as a dichotomous
proposition: either you support
consolidation, or you support high drm
rates. What we are being asked to do is
weigh the advantages of consolidation
- lower rate increases and increased
student space - against the
disadvantages - inconvenience and
loss of dorm identity. Clearly we favor
saving the students money, and giving
them more space, but we can't back
meal consolidation if there is a way to
save the already over-extended
students money while retaining
services and conveniences. Why is
such an idea never considered by the
Regents and administrators? It is
possible students would be willing to
walk in the cold if it would save them
money, but they shouldn't be forced to
make such a decision until all other
means of saving money for students
are explored.
Therefore, we suggest the Regents
commission a thorough study of the
housing office. Such a study would
have to compare our costs with those of
other universities, and make
recommendations to the Regents as to
where cuts can be made in our system.
Dorm rates here are currently higher
than at any institution in the Big Ten,
and all those schools offer 20 to 21
meals per week compared to the 13
offered here. Surely meal
consolidation alone would not
compensate for the disparity; there
must be additional waste in the
housing office.
We believe such a study would
recover the actual cause of the cost
problem: bloated administrative
expense. If such is the case, students
may well be able to eat in their own
dorms, and pay less too if the housing
offce is simply made efficient. At any
rate, the Regents can't possibly make
an intelligent, informed decision until
such alternatives have been fully
studied.
, -,
; - .-
_.
,. -
. -
- . - ..
, .2 _r_ j - -- - - _
" y.
_ /
..
/Li
,
A9
i .
U
i
Ce
Cock fights keep commies away
SKIATOOK, OKLAHOMA-It's called the
"Sport of Kings," but none of the 100 or so
spectators crammed into the tin-roofed barn
a few miles from this small northeastern
Oklahoma town looked much like royalty.
They were perched on white-washed
bleachers that were splattered with blood,
dirt and tobacco spit. They were watching a
small arena in front of them, anxiously
waiting for the first bout to begin.
A bald man wearing thick glasses entered
the ring. He held a bright red rooster which
jerked its head back and forth as it glared at
the crowd.
Attached to its feet were two slendfer
needles. Each steel spear was two inches
long. Each was razor sharp. Each was
strapped around the bird's natural spur.
Within seconds a teenage boy also stepped
into the ring. He carried a golden rooster
which he stroked absent-mindedly. That bird
also wore steel spurs.
The teenager and the man walked to the
center of the ring and pushed the birds within
inches of each other.
The roosters pecked at each other's eyes,
twisting and turning, trying to free
themselves and attack. Only the two handlers
kept the birds from blinding each other.
The crowd came alive.
A fat woman in a print dress waved $5
above her head. "Got five on Big Red,"she
cried. "Got five on red."
A small freckled-faced boy pulled a wadded'
dollar bill from his blue jeans and poked a pal
in the ribs.
"Betcha that gold kills the red one dead,"
he said.
A group of men in overalls and cowboy
boots agreed on wagers in between spits of
tobacco.
"Cut 'em loose!" the umpire yelled as the
handlers released the birds.
The two cocks collided in mid-air, slashing
with their prongs. Both birds connected. They
fell to the grpund locked together as the
crowd jumped and screamed.
The red rooster had impaled the golden bird
in the neck. The gold cock had stabbed the red
bird near its wing.
"Handlers," theumpire yelled.
The boy and the man hurried to free their
birds. The umpire nodded his head and the
birds were turned loose again.
Five times the birds would lock together.
Five times the spurs would strike until finally
the two birds fell exhausted - locked
together. Only their breasts moved as they
gasped for air.
The teenager tilted his bird's head and
opened its mouth to let the blood from its beak
run out of its throat back into its stomach,
giving it a few more seconds of life.
"He's a goner boy !" the fat woman yelled.
"Die you old hen," another woman
screamed.
By now, many of the spectators had moved
to the small fence that enclosed the ring,
By E.N. Earley
some knelt for a better view.
Big Red also was bleeding.
The umpire drew an "H" in the dirt and the
two handlers placed their birds inside the
symbol.
"Let 'em go! the umpire ordered.
This time, neither bird bolted forward. The
gold cock stood still, proud. The red cock
inched forward.
Suddenly, the golden bird - its once
brilliant feathers covered with dust and blood
- collapsed.
The red cock stepped next to it. As if it were
an ancient gladiator waiting for approval
from the emperor, the bird seemed to pause
and glance at the crowd.
"Kill 'em Johnny!" a fan yelled, calling
the bird by its owners' name. "Kill 'em."
The bird raised a spur and plunged it into
the golden rooster's neck. Blood spurted from
its beak as the crowd applauded and cheered
and the umpire declared a winner.
Most of the crowd was so busy collecting
gambling debts, they did not seem to notice
that Big _Red had also collapsed.
The handlers picked up the birds now as two
new contestants entered.
"Good fight boy," the man said.
"Thanks," the teenager sreplied. 'I'm
gonna miss this bird," he said stroking the
dead rooster.
They tossed the birds outside, near the front
door. Within an hour, five more birds would
join those two. A feweyoungsters poked sticks
at the birds that were alive but unable to
move.
T:he scene at this "Gaming Club" hidden by
blackjack trees at the end of a muddy
unmarked road apparently is typical of
cockfights held across the nation from early
fall until July.
Because the sport is illegal in every state
but Oklahoma and Florida, it is difficult to tel
how many cockfights are held each year.
Most cock~fights are kept secret even in
states where they are legal. Invitation is by
word of mouth. Strangers are not welcome.
Photographs are forbidden.
Some cockfighting rings in Oklahoma have
theater seats and fancy refreshment stands,
but most are primitive, simple rings in old
barns.
Cockfighters are reluctant to talk to
reporters. Telephone calls to the editor of The
Gamecock, the sport's leading magazine,
were in vain.
Advertisements in that magazine and
others reveal, however, that cockfighters can
be found in nearly every state - particularly
southern states, New York City and southern
California.
In California, fighting birds often wear
slashers instead of steel prongs. As the name
implies, a slasher is a sharp blade that acts lie
a broadsword and can easily decapitate an
opponent.
Most states have ruled that cockfighting
like dog fighting- is inhumane, but not
Oklahoma. The state Court of Crimial
Appeals overturned the 1962 convictions :of
four men guilty of cockfighting. The justices
said the men had not violated the animal
cruelty acts because "fowls are not animals.'
The court based its ruling on a Biblte-41
passage that distinguished between the
"beasts of the field and the fowls of the air., -1
In November, 1975, an Oklahoma legislato
tried to change the state law toinclude fov'
as animals. His pleas were greeted in ;this
state legislature by chants of "cock-a-doodlg
doo" from the throats of his fellow House
members and from concealed tape recorders
Legislators cheered when Rep. John Moii 6
of Muskogee spoke passionately of he "greit;
sport of all free countries - cockfighting.'
"In every country the Communists have
taken over," Monks warned, "the first thing:
they do is outlaw cockfighting."
Cockfighting was practiced by George
Washington and abraham Lincoln, Monks
said. "It's.an American tradition."
Monks then claimed that the fall of Great
Britain as a world power could be linked to
cockfighting. "The government got so big it
suppressed the sports of the people and that
was he first step to ruin."
The bill to end cockfighting was sent to a
committee for study. It has never been
discussed.
"These birds were born to fight," says Ed
Parks, a prominent Tulsa attorney and
cockfighter. "Bleedin hearts get upset when
a few chickens get killed, but its a hell of a lot
better to die in a ring fighting than to have
some farmer pull off your head and throw you
in a pot for dinner."
Breeders train the birds with "muffs"
which resemble small boxing gloves. They
feed the birds secret mixtures of vitamins and
powdered bone marrow to make their blood
thick. Some cockfighters use drugs to pep up
their birds, which can cost from.$25 to $2,500.
Entry fees for bouts. range rom a few;
dollars to severalbhundred,gbut the real
money comes from gambling during they
fights - not from winning the victor's purse.
Like many so-called victimless crimes, the,
gambling goes unnoticed by officials - at
least that was the case when Big Red and the
golden rooster fought to their deaths.
The umpire for one match was a local
deputy sheriff.
"Shucks," he said. "Ain't nothing wrong in
some folks havin' some good clean fun. why:
don't you just leave everybody alone?"
"
E. N. Earley, a reporter for the Tulsa
Tribune, is a contributing editor of
Pacific News Service.
I
TE6TER5 INSERTED HIS NAME
IN THE HUD COMPUTER WHICH
OK'D IT AND GAVE HIM A
$99,999 SALARY!
WELL, THAT COULDN'T HAPPEN
ON CAPITOL iLL
WE DONT HAVE
AN9 OPENINGS!
g
N
1
v
"
dam'
1 THE MiLWAUKEE JOURNAL
EDITORIAL STAFF
Editors-in-chief
DAVID GOODMAN GREGG KRUPA
Managing Editors
M. .EILEEN DALEY
Letters to the Daily
Character assassin
To the Daily:
It's unfortunate that Josh
Peck's review of Musket's "Man
of LaMancha" was more an
exercise in character
assassination than it was a
theatrical review. Mr. Peck did
make some valid criticisms of the
production, but in order to find
them, one had to go through
paragraphs designed to hurt the
members of the production and to
misinform the public. Mr. Peck
seemed to ignore the warm and
enthusiastic reception that the
audience gave (and still
continues to give) "La Mancha".
Instead, it appears that he was
determined to send poison-pen
,v+a_" +n +h m _mhn of +h
review "Man of La Mancha", this
time doing so in consultation with
the rest of the audience.
-Lee Berke
Misquoted
To the Daily:
The Daily of Nov. 7 reports on a
meeting of sacua in which topics
of SACUA'S forthcoming
discussion with the Regents were
reviewed. The Daily mistakenly
reports that I placed particular
emphasis on improving fagulty
saaries at the higher ranks. It
was SACUA Chairman Shaw
Livermore who expressed
concern about the relatively
greater gap at the full professor
level, while' I urged that the
without talent cast the first
stone." So it is at the Michigan
Daily.
Mark Johnson, in an article
entitled "Orchestra not quite up
to pair (sic)," lambasted the
University Philharmonia's
Friday, October 13 concert.
Johansson began his attack by
stating a tenet of the :Daily r: "It
would be unfair not to list a few of
the generally good points about
the presentation before
attempting to criticize the
University Philharmonia's
performance . .. " The tenet:
criticism must be negative.
Johansson followed the Daily
Dogma admirable it seems, not
truly caring about the concert,
the symphonies, or his own
nr:nl Rnn-frl a nninfa
musicality was there Fridaya
night.
Also, I question Johansson'$-
right to pick out mistakes, when'
he missed several that seemed
more important than those he
noticed. But still, none of the,
mistakes were major:
performance problems, and it-
was a fine concert.
Maybe the quality of thought
and print at the Daily would',
improve is Johansson and the'
other staff members did not dally:
at the Daily. They should be at
class learning to write.
effectively, lose their everA,
present passives, and learn their
subjects before they criticize
others. One other point: 1
13a ilii
Arts Editors
OWEN GLEIBERMAN'
MIKE TAYLOR
BUSINESS STAFF
NANCY GAD -- -- ._ iwc Mn _r.