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.