Columnist misunderstands role, benefits of Squirrel Club

To the Daily:

Sam Singer’s article about the Squirrel Club (Squirrel Huggers, 04/12/05) is thoroughly inaccurate. The first problem with his article is its numbers:  He says that our meetings average 50 attendants, which they do perhaps twice a year, but more normally about 10-15 people attend (and perhaps five in cold weather). This is nothing near the roving band of 50 squirrel-feeding students Singer portrays.

Numbers aside, the article misunderstands the University ecosystem and our club’s purposes. All animals adapt to their surroundings when finding food. The squirrels on campus are dependent on student garbage for food — who hasn’t seen a squirrel rooting around a dumpster or trash can? Singer’s point that squirrels fed by humans are in danger of lacking food during the winter is unfounded, as trash is never absent from campus. However, the Squirrel Club does not like to see squirrels eating trash, and we instead supply the squirrels with a healthier alternative — unsalted peanuts and sunflower seeds. Our efforts do not impact the squirrels’ ability to survive: their well-nourished nature is shown by the much larger-than-average size of squirrels on campus.

In a further effort for squirrel welfare, we deal with a significant number of injured squirrels every year, forwarding them on to the properly trained animal-rescue staff. Additionally, club members are currently involved in an effort to combat the epidemic of squirrel mange on campus, which is a skin disease treatable with antibiotics. Singer asks the club to “think of the squirrels.” We do so now and will continue to.

Jason Colman

LSA senior

The letter writer is president of the Squirrel Club.

MCRI proponents not telling the truth about its effects

To the Daily:

In his recent letter, Carl Cohen (MCRI adheres to principles of 1964 Civil Rights Act, 04/08/2005) unwittingly confirms the basic accusations against the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative of using deception and fraud. MCRI aims to outlaw all affirmative action for women and minorities in Michigan. The same language MCRI aims to pass even banned outreach programs in California. The proponents of MCRI, including Cohen, won’t say this plain truth about the aim of their proposal.

Why the striking omission?

Presumably, because they know it is unpopular. A Detroit Free Press poll from the fall of 2003 found that only 18 percent of white people in Michigan think affirmative action should be “ended now” — exactly what MCRI aims to do (Michigan split over the path to equality, Detroit Free Press, 01/19/2004).

The Ku Klux Klan group that is campaigning for MCRI is more candid about why it supports the proposition.

More evidence of MCRI deceit and fraud is turning up in a survey now being conducted of Detroit voters who signed the petition to get MCRI on the ballot. Very close to 100 percent of the people so far surveyed were deceived into thinking they were signing a petition for affirmative action. Many have already signed affidavits to the effect that had they not been lied to, they never would have signed the MCRI petition.

MCRI is wrought with deception and fraud like no other ballot drive in Michigan history. We would know this even without Cohen’s admission by omission.

Monica Smith

LSA junior

Kate Stenvig

Rackham

The letter writers are members of BAMN.