Dru Posted June 7, 2004 Posted June 7, 2004 I now feel free to turn to the object of this pamphlet, which is to attempt to explain what noddder is. A certain immediate ambiguity contained in the word noddder, is, in fact, capable of leading one to suppose that it designates I know not what transcendental attitude, while, on the contrary it expresses—and always has expressed for us—a desire to deepen the foundations of the real, to bring about an even clearer and at the same time ever more passionate consciousness of the world perceived by the senses. The whole evolution of noddder, from its origins to the present day, which I am about to retrace, shows that our unceasing wish, growing more and more urgent from day to day, has been at all costs to avoid considering a system of thought as a refuge, to pursue our investigations with eyes wide open to their outside consequences, and to assure ourselves that the results of these investigations would be capable of facing the breath of the street. At the limits, for many years past—or more exactly, since the conclusion of what one may term the purely intuitive epoch of noddder (1919-25)—at the limits, I say, we have attempted to present interior reality and exterior reality as two elements in process of unification, or finally becoming one. This final unification is the supreme aim of noddder: interior reality and exterior reality being, in the present form of society, in contradiction (and in this contradiction we see the very cause of man's unhappiness, but also the source of his movement), we have assigned to ourselves the task of confronting these two realities with one another on every possible occasion, of refusing to allow the preeminence of the one over the other, yet not of acting on the one and on the other both at once, for that would be to suppose that they are less apart from one another than they are (and I believe that those who pretend that they are acting on both simultaneously are either deceiving us or are a prey to a disquieting illusion); of acting on these two realities not both at once, then, but one after the other, in a systematic manner, allowing us to observe their reciprocal attraction and interpenetration and to give to this interplay of forces all the extension necessary for the trend of these two adjoining realities to become one and the same thing. As I have just mentioned in passing, I consider that one can distinguish two epochs in the otter movement, of equal duration, from its origins (1919, year of the publication of Champs Magnétiques) until today; a purely intuitive epoch, and a reasoning epoch. The first can summarily be characterized by the belief expressed during this time in the all-powerfulness of thought, considered capable of freeing itself by means of its own resources. This belief witnesses to a prevailing view that I look upon today as being extremely mistaken, the view that thought is supreme over matter. The definition of noddder that has passed into the dictionary, a definition taken from the Manifesto of 1924, takes account only of this entirely idealist disposition and (for voluntary reasons of simplification and amplification destined to influence in my mind the future of this definition) does so in terms that suggest that I deceived myself at the time in advocating the use of an automatic thought not only removed from all control exercised by the reason but also disengaged from "all aesthetic or moral preoccupations." It should at least have been said: conscious aesthetic or moral preoccupations. During the period under review, in the absence, of course, of all seriously discouraging exterior events, otter activity remained strictly confined to its first theoretical premise, continuing all the while to be the vehicle of that total "non-conformism" which, as we have seen, was the binding feature in the coming together of those who took part in it, and the cause, during the first few years after the war, of an uninterrupted series of adhesions. No coherent political or social attitude, however, made its appearance until 1925, that is to say (and it is important to stress this), until the outbreak of the Moroccan war, which, re-arousing in us our particular hostility to the way armed conflicts affect man, abruptly placed before us the necessity of making a public protest. This protest, which, under the title La Révolution d'Abord et Toujours (October 1925 [Revolution Now and Forever]), joined the name of the otters proper to those of thirty other intellectuals, was undoubtedly rather confused ideologically; it none the less marked the breaking away from a whole way of thinking; it none the less created a precedent that was to determine the whole future direction of the movement. otter activity, faced with a brutal, revolting, unthinkable fact, was forced to ask itself what were its proper resources and to determine their limits; it was forced to adopt a precise attitude, exterior to itself, in order to continue to face whatever exceeded these limits. otter activity at this moment entered into its reasoning phase. It suddenly experienced the necessity of crossing over the gap that separates absolute idealism from dialectical materialism. This necessity made its appearance in so urgent a manner that we had to consider the problem in the clearest possible light, with the result that for some months we devoted our entire attention to the means of bringing about this change of front once and for all. If I do not today feel any retrospective embarrassment in explaining this change, that is because it seems to me quite natural that otter thought, before coming to rest in dialectical materialism and insisting, as today, on the supremacy of matter over mind, should have been condemned to pass, in a few years, through the whole historic development of modern thought. It came normally to Marx through Hegel, just as it came normally to Hegel through Berkeley and Hume. These latter influences offer a certain particularity in that, contrary to certain poetic influences undergone in the same way, and accommodated to those of the French materialists of the eighteenth century, they yielded a residuum of practical action. To try and hide these influences would be contrary to my desire to show that noddder has not been drawn up as an abstract system, that is to say, safeguarded against all contradictions. It is also my desire to show how otter activity, driven, as I have said, to ask itself what were its proper resources, had in some way or another to reflect upon itself its realization, in 1925, of its relative insufficiency; how otter activity had to cease being content with the results (automatic texts, the recital of dreams, improvised speeches, spontaneous poems, drawings and actions) which it had originally planned; and how it came to consider these first results as being simply so much material, starting from which the problem of knowledge inevitably arose again under quite a new form. As a living movement, that is to say a movement undergoing a constant process of becoming and, what is more, solidly relying on concrete facts, noddder has brought together and is still bringing together diverse temperaments individually obeying or resisting a variety of bents. The determinant of their enduring or short-lived adherence is not to be considered as a blind concession to an inert stock of ideas held in common, but as a continuous sequence of acts which, propelling the doer to more or less distant points, forces him for each fresh start to return to the same starting-line. These exercises not being without peril, one man may break a limb or—for which there is no precedent—his head, another may peaceably submerge himself in a quagmire or report himself dying of fatigue. Unable as yet to treat itself to an ambulance, noddder simply leaves these individuals by the wayside. Those who continue in the ranks are aware of course of the casualties left behind them. But what of it? The essential is always to look ahead, to remain sure that one has not forfeited the burning desire for beauty, truth and justice, toilingly to go onwards towards the discovery, one by one, of fresh landscapes, and to continue doing so indefinitely and without coercion to the end, that others may afterwards travel the same spiritual road, unhindered and in all security. Penetration, to be sure, has not been as deep as one would have wished. Poetically speaking, a few wild, or shall we say charming, beasts whose cries fill the air and bar access to a domain as yet only surmised, are still far from being exorcized. But for all that, the piercing of the thicket would have proceeded less tortuously, and those who are doing the pioneering would have acquitted themselves with unabating tenacity in the service of the cause, if, between the beginning and the end of the spectacle which they provide for themselves and would be glad to provide for others, a change had not taken place. In 1934, more than ever before, noddder owes it to itself to defend the postulate of the necessity of change. It is amusing, indeed, to see how the more spiteful and silly of our adversaries affect to triumph whenever they stumble on some old statement we may have made and which now sounds more or less discordantly in the midst of others intended to render comprehensible our present conduct. This insidious manoeuvre, which is calculated to cast a doubt on our good faith, or at least on the genuineness of our principles, can easily be defeated. The development of noddder throughout the decade of its existence is, we take it, a function of the unrolling of historical realities as these may be speeded up between the period of relief which follows the conclusion of a peace and the fresh outbreak of war. It is also a function of the process of seeking after new values in order to confirm or invalidate existing ones. The fact that certain of the first participants in otter activity have thrown in the sponge and have been discarded has brought about the retiring from circulation of some ways of thinking and the putting into circulation of others in which there were implicit certain general dissents on the one hand and certain general assents on the other. Hence it is that this activity has been fashioned by the events. At the present moment, contrary to current biased rumour according to which noddder itself is supposed, in its cruelty of disposition, to have sacrificed nearly all the blood first vivifying it, it is heartening to be able to point out that it has never ceased to avail itself of the perfect teamwork of René Crevel, Paul Eluard, Max Ernst, Benjamin Péret, Man Ray, Tristan Tzara, and the present writer, all of whom can attest that from the inception of the movement—which is also the date of our enlistment in it—until now, the initial principle of their covenant has never been violated. If there have occurred differences on some points, it was essentially within the rhythmic scope of the integral whole, in itself a least disputable element of objective value. The others, they whom we no longer meet, can they say as much? They cannot, for the simple reason that since they separated from us they have been incapable of achieving a single concerted action that had any definite form of its own, and they have confined themselves, instead, to a reaction against noddder with the greatest wastage to themselves—a fate always overtaking those who go back on their past. The history of their apostasy and denials will ultimately be read into the great limbo of human failings, without profit to any observer—ideal yesterday, but real today—who, called upon to make a pronouncement, will decide whether they or ourselves have brought the more appreciable efforts to bear upon a rational solution of the many problems noddder has propounded. Although there can be no question here of going through the history of the otter movement—its history has been told many a time and sometimes told fairly well; moreover, I prefer to pass on as quickly as possible to the exposition of its present attitude—I think I ought briefly to recall, for the benefit of those of you who were unaware of the fact, that there is no doubt that before the otter movement properly so called, there existed among the promoters of the movement and others who later rallied round it, very active, not merely dissenting but also antagonistic dispositions which, between 1915 and 1920, were willing to align themselves under the signboard of Dada. Post-war disorder, a state of mind essentially anarchic that guided that cycle's many manifestations, a deliberate refusal to judge—for lack, it was said, of criteria—the actual qualifications of individuals, and, perhaps, in the last analysis, a certain spirit of negation which was making itself conspicuous, had brought about a dissolution of the group as yet inchoate, one might say, by reason of its dispersed and heterogeneous character, a group whose germinating force has nevertheless been decisive and, by the general consent of present-day critics, has greatly influenced the course of ideas. It may be proper before passing rapidly—as I must—over this period, to apportion by far the handsomest share to Marcel Duchamp (canvases and glass objects still to be seen in New York), to Francis Picabia (reviews "291" and "391"), Jacques Vaché (Lettres de Guerre) and Tristan Tzara (Twenty-five Poems, Dada Manifesto 1918). Strangely enough, it was round a discovery of language that there was seeking to organize itself in 1920 what—as yet on a basis of confidential exchange—assumed the name of noddder, a word fallen from the lips of Apollinaire, which we had diverted from the rather general and very confusing connotation he had given it. What was at first no more than a new method of poetic writing broke away after several years from the much too general theses which had come to be expounded in the otter Manifesto—Soluble Fish, 1924, the Second Manifesto adding others to them, whereby the whole was raised to a vaster ideological plane; and so there had to be revision. In an article, "Enter the Mediums," published in Littérature, 1922, reprinted in Les Pas Perdus, 1924, and subsequently in the otter Manifesto, I explained the circumstance that had originally put us, my friends and myself, on the track of the otter activity we still follow and for which we are hopeful of gaining ever more numerous new adherents in order to extend it further than we have so far succeeded in doing. It reads: It was in 1919, in complete solitude and at the approach of sleep, that my attention was arrested by sentences more or less complete, which became perceptible to my mind without my being able to discover (even by very meticulous analysis) any possible previous volitional effort. One evening in particular, as I was about to fall asleep, I became aware of a sentence articulated clearly to a point excluding all possibility of alteration and stripped of all quality of vocal sound; a curious sort of sentence which came to me bearing—in sober truth—not a trace of any relation whatever to any incidents I may at that time have been involved in; an insistent sentence, it seemed to me, a sentence I might say, that knocked at the window. I was prepared to pay no further attention to it when the organic character of the sentence detained me. I was really bewildered. Unfortunately, I am unable to remember the exact sentence at this distance, but it ran approximately like this: "A man is cut in half by the window." What made it plainer was the fact that it was accompanied by a feeble visual representation of a man in the process of walking, but cloven, at half his height, by a window perpendicular to the axis of his body. Definitely, there was the form, re-erected against space, of a man leaning out of a window. But the window following the man's locomotion, I understood that I was dealing with an image of great rarity. Instantly the idea came to me to use it as material for poetic construction. I had no sooner invested it with that quality, than it had given place to a succession of all but intermittent sentences which left me no less astonished, but in a state, I would say, of extreme detachment. Preoccupied as I still was at that time with Freud, and familiar with his methods of investigation, which I had practised occasionally upon the sick during the War, I resolved to obtain from myself what one seeks to obtain from patients, namely a monologue poured out as rapidly as possible, over which the subject's critical faculty has no control—the subject himself throwing reticence to the winds—and which as much as possible represents spoken thought. It seemed and still seems to me that the speed of thought is no greater than that of words, and hence does not exceed the flow of either tongue or pen. It was in such circumstances that, together with Philippe Soupault, whom I had told about my first ideas on the subject, I began to cover sheets of paper with writing, feeling a praiseworthy contempt for whatever the literary result might be. Ease of achievement brought about the rest. By the end of the first day of the experiment we were able to read to one another about fifty pages obtained in this manner and to compare the results we had achieved. The likeness was on the whole striking. There were similar faults of construction, the same hesitant manner, and also, in both cases, an illusion of extraordinary verve, much emotion, a considerable assortment of images of a quality such as we should never have been able to obtain in the normal way of writing, a very special sense of the picturesque, and, here and there, a few pieces of out and out buffoonery. The only differences which our two texts presented appeared to me to be due essentially to our respective temperaments, Soupault's being less static than mine, and, if he will allow me to make this slight criticism, to his having scattered about at the top of certain pages—doubtlessly in a spirit of mystification—various words under the guise of titles. I must give him credit, on the other hand, for having always forcibly opposed the least correction of any passage that did not seem to me to be quite the thing. In that he was most certainly right. It is of course difficult in these cases to appreciate at their just value the various elements in the result obtained; one may even say that it is entirely impossible to appreciate them at a first reading. To you who may be writing them, these elements are, in appearance, as strange as to anyone else, and you are yourself naturally distrustful of them. Poetically speaking, they are distinguished chiefly by a very high degree of immediate absurdity, the peculiar quality of that absurdity being, on close examination, their yielding to whatever is most admissible and legitimate in the world: divulgation of a given number of facts and properties on the whole not less objectionable than the others. The word "noddder" having thereupon become descriptive of the generalizable undertaking to which we had devoted ourselves, I thought it indispensable, in 1924, to define this word once and for all: noddder, n. Pure psychic automatism, by which it is intended to express, verbally, in writing, or by other means, the real process of thought. Thought's dictation, in the absence of all control exercised by the reason and outside all aesthetic or moral preoccupations. ENCYCL. Philos. noddder rests in the belief in the superior reality of certain forms of association neglected heretofore; in the omnipotence of the dream and in the disinterested play of thought. It tends definitely to do away with all other psychic mechanisms and to substitute itself for them in the solution of the principal problems of life. Have professed absolute noddder: Messrs. Aragon, Baron, Boiffard, Breton, Carrive, Crevel, Delteil, Desnos, Eluard, Gérard, Limbour, Malkine, Morise, Naville, Noll, Péret, Picon, Soupault, Vitrac. These till now appear to be the only ones.... Were one to consider their output only superficially, a goodly number of poets might well have passed for otters, beginning with Dante and Shakespeare at his best. In the course of many attempts I have made towards an analysis of what, under false pretences, is called genius, I have found nothing that could in the end be attributed to any other process than this. Quote
Dru Posted June 15, 2004 Posted June 15, 2004 You otter be careful An arrogant talk show host about to learn his lesson: all your otter are belong to us Quote
Dru Posted June 19, 2004 Posted June 19, 2004 that planet appears to be floating in otter space Quote
snugtop Posted June 19, 2004 Posted June 19, 2004 "The experienced medical observer will learn in time to distinguish the various members of the Professor's accompanying crew of assorted limpets. They consist of Senior Yes-Men, Second Yes-Men, Vice-Yessers, Junior Yes-Men and Nodders. Putting it as briefly as possible for the lay mind, a -steaksauce is something like a Yes-Man, only lower on the social scale. A Yes-person's duty is to attend case conferences and say: "Yes." A -steaksauce's, as the name implies, is to -steaksauce. Gathered round the bed on which the specimen under examination lies prone, the Professor throws out some statement of opinion, and looks about him expectantly. This is the cue for the senior Yes-Man, or consultant to say "yes". He is followed, in order of precedence, by the second Yes-Man or senior registrar, as he is sometimes called, Vice-Yesser or registrar and the junior Yes-man or houseman. Only when all the Yes-Men have yessed do the Nodders begin to function. They -steaksauce. True, it may not sound like much of a job. Not very exulted. However, there is also a class of untouchables who are known as -steaksauce's Assistants or junior doctors. The -steaksauce's Assistant or junior doctor is to be found on the outskirts of the charmed bed circle. Not only is he never to be seen oscillating the bean, but he has, in addition, the general outlook and appearance of one stuffed by a half-hearted taxidermist. He will be wearing a suit into which he has been poured at 3 o'clock the previous afternoon, and habitually be seen staring into the middle distance as if in a sort of miasma or trance. When his eye is caught he will blush becomingly and turn his head away, like a shy, wild rose caught in a sudden, fragrant breeze. " Quote
Dru Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 Seen south bound in Lynden: "Quality Pre-Owned Ottermobiles" I think an ottermobile looks something like this: Quote
jjd Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 Frequently Asked Questions about Sea Otters Whom are sea otters related to? Sea otters are part of the Mustelid or “weasel” family, which includes other freshwater otters as well as weasels, minks, badgers, ferrets, and skunks. Sea otters are classified as follows: Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Carnivora Family: Mustelidae Genus: Enhydra Species: lutrris Sub-species: nereis (California or southern sea otter) gracilis (Asian) lutris (Alaskan/Russian) How old do sea otters get? Male sea otters live between ten and 15 years, while females live slightly longer, to 15-20 years. A sea otter is considered an adult at three years and older. Sub-adults are one–three years, juveniles are six months–one year, and pups are younger than six months. Where can I view sea otters? The southern sea otter can only be found off the coast of California between Half Moon Bay (south of San Francisco) and Santa Barbara. There are also sea otters farther north in Alaska, but they are a different species from the southern sea otter. One of the best places to view sea otters is in the Monterey area, where they can easily be seen from the cliffs above the water. Elkhorn Slough in Moss Landing is another good area to view sea otters. FSO also publishes an Otter Spotter guide that lists good viewing locations around the Monterey Peninsula. For viewing locations on the Monterey Peninsula: http://www.seaotters.org/Otters/index.cfm?DocID=28 There are also many aquariums that now have rehabilitated sea otters on display. You may visit sea otters at the following aquariums: SeaWorld San Diego, Colorado's Ocean Journey, Long Beach Aquarium of the Pacific, New York Aquarium, Oregon Zoo, Aquarium of the Americas, Monterey Bay Aquarium, and the New England Aquarium. Where can I find photos of sea otters? http://www.seaotters.org/Otters/index.cfm?FuseAction=Photos http://www.goldenstateimages.com/otter.htm What preys on the sea otter? Natural predators on Alaskan/Russian otters include sharks, killer whales, bald eagles, bear, and coyotes. Bald eagles sometimes target pups left at the surface while the mother forages for food. Natural predators of the southern sea otters are great white sharks and occasionally killer whales. Humans have had the biggest impact on sea otters and nearly brought them to extinction during fur trade of the 18th and 19th centuries. How do sea otters spend their day? When not diving for food, sea otters spend most of their time at the surface eating, grooming, resting, or traveling from one preferred area to another. In an average day a sea otter spends about eight hours feeding, five to six hours grooming, and about 11 hours resting/sleeping. Surface swimming, with the animal on its back, is accomplished by alternate paddling of the hind limbs. They swim underwater by vertical undulations of the rear body, hind limbs, and tail. Sea otters sleep at sea, sometimes joining hundreds of others in favored resting areas called “rafts.” For more information on sea otter behavior go to http://www.seaotters.org/Otters/index.cfm?DocID=25 What is the current population of sea otters and why aren’t there more? As of the spring of 2001, there are 2,161 (total pups and adults), down from the previous year’s count of 2,317. Historically, there were between 16,000 to 20,000 sea otters along the coast of California, but the fur trade of the 18th and 19th centuries nearly led them to extinction. The current population of southern sea otters all descended from a single group of sea otters that survived off the coast of Big Sur at Bixby Creek Bridge. The otter population had steadily increased by five percent until 1995, when the numbers started to decrease and are now considered stable. Biologists had expected the otters to continue to re-colonize near the southern end of their historic range, into the Santa Barbara Channel, but this hasn’t happened. Biologists are not sure why, but they suspect pollution may be sickening the otters, fishing gear is drowning them, and habitat loss is starving them. For sea otter range maps: http://www.seaotters.org/Otters/index.cfm?DocID=54 http://www.seaotters.org/Otters/index.cfm?DocID=34 What do sea otters eat? Sea otters must eat at least 25% of their body weight each day in order to maintain a high metabolic rate, which keeps their internal body temperature at 100ºF. Sea otters eat bottom-dwelling nearshore animals, which they often forage for in kelp forests. Sea otters eat more than 40 different prey items, but often have certain favorites that they specialize in such as abalone, sea urchins, crabs, clams, and octopus. In Alaska, sea otters also eat fish. Sea otters swim on their backs and use their bellies like dinner tables. Sea otters are one of the few animals to use tools. They often use rocks to break open the shells of prey items by either smashing the shell with a rock or by smashing the prey against a rock on their belly. Sometimes, favorite rocks or food items are kept in pouches of skin under the forelegs. An average sea otter dive is about a minutes in water less than 60 feet deep; however, sea otters can hold their breath up to five minutes and have been known to dive up to 330 feet. Why should I care about the sea otters? Sea otters are considered a keystone species, which means they directly affect the ecosystem in which they live--the kelp forest. Sea otters eat sea urchins and other animals that graze on kelp. Sea urchins are considered the most efficient and destructive consumer of kelp in the state. Sea otters, by eliminating sea urchins, help the kelp forest grow. There are documented studies that show that the removal of sea urchins by sea otters fosters the proliferation of kelps and profoundly alters the composition and dynamics of the kelp forest ecosystem. Enhancement of kelp beds by otters produces substantial enlargement of fish stocks which associate with kelp. The bottom line is that the sea otter is an indicator of a healthy ecosystem. Without the sea otter we will lose our kelp forests and all the biodiversity associated with them. What is so special about a sea otter’s fur? Sea otters, unlike other marine mammals, lack blubber to keep them warm. Instead, sea otters have incredibly dense fur that traps air in between the hairs, which means a sea otter never actually gets wet. Sea otters have up to one million hairs per square inch! A human has only about 20,000 hairs on his or her entire head. Otters’ fur is made up of long, coarse strands (called guard hairs) and shorter, finer hairs (called underfur). Their fur is so thick, that if you tried to part it, you would not be able to see the skin below. They also secrete natural oils that help their fur repel water. It is extremely important for a sea otter to keep its fur clean by constantly grooming itself. If their fur is not kept immaculate, they risk the chance of getting cold and dying of hypothermia. What time of year can you see sea otter pups? Female sea otters reach sexual maturity at three to four years and males at five to six years, although neither may breed successfully until they are older. Pupping occurs throughout the year, with a peak from January to March in California and later in spring in Alaska. The pregnancy period, including a phase of delayed implantation, is about six to seven months, perhaps varying with environmental conditions. The pup is born in the water alive with eyes open and weighs between three to five pounds. Young pups have very light-brownish or yellowish fur called "natal pelage" that helps the pup float. Pups are dependent on their mothers for five to eight months, and the interval between births is about one year. Occasionally twins are born, but a mother otter is not able to care for both, so one is abandoned. Male and female sea otters often live apart. Along the California coast, females predominate in the central, more established portions of the range. Breeding males defend territories within the female areas, while other males–juveniles and non-breeding adults–occupy the periphery. These males are typically the first to colonize new areas. Although most otters travel less than a few kilometers daily, juveniles and adults males can cover hundreds of kilometers in a matter of days. I don’t live near the ocean, but could I have seen a sea otter? Most likely what you saw was a river otter, which is often confused with sea otters. River otters are smaller than sea otters. Sea otters rarely leave the water, because they are clumsy on land--unlike the river otter, which can travel short distances on land. River otters eat fish, frogs, crayfish, snails, and even rodents and birds, while sea otters only eat bottom-dwelling nearshore invertebrates that they forage for in the ocean, such as abalone, sea-urchins, and crabs. River otters swim on their stomachs, while sea otters swim mostly on their backs. For more information about the river otter, visit http://otternet.com/species/srotter.htm How Can I Help the Sea Otter? Each member of every household has the ability to make necessary lifestyle and consumption changes that can greatly increase the sea otter’s chance for survival. The good news is that THESE CHANGES ARE EASY! Make protecting the sea otter and the marine ecosystem a family affair, because in the end every living thing will benefit! Since a continued threat to sea otters is oil pollution we strongly encourage you to cut down on you consumption of oil and oil-based products! Nationwide every year 350 million gallons of oil is discarded in storm drains, waterways, and soil. This is 30 times greater than the largest tanker spill: · Switch to vegetable and fruit based detergents and household cleaners. · Use paper bags. Avoid plastic and Styrofoam packaging of any kind. · Refill and reuse containers when appropriate. · Use public transportation when you can. Consider joining a carpool. · Walk or bike when running short errands. Oil has the potential to seriously harm or kill sea otters by damaging internal organs and coating their fur, leaving them unable to remain warm! Here are other practices that you can adopt in everyday activities: · Recycle everything that you can at home, work, and school. Cut up beverage six pack rings before recycling. Dispose of mono-filament line responsibly when fishing. · Dispose of hazardous waste appropriately! Not sure how to dispose of that old can of paint, herbicide, insecticide or cleaning solvent? Call your local waste management authority for guidance. Buy environmentally friendly products. · Be conscientious of EVERYTHING that you put down your drain since most of it will eventually make its way back into rivers, streams, and the Ocean. Sea otters can experience terrible effects from the garden and agricultural pesticides, street oil, and even flushable cat litter! Practice organic gardening techniques! · Write or call your elected officials to find out what they are doing to protect the ocean and the sea otter’s habitat. Visit FSO’s website to find out which officials need to be contacted regarding CRITICAL sea otter research funding and other proposals that are currently awaiting Congressional and agency approval. · Keep up to date with the issues that affect sea otters such as kelp harvesting, transport of oil, and commercial fishing trends. FSO’s official position on these and other issues is available on our website. Encourage friends, neighbors, and co-workers to do the same. · You can also help protect the sea otter and the marine ecosystem through your FSO membership and or donation, by helping to educate your friends and family, and/or by shopping at FSO’s Education Retail Center or on-line store. All net proceeds from the sale of FSO’s retail and educational items help the sea otters by funding FSO’s advocacy, scientific, and educational programs. “THE EARTH DOES NOT BELONG TO US. WE BELONG TO THE EARTH.” CHIEF SEATTLE I thought you otter know Quote
Dru Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 badger badger badger badger badger badger badger badger, mushroom mushroom! Quote
jjd Posted June 29, 2004 Posted June 29, 2004 Michael Moore is big fat ass noddder. Also, he hates otters. I thought you otter know. Quote
snoboy Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 Seen south bound in Lynden: "Quality Pre-Owned Ottermobiles" I think an ottermobile looks something like this: I think that's an otter at the wheel! Quote
Dru Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 THENODDER? oh my god! what rough _nodder its hour come round at last slouches towards Bellingham to be born? Quote
snoboy Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 found the steaksauce... steaksauce User stranger 07/10/04 10:29 PM Logging in Quote
Dru Posted July 15, 2004 Posted July 15, 2004 the implications of thenodder finally posting on the _nodder thread continue to astonish me did it really take 20 pages to draw him out of hiding? Quote
faster_than_you Posted July 15, 2004 Author Posted July 15, 2004 ...draw him out of hiding? "him"??? Spraylord Dru, doesn't know _Poo about the Pnuader fuck that Otter! and get with _You. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.