Here is what your museum has done (picture attached) to our beautiful world which exists just outside of your artificial world of art. It is a baby red-tailed hawk which was poisoned most likely from a rat which ate anti-coagulant rodenticide from your museum's compound.
You have a paid duty to preserve a phony world of worthless objects as far as the earth is concerned. Your duty is to maintain that deception so those weak minds which your museum attract can give up a part of their meager possessions for a chance to see exhibits which you and your clique has succeeded in making them believe is worth seeing.
But just outside your phony museum is a world of trees and animals struggling to survive as you expand into their already shrunken space. As you have found that even with all your power to deceive you still cannot find ways to expand your museum above ground so you are digging under the park to steal more real estate for your phony institution.
The glass windows of your museum kills thousands of birds every year but you refuse to do anything or try anything to stop this. You are poisoning the rats and mice which you claim is a threat to your art collection.
Well Emily if rats and mice are coming to your museum they are not coming for art they are coming for food. If you really care about your art you will not allow food in your museum and you’ll never have a problem.
But you and I know that art is not what you make your money on--it’s food. You know your visitors are not interested in seeing art as much as they are interested in stuffing food into their bodies after being bored to death by your exhibits. So food is a major part of the MET. Admission fees and suggested donations which you bully visitors into paying, and tickets to special exhibits are more or less limited, but the money you can get from food has no limit--people can sit and eat bad food all day long if they wished.
Well Emily your museum’s greed is affecting the natural world just outside your doors and it is killing the most beautiful things which visitors to the park are truly impressed and inspired by seeing.
Perhaps one day you should try to observe the reaction the average visitor has to the sight of a hawk perched in a tree in the park and compare it to the reaction of the average museum visitor’s reaction to your best exhibit.
At the sight of the hawk you will see that people are truly impressed and you can feel their soul lifting. Even the coldest hearts stop and relish to sight. That happens because the hawk, unlike your museum’s attractions, is a true work of art and people feel it in their hearts. Cyclists and joggers will stop to look, business men and women will stop their calls to look. Even teenage girls--the most difficult people to distract from their texting--they will stop and their innocent teenage-girl ‘I don’t care about anything else but myself’ façade melts away at the sight of a hawk perched in a tree in Central Park.
You couldn’t ever get that kind of reaction from your exhibits no matter how much publicity you get the Media to drum up for you, and that is because the people know in their hearts that when they look at your art they are seeing human pain and misery. Their heart knows that they are looking at art that was stolen from people in far off countries--you rob other people of their history because they are too poor and ignorant to stand up to your deceptive ways. So the museum’s visitor even if they try to be impressed, their hearts won’t let them and they themselves feel robbed and cheated for being trapped into coming to your museum. They are soon bored enough and then they follow the scent of the French Fries where they will stuff their face on burgers and soda to cap off their museum visit.
I don’t feel like I will ever be able to get you to appreciate Nature’s art so I will leave you with this;
Do you really love the art which you promote at your museum? Are you truly impressed by the work of those great men and women who sometimes gave their life to create those works you have hanging in your halls? If you do and you really appreciate the pain they suffered to produce those works then right outside your front door there a living artists struggling to sell their work to feed themselves. Soon they will be dead and perhaps then their work will be hanging in your halls. So for now when they are alive and trying to survive one day at a time, why don’t you show just a little bit of respect for them and stop your endless harassment and persecution of those living artists.
[my reply to the MET's form letter in response to their rodenticide use]
Dear Mr Holtzer:
Your words, though eloquent, lacks substance. The hawk has not recovered and you have no right to assume this since you are so detached from the natural world around you. Have you sat with the hawk from dawn to dusk and watched his every move to determine this? Or have you come into the park for even five minutes to see the effect of your reckless extermination practices? No you haven't in both cases so do not announce with an air of authority that the bird has recovered. The bird was captured and is now in a rehab center where the two owners of the center is struggling to save him along with his sibling who was also a victim from poison used by the AMNH across the park.
Before you begin to construct any crafty reply to defend your museum's selfish ways you should immediately contact the rehab center and make a generous donation to ensure that there are no delays in the treatment of the sickened hawks because of lack of funds for veterinary services and other expensive treatments necessary for rehabilitating these precious animals.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art building is still owned by the people of New York City and if you cannot operate your museum without causing harm to the natural life in the park then you should relocate your art collection. Your museum is a hazard to the park's living creatures so you need to move out. Central Park and it's natural inhabitants takes priority over any commercial enterprises.
Contact the rehabilitators and make a donation:
Bobby & Cathy Horvath
WINORR- Wildlife In Need of Rescue and Rehabilitation
202 N. Wyoming Avenue
N. Massapequa , N.Y. 11758
The Form letter from the MET:
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:28:31 -0400
Subject: Museum Pest Control
If you are in receipt of this email you have recently communicated with Emily K. Rafferty, President of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, about recent reports that a young hawk seemed to have taken ill in an outdoor area next to the Museum. In my role as senior vice president for external affairs, I have been asked by Ms. Rafferty to reply. Some of you may remember that I offered comments to similar messages of concern back on August 1, 2008; that reply still lives on the website:
First, let me say how delighted and relieved we all were to read the recent update(on palemaleirregulars.blogspot.com) that indicates that the seemingly afflicted “fledge” appears to be alive and well and flying about. Happily, if it was indeed made sick by ingesting something, it seems to have recovered. Needless to say, we share your affection for these birds—they are frequently in our sight on the various rooftops of the building, and we have come to regard them as precious neighbors and a source of great delight.
That said, please understand that we are obligated—to our public, to our collection, and to the general issue of safety—to do battle against the vermin population that, without proper controls, would pose a major threat to the institution. Rats cause disease and fire hazards, and hold the potential to cause significant damage to works of art in various media, especially those made of organic material like textile, paper, or wood. We live in a challenging environment in our Central Park home. Of course it has always been our goal to focus pest control on the vermin alone, and to use materials that pose the least danger to predators and other native wildlife.
We fully believe that our professional advisors, Orkin, have developed a system that meets all these goals. We use bait boxes that birds and other animals cannot penetrate. We employ the chemical known under the brand name Contrac that, while deadly for rodents, almost always bring them from their nests, subject to predators, when they are dying, at which time the poison is no longer in their systems. In other words, once they have lost the ability to flee from predators like the hawks, when they are most likely to be caught, killed, and consumed, the poison has already left their systems and is inactivated—when there is no secondary danger to their captors. In this way we fulfill our obligations to protect the museum while minimizing the threat to the birds.
Nor do we set these traps indiscriminately. We first carefully test areas for infestation by putting out boxes that contain only food, and only when we detect proof that rats are entering and consuming the bait do we add the Contrac. This in effect minimizes the time the chemical is exposed to the elements—and to nature.
In all our work here, we strive to be environmentally sensitive, and we continue to have the highest respect not only for that which has been created by humankind, but also for that which has been created by nature. We believe we have balanced our responsibilities in the most informed and humane way possible, and trust you will understand that our staff vigilantly remains in close supervision of the entire process, and ever sensitive to changing technologies. All this said, we think we have not added any danger to the lives of our beloved hawks and their progeny.
We are pleased to learn that the bird in question appears to have recovered—and look forward to further discussion if you feel the need to dialogue. Many thanks for your concern.
With best wishes,
Senior Vice President, External Affairs
The Metropolitan Museum of Art
1000 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10028