Hi Tweets,

A speculative question comes up for me in connection with this thread. *If*
the question of which humans get to do what with a given bird on public
property ever goes to court -- a possibility not too extreme in a country
as litiginous as America -- whose interests, or rights if it comes to that,
should have precedence? Whose interests or rights *will* have precedence?

Who, in law, actually *owns* the birds? That is, moral value-judgements and
social compunction aside, who actually has the *real* power vested in or by
the State, or conceded by the State de facto and de jure, to execute their
immediate fate with impunity from legal and political consequence?

And thinking through the messy implications of the above, I'm forced --
shuddering -- to ask who, singly or collectively, would be the bird's best
advocate?

Cheers

Michael Price The only alien planet is Earth.
Vancouver BC Canada
mprice at mindlink.net - J. G. Ballard