Tom Sietsema, food critic for The Washington Post, ran a picture of a roasted rabbit (whole body without head) on a bed of pasta on p. 40 of The Washington Post Magazine (October 16, 2011), “Tom’s Fall Dining Guide.”  The restaurant being reviewed was Et Voila!,  a Belgian themed restaurant.  See review at  http://www.washingtonpost.com/gog/restaurants/et-voila,1152245.html

In the past when RabbitWise complained about a similar photo that accompanied his review of the restaurant Bebo Trattoria (The Washington Post Magazine, December 31, 2007).  He responded in print “…don’t look for any more rabbit photos anytime soon.”  Full response below (sidebar).   Apparently, he thought that “soon” has expired.

IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT WE RESPONDED TO SIETSEMA AND THE RESTAURANTS WHO PUT RABBIT ON THEIR MENUS.  If we do not, it will send the message that rabbits do not have a community that is willing to stand up and fight for them and people like Sietsema and the restaurants that he writes about will feel that they have free license to do whatever they want to rabbits.  PLEASE , PLEASE, PLEASE WRITE AND COMPLAIN.  Newspapers are inclined to do something, maybe even write a story, when they see there are sufficient numbers of people commenting on the same topic.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

-CALL AND COMPLAIN. The Washington Post switchboard will connect you to Sietsema’s voicemail if you call 202-334-6000 (or 800-627-1150).   Also call, Patrick B. Pexton, Ombudsman, the readers’ representative within the newspaper, at 202-334-7582 (or 800-627-1150).

-WRITE A LETTER to him at:

Tom Sietsema

c/o The Washington Post

1150 15^th St. NW

Washington, DC 20071

Copy your letter to Letters to the Editor and Patrick B. Pexton, Ombudsman, the readers’ representative within the newspaper, at the same address.

-E-MAIL Tom Sietsema:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/tom+sietsema also copy your e-mail to Patrick B. Pexton, Ombudsman, the readers’ representative within the newspaper, at ombudsman@washpost.com and to letters to the editor of The Washington Post at letters@washpost.com

-FACEBOOK:

Comment on Facebook at

www.facebook.com/washingtonpost

www.facebook.com/people/Tom-Sietsema/702741654

-COMPLAIN TO THE RESTAURANT:

Et Viola!

5120 MacArthur Blvd, NW

Washington, DC 200016

T: (202) 237-2300
F: (202) 237-5007
E: Mail@EtVoilaDC.com

Web: www.etvoiladc.com

FB: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Et-Voila-DC/103661299710758

WHAT YOU CAN SAY

Go for the bad for business angle as opposed to the rabbits are fluffy and cute angle.  They don’t care about cuteness.  They do care about what is bad for business.  Point out that according to the American Pet Products Manufacturing Association, rabbits are the third most popular pets in the USA after cats and dogs; point out that there are HUNDREDS of shelter and rescue organizations across the nation that rescue rabbits.  If you are from the DC area, mention that there are 17 organizations in this incredibly rabbit friendly area and that none of these rabbit people or their families will be eating at ANY restaurant who serves up their pet on a platter.  What if it were your cat or dog?

To counter the inevitable “we’re not  eating anyone’s pet” response say that there are plenty of rabbit people who now live with rescued former “meat” rabbits who were clearly traumatized for life by their experience in rabbit mills.   Counter the “it’s our cultural heritage” argument by stating that this was the same argument used to excuse slavery and other travesties and that the point of being civilized is to move forward in moral progress, not to be stuck in archaic practices.  Furthermore, you do not see where it is necessary to add more misery in the world by increasing the demand for the flesh of yet another species.  If you are vegan or vegetarian, all the better to point out that you do not eat any animal and hence can avoid the hypocritical and/or specieist argument.

Here’s where you can get cute and cuddly:  remind them that you’ll be happy to let everyone you come in contact with for the next one hundred years that they are frying up adorable little bunnies who are slaughtered before they even reach adolescence after being raised, transported, and slaughtered in horrific conditions.  It’s like eating Thumper, the Easter Bunny, Rodger the Rabbit, or Bugs.  That’s a lot of people to alienate and it’s bad for business.  You can also mention that you’ll be telling everyone you know about exactly what they are really participating in if they patronize restaurants and grocery stores who sell/serve rabbit.  If they learn about rabbit mills, they won’t be going anywhere that serves or sells rabbit ever in their lives.

THE TREND FOR EATING RABBIT IS ON THE RISE.  LET’S DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT NOW!

The side bar response, “Ask Tom,” to his regular review in the Sunday Washington Post Magazine, February, 3, 2007, p. 28:

“A number of readers took issue with the food photograph that accompanied my review of Bebo Trattoria in Crystal City (Magazine, Dec 31). “Seeing a rabbit on a platter produces the same reaction as seeing a cat or a dog fricasseed for human consumption,” complained Lana Lehr of Kensington. “As if we aren’t fat enough as a country,” weighed in Kathy Burke of Greenback, Tennessee, “we have to go beyond the typical meat-laden fare and add yet another species to our repertoire. A species that just happens to be the third most popular house pet in the country.” Paulette Lincoln-Baker, a self-described “companion to six house rabbits” in Sterling wondered in an email if I would be willing to promote “fried beagle if some local chef decides to do something trendy and different.”

Vegetarians complain when I write about steakhouses, and seniors have taken me to task when I fail to mention how loud some restaurants are.  I’ve listened to both camps, and I’ve made changes as a result: When I write about places specializing in meat, I try to find dishes that might appeal to those who avoid it, and I’ve spanked more than a few restaurants for their lack of soundproofing. But the bottom line is this: I write for a general readership, and I’m reluctant to avoid mentioning dishes just because they aren’t to some readers’ taste.  That said, don’t look for any more pictures of rabbit anytime soon.”

Apparently he missed the point that we were complaining about the third most popular companion animal in the country showing up on a dinner plate.

Hey Rabbit People,

You have got to hear this song about rabbits.  Let’s dedicate to all our honey bunnies!

Rabbits (original song)

SPREAD THE WORD!

The Daily Courier

7/6/2011 9:56:00 PM Tax court victory helps animal rescue volunteers deduct expenses Lauren Durham/Courtesy photo Pete is a 4-year-old terrier mix who is a social butterfly. He loves getting his ears scratched and playing with other dogs. Pete is part of July’s Priceless Pets program, in which potential adopters get to “Pick Their Price” on all dogs over 1 year old and cats over 6 months. Pete would love to go home today. Ed Boks Yavapai Humane Society The Wall Street Journal recently reported on a U.S. Tax Court ruling that will affect millions of dollars in annual tax deductions by animal-rescue volunteers. The ruling brings some much-needed clarity to deducting unreimbursed expenses incurred by volunteers helping Internal Revenue Service-recognized charities like the Yavapai Humane Society (YHS). The case involved Jan Van Dusen, who appeared before a U.S. Tax Court judge and a team of IRS lawyers more than a year ago regarding a tax deduction for taking care of 70 stray cats. In June, the Tax Court ruled Van Dusen could take $12,068 in charitable deductions for expenses incurred while taking care of the cats for an IRS-approved charity, Fix Our Ferals. The deductions were for cat food, veterinarian bills, kitty litter, a portion of her utility bills and other items such as paper towels and garbage bags. The decision, in Van Dusen v. Commissioner, paves the way for volunteers to deduct unreimbursed expenses that further a rescue group’s mission, such as fostering homeless animals. It also clarifies rules for deducting unreimbursed charitable expenses of $250 or more, especially if they involve use of a home. It affects donors to charities and religious groups, but not political organizations. Prior to this ruling, tax advisors often warned clients taking such deductions to be prepared for an IRS challenge. This ruling informs the taxpayer just how to successfully prepare for that challenge – with records of pertinent expenses and a letter from the charity acknowledging the gift. The IRS declined to comment on the case. It has 90 days to appeal to a federal appeals court. Van Dusen, 59, is a former family law attorney living in Oakland, Calif. She lives alone in a 1,500-square-foot home in a modest neighborhood with seven cats of her own. As a volunteer for Fix Our Ferals, whose mission is to trap, neuter and care for stray cats, Van Dusen provided foster care for about 70 feral cats. Van Dusen tried to take the deductions on her 2004 tax return, but the IRS considered them nondeductible personal expenses. In 2009, the case wound up in court. Van Dusen knew little about tax law before the trial, but represented herself because she couldn’t afford a lawyer. She said her pretrial encounters with IRS agents were “intimidating,” and she felt that in court the IRS lawyers “tried to portray me as a crazy cat lady.” However, Judge Richard Morrison demonstrated considerable patience: “He had to go through all (my) receipts from Costco and ask questions like, ‘What were these paper towels used for?’” In his 42-page decision, Judge Morrison agreed with many of her arguments. He allowed her to deduct most of some bills and half of others for care of the feral cats, ruling they were unreimbursed expenses incurred while helping a charitable group in its mission. He curtailed the total deduction somewhat because she didn’t have a valid letter from Fix Our Ferals acknowledging her volunteer work for expenses of $250 or more. There are an estimated 11 million volunteers nationwide who do volunteer work with local shelters and rescue groups, and many of these volunteers spend up to $2,000 of their own money a year to help animals in need, with some spending up to $15,000 a year. This is the first time the court has addressed these types of expenses, and this ruling sets an important precedent for the many foster-care-giving volunteers in our community. Check with your tax advisor on the impact this ruling may have on your volunteer efforts. If you are interested in YHS’s Foster Care program or becoming a foster care giver, visit www.yavapaihumane.org or contact YHS’s foster placement coordinator at ehester@yavapaihumane.org or 445-2666, ext. 16. Ed Boks is the executive director of the Yavapai Humane Society. He can be reached at eboks@yavapaihumane.org or by calling 445-2666, ext. 21.