Don't donate to temples without cow trust funds

[Guest guest]

Madhava Gosh is making many excellent points here.

 

Where is Prabhupada's letter to Yasomatinandana to back up the idea of the cow

trust? That should be quoted to preface anything in the book on trusts.

Important

to establish that the original suggestion came from Srila Prabhupada, not our

idea.

 

Then the points are this:

 

1. A land trust for cows prevents land from being sold or even confiscated (as

in

legal suits) away from them. When developers move into a Krsna conscious

community, the first thing they do is send a backhoe out to your best pasture

and

dig up holes in it to see if it passes a perk test for house construction.

Enough

to turn the stomach of any cowherd.

 

2. As long as Krsna's cows don't have their own separate funds, they are very

likely to lose them for other purposes. The temple is nicely painted up while

the

cows languish in crowded filthy conditions.

 

I read an ad lately encouraging people to donate to the Vrndavana Goshalla.

But,

from what we heard -- there is no separate cow trust fund for Vrndavana. There

is

no guarantee that the money will actually be spent for the cows. For all the

donor

knows, it will be spent for luxurious accommodations for some visiting

Maharaja.

 

I remember reading in the different letters how the cowherd was requesting the

temple president to set up a trust fund for the cows. That was back in spring

1999. I'll bet that the president still hasn't set up a cow trust fund for

Vrndavana.

 

And, once again, this points back to the importance of the cowherd being able

to

have a private 1-hour meeting directly with the GBC to see that something

likely

this is actually carried out -- rather than the less articulate cowherd being

constantly cut off by the smooth talking temple president, who may claim that

everything is just fine as it is right now -- or giving endless excuses why the

ISKCON law 507 is not realistic.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

 

"COM: Madhava Gosh (das) ACBSP (New Vrindavan - USA)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2965758 from COM]

>

> Noelene Hawkins wrote:

>

> > [Text 2954703 from COM]

> >

> > [Text 2951082 from COM]

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >II ORGANIZATION OF COW CARE FACILITIES

> > >

> > >Cow/Land Trusts

> > >This is a hard one as there is not yet an established Cow Trust?

> >

> > Could someone please enlighten me as to why this is necessary or even

> > desirable? If we are to breed with utmost caution, taking into account the

> > carrying capacity of the land in worst of conditions, and the fact that

cows

> > live up to 20 years, why does money have to be accumulated for extra land?

>

> Sad experience makes it if not necessary, at least desirable. Tying Trusts

to

> overbreeding is really two different subjects.

>

> In NV, Kirtanananda bred lots of cows with the idea money from milk sales

> would

> pay for th upkeep of the herd. It doesn't work. Coe gives really profitablr

> milk for one year, but the calf lives 12 or more. So all the money is at the

> beginning. Even if you were to try to pay withthe milk money, a Trust would

> be

> needed so the money would be set aside and paid out over the life of the calf

> rather than all spent as it came in. Even considering the carrying capacity

of

> the land, what is to assure that the land is going to be there? The Trust

> would be the landholder to ensure that it is held for the lifetime of the

cow.

> All calculations of preventing over breeding are good and necessary, but if

> some manager sells the land to met some short term cash flow expediency, it

is

> gone and no longer available for the cow. By placing ownership of the land

in

> Trust, selling is no longer an issue.

>

> Don't think it can't happen. For instance, a gurukuli lawsuit could be

> successful and all the assets seized. The Trust would give protection.

>

> >

> >

> > So why encourage overbreeding? Why encourage speedsters on the road, saying

> > its OK, we'll clean up your mess and pay the hospital?

>

> Not encouraging over breeding. Assuring the future of sensible breeding. If

> someone were to apply to the Trust for the assurance the calf would cared

for,

> the Trustees would apply the proper criterion to the situation, deciding on

> issues of land capacity, stability of breeder, etc. before approving the

> breeding.

>

> >

> > Sorry but it don't make sense.

> > If it is for the welfare of the cow, medical etc.then why this can't be

> > covered by ox-produce sales,

>

> Yes, that could be financed or owned by the Trust. Businesses take capital.

>

> > or adopt-a-cow? Or give most of the care

> > through herbs grown locally? Then strictly adopt-a-cow funds should go to

> > medical care, beyond herbal, because diversion of such funds to other

> > projects is common in my experience.

>

> It is common because the funds are co mingled with general revenues. A gift

to

> a Trust can only be used for the purposes of the Trust. A Trust prevents

> diversions.