Protection Farms -- cow is dependent throughout its life

[Guest guest]

You give the analogy that if a person has a child, he is normally not

expected to care for that child for his whole life. At some point, the

child will become mature and as an independent adult will take care of

himself.

 

It is important to remember that this analogy cannot be applied to cows

and bulls. Just to the point is the very opening statement of ISKCON's

Minimum Cow Protection Standards:

 

"The term 'cows' is used herein to mean cows, calves, oxen, and bulls.

Cows are domestic animals, not wild animals. They are dependent on the

care of humans."

 

The implication here is that cow protection means care for the complete

lifetime of the cow. There will be no stage as with human beings, or

even with wild animals, at which the cow can be released and left to

care for itself. Therefore, any true model of cow protection, must

incorporate this factor as a basic point to be dealt with.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

 

 

 

mark chatburn wrote:

 

> To HKDD, thank you very much for responding to my

> points.

> The questions I wrote below refered to the eventuality

> that the business goes bust and the charity takes over

> the care of the animals.

> My point here is to define the absolute minimum care

> afforded by the charity once the business has gone due

> to its failure to meet the risks allowed to the

> business. What would be the absolute minimum?

> Your points are very valid in the working system, but

> what if the business fails. If each cow has an assured

> 1 hectare (depending on land quality) then it will do

> its own rotational grazing (see Argentina). The

> animals will have their names, but if they are now

> from a failed farm there will be little expenses to

> count them every day and give them the human touch

> (again what pre-paid arrangements need to be made).

> It would be better for arrangements to be made for

> their absorption in a succeeding farm, with land

> bought and their care outsourced to the new farm.

>

> When talking about risk, one must remember when we

> have children we do not have the funds set up for the

> rest of the child's life, for housing, education,

> clothes, food. No, we make them through their life.

> So, if we are to say the minimum standards to produce

> cows is to have their lifetime welfare pre-assured by

> a trust fund, it is shooting ourselves in the foot, as

> it is a challenge just too far to meet - unrealistic.

> Then it will not be done. Risk is a factor in life,

> and as I wrote before we risk 100% for all farm

> animals by doing nothing and allowing the perpetuation

> of the present system.

>

> Other than that I am very happy we are communicating.

>

> The trust would

> > > > > keep this fund in an endowment to guarantee

> > the

> > > > protection of the cows by

> > > > > hiring cow herds in the future if the business

> > > > fails.

> > >

> > > Right, to ensure their lifetime protection it

> > would

> > > probably be better for land to be assured, as

> > their

> > > ultimate home if all else fails. Here in

> > Argentina,

> > > all animals are lte loose on enormous tracts of

> > land -

> > > grass-fed beef. Therefore, the basic minimum care

> > is

> > > for land to satisfy their feeding needs summer and

> > > winter. Beyond that what is the basic minimum? A

> > visit

> > > once a month?

> >

> > Lord Krsna, the foremost among all cowherds,

> > demonstrated by His

> > personal activities at least three principles which

> > should be followed

> > for cow protection if possible:

> >

> > 1. Rotational grazing. Krsna and His cowherd

> > boyfriends would move the

> > cows to fresh grazing grounds each day. The

> > practical application of

> > this method in modern times is rotational grazing.

> > As a scholar of

> > environmental protection, I'm sure that you can

> > appreciate how

> > rotational grazing protects Mother Earth from soil

> > erosion, etc.

> >

> > 2. Giving each cow or bull a name. Krsna would

> > call each animal by

> > it's name and the animals would respond by lowing

> > affectionately. The

> > practical application of this principle in modern

> > times is that the name

> > establishes a personal relationship with the cow or

> > bull -- thus

> > reducing its chance of being slaughtered. Oddly

> > enough, there is at

> > least one large project in ISKCON where many bull

> > calves go unnamed.

> >

> > 3. Counting the cows daily. When Krsna brought the

> > cows back to the

> > village for the night, He would count the cows using

> > a string of

> > jewels. The practical application of this principle

> > in modern times is

> > that under any effective cow protection program, the

> > cows and bulls must

> > be counted at least once a day -- just as Krsna did.

> > Otherwise, a cow

> > might wander off and get caught in some dangerous

> > place -- or cows that

> > are down because they are ill will not be detected

> > by the cowherd. And,

> > worst of all, if it is known that the cowherds are

> > not vigilant about

> > counting the cows, it becomes an invitation for

> > cattle rustlers to come

> > and steal the animals and kill them.

> >

> > All these principles exemplified by Lord Krsna are

> > addressed by various

> > rules in ISKCON's Minimum Cow Protection Standards.

> >

> > your servant,

> >

> > Hare Krsna dasi

> >

>

>

>

> Get email at your own domain with Mail.

> http://personal.mail./

 

--

Noma Petroff

Academic Department Coordinator

BOWDOIN COLLEGE

Department of Theater & Dance