Changes to Standards/help me

[Guest guest]

Dear ISCOWP, Cow Protectionists, Cow Abuse Protestants,

PAMHO, AGTSP, AGTCP.

Is it too late to discuss changes to the standards? I have the standards

that were published in the ISCOWP news,

and there may have been changes since then, I don’t know. I joined this

conference after the standards were

dicided upon, so I am having to make a late appeal, sorry for this

inconvenience.

My concern ius mainly item #14- Local GBC responsibility. I feel there has

to be some additions applicable to our

situation, because its just not working: cow abuse is continuing.

Our situation is: one person officially in charge of the whole herd, all

agriculture, cow-related activitries like

breeding milking etc. No one else is encouraged to get involved, lest they

clash with this person. No monitor, no

investigation team. Very small devotee community to choose one from. Bad

record of abuse.

However, we are an ISKCON farm and therefore the GBC ministry’s guidelines

must be met, but unless your

guidelines are applicable to my situation, they cannot help me. Anything

other than quoting these standards can be

countered as being sentimental. Even sastric quotations can be just “my

interpretation”.

Here are some suggested additional standards...

1. In the absence of a GBC- appointed monitor, or investigation team, such

as in a small community, any devotee

knowledgeable of the standards should be allowed to observe the herd on a

regular basis, for the purpose of

ensuring the standards are met, especially on farms where cow abuse has been

reported/observed and this should be

encouraged by the GBC.

2. Where cow abuse is observed in that there is evidence which is in the Not

Allowed category of the Cow

Protection Guidelines, such devotee should be encouraged to submit a report

to the local farm council for

rectification of the situation. That report can also be sent to the Cow

Ministry. Such a report can specify actions

needed to correct the situation. If there is any disagreement on the action

required, and such disagreement is

resulting in a lack of rectification, or delay of it, the matter can be

settled by consultation with the Cow Ministry,

and the decision reached by the Ministry will include actions required for

rectification. If such corrections are not

initiated after one month since the abuse was reported, the matter will be

referred to the Ministry of Justice.

3. (Applicable to All Communities) The GBC should be able to prove that the

monitor approved by him has a

sincere desire to stop cow abuse. This should be shown by (a) the monitor

having in the past provided excellent

care to the cows under his care, or (b) having protested or opposed the lack

of such care.

In the absence of such a monitor, if there are persons available who have

either or both of the above qualifications,

and that are willing to act as monitor, and the GBC does not appoint them,

then the GBC should provide in writing

their reasons to the ministry. In the meantime, in the absence of such a

monitor, however, it is necessary that any

willing devotee, knowledgeable of the standards and having either

qualification above, be allowed to act as

monitor.

In order to avoid cow abuse, at all times there must be: (a) a local

observer to identify cow abuse, (b) a monitor to

investigate asbuse and make reports, and an investigation team to specify

action. In a small community this may

have to be done by one devotee, who is independent of the local management,

but is qualified by either (a) or (b)

above, and willing.

************************************************************************************

Elsewhere in the Guidelines, you mention that no bull should be kept without

company. Please change it to no

bull, cow or bullock! They are all social animals and suffer greatly if

left alone for long periods. (Please read

“bullock” as “ox” if preferrred). The only condition of isolation is

contagious disease (with written proof of a vet

report that it is so), only for the period it is contagious. If the cow is

otherwise sick, or just old, the company should

be of gentle temperament so as to not cause injury e.g. by horning.

Re. health, vet visits should not be just hearsay, but provable by written

report.

Re: death: part of “neglecting the cow while she dies” Not permitted- not

to inform the devotees of a dying cow

or bullock, how it is being cared for and what can be done, especially where

it is dying out of sight. Noit to inform

concerned devotees of a down, sick or missing cow or bullock.

In the case of a missing cow/bullock- not permitted- not to undertake a

thorough search.

 

Hope this meets with your approval. Open for discussion, of course. Please

take this seriosly as I have a

sympathetic vice-president here, pushing for implementing all the standards,

but they have to be made appropriate

for us too. From your servant, Niscala dasi, New Gokula, Australia.

 

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com