Guest guest Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 *Dear AAPN colleagues,* * I have attached Ms Kirsten Conrad's reply to my questions on tiger farming. After reading all the e-mails I think that there are several areas where we concur. I think we are all in agreement that tiger farming violates the principles of animal rights, ie., the inviolable right of an individual animal to exist free from pain and torture. I believe we are also agreed that tiger farming violates animal welfare, since creating ideal living conditions for tigers in captivity is difficult and farming kills healthy animals. The disagreement is on the conservation question regarding whether captive farming of tigers can aid the existence of wild tigers. As Ms Conrad says, there is not enough research done to determine if captive breeding tigers forms a viable conservation tool. In this case, I think the captive breeding experiment is better avoided since it deals with many lives and the likely conservation outcome is uncertain and ethically dubious. Even hard core conservationists agree that killing should be kept to a minimum since it goes against the spirit of the endeavour. I however do appreciate that the topic was raised since a similar proposal has been mooted for crocodiles in India by the Madras Crocodile Bank that has bred thousands of Marsh crocodiles and right now does not know what to do with them. I am glad that the Indian government is not allowing sustainable use of wildlife products by captive breeding and these thousands of crocodiles would never have faced overcrowded conditions if the Madras Crocodile Bank had not thrown caution to the winds and persisted in biting off more than they can chew. I do not think that any group, be it animal rights activists, welfarists or conservationists have the ultimate say on how to treat animals. Treatment of animals is a matter of concern for everyone, even those who do not come under the three divisions mentioned. It is better to identify common areas of interest and agree to disagree on others. In our Indian Zoo Inquiry, we opposed the sustainable use concept. I personally remain opposed and am glad that no such proposal is on the anvil in India for tigers. It gives me enormous pleasure to realise that if there is one country in the world that has succesfully integrated animal rights, welfare and conservation, it is India. * * Regards,* ** * Sincerely,* * * ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Kirsten Conrad <asiacat Aug 16, 2006 6:17 PM RE: Tiger Farming in China ** *Dear Mr. Ghosh,* ** *Thank you for taking the time to read my posting and to ask so many good questions. I have tried to respond below, hopefully in blue. This is an important topic and I am glad it is under discussion. * ** *-Kirsten Conrad* ** [journalistandanimals] *Sent:* Thursday, August 17, 2006 1:07 AM *To:* Kirsten Conrad *Cc:* aapn *Subject:* Re: Tiger Farming in China Dear Ms Conrad, Thanks for your response. I have several questions and issues : 1)As I understand from the article you posted, the trip was funded by the Chinese authorities. Besides which, the author of the article espouses free market economics so it does not come as a surprise that he views tigers as commodities, just like potatoes or plastic bottles.The author was recently on NDTV debating free market economics in a programme compered by Vikram Chandra. He spoke about the virtues of free market economics in Somalia that has given that country good telecommunications. Somalia is a country that also has Coke and it also has a bloody history of civil war. You can take your pick, telecommunications, Coke or civil war. In this case, conservation or animal welfare/rights may not be the principal issue that concerns Liberty Institute since free market economics puts money above everything else, including ethics. Several American scholars including Noam Chomsky have commented on this. The data is available. Of course, it is free to interpretation. So one might be pardoned for being sceptical of a free market campaigner's views on tiger conservation or welfare or rights. * * *As a friend of mine says, capitalism is a political system, not an economic one. But you are right to examine the motives of a source. I might suggest that many NGO's act in their own, self-perpetuating interests rather than to protect those of either the species or the host countries where they operate. * 2)One could venture that you were taken to the comparatively better farms where the captives are reasonably treated. There is a substantial body of information on the many farms where tigers are badly treated. There are pictures of these tiger farms that have been published by many animal welfare agencies, so surely conditions in all the farms are not all that good. What is your opinion on these farms? * * *I have seen only the two **major farms; I think China has 15-20 breeding operations, but outside the two my understanding is that they are much, much smaller operations (which does not necessarily mean better conditions, in fact the opposite). In my opinion--and I have served on the Board of a major US zoo--the conditions at Hengdaohezi and Harbin are better now than when I went in 1999 and 2000. I had never been to Guilin before. In both places, the animals had adequate sized enclosures or were free-ranging-type conditions, adequate food, water and cover. The health treatment in Harbin was above average. In both places I'd want to get the tigers off so much chicken. Both farms had far better conditions than what I've seen in Chinese zoos (albeit only as an outsider). One recommendation I made to SFA was that they hire consultants to conduct an AZA (American Zoo Association which grants accreditation based on a set of criteria, yes not perfect but at least a baseline standard) or some similar organization to " certify " their facilities. * 3)You say current measures to save tigers are not effective. How do you substantiate this and what is your definition of an effective measure? * Consider the number of tigers living in the wild 30 and 20 and 10 years ago versus today. And consider the recent report on the 40% loss in habitat. While there may be some isolated pockets of " success " (meaning the loss is stemmed), nobody can say we're winning the war. *Which measure is totally and comprehensively effective?* This I do not know and suspect it would be a combination of efforts, including loophole-free legislation that is enforced, economic livelihood for those who live near tigers, no corruption, education, and a host of other activities. * 4)*'We simply cannot dictate to people what to believe.'* So if people believe in racism and slavery and trade in narcotics and child labour and rape and murder, should we dictate terms to them?* * *Good point. Mine is that China is a sovereign country. * *Yes, what you mention is reprehensible, but I prefer to deal with countries as sovereign nations rather than invade, as is the case with Iraq. * * 5)'It is now time to look at all possible conservation measures. Positions against captive breeding have been taken, but in the absence of any hard data. Instead, we have deeply held opinions, which do not give rise to fact-based analysis, with the result being that we may be ruling out a viable conservation tool. Once we have some firm data, then we can take an informed position.'* You are making a claim that captive breeding of tigers might help to ease off pressure on wild populations. * True, I am. First, however, before we decide for or against, we need to take a careful look at it. I find it ironic that scientists, who are data-driven, have taken a position against captive breeding in a vacuum of facts. * Opponents of captive breeding tigers are not making the claim. Therefore, the onus is on you and not them, to come up with data to justify captive breeding of tigers that would help wild populations. * * *Yes, it is. And China needs to undertake a careful study such as the one I suggest. If they go ahead without gathering the facts (and conducting other research), then they would be acting irresponsibly. Suppose it backfired and they had not ;t done their due diligence? * The article mentions reintroduction of tigers as a possibility. Can you come up with an example of a successful tiger reintroduction programme? * * *I know of no successful reintroduction of tigers. An essential prerequisite is habitat and pray. * Also, how do you define 'conservation'? * * *Existence of animals roaming freely in their native habitats, in situ. Preservation is another thing, where the animal exists but in captivity. * *6)'I am also pragmatic and understand that China will go ahead and do what it is going to do, regardless of what I think or want them to do.'* Just as many people understand that the US will go ahead and do what it is going to do with its foreign policy regardless of what other countries want them to do. That does not necessarily mean they should support bombing of countries and assist the development of detention centres. The same thing was said by many people in US and UK who suppported the apartheid regime in South Africa. The regime ultimately caved in to international pressure. Although the final decision on captive breeding tigers will have to be taken by the Chinese themselves, what makes you sure that international pressure will not convince them to stop tiger breeding for medicine? * * *I am not sure that it won't and know that they are concerned about this, whether it comes from a government, NGO, or an informal network such as what just happened with the hunting licenses. Again, however, we need to know more about farming as a possible conservation measure before we cross it off. * If sanctions are imposed on them for trade in tigers, will they be effective? * * *Well, that depends on what type of sanctions. And the economic impact is only part of the consideration. " Face " is a major factor. I can say that China is much stronger now than in 1993, when it enacted the ban fearing sanctions by the US. * China caved in to international pressure when they applied for Olympics and released several prisoners. The international campaign for a more democratic China is having an effect. Would a sustained campaign against the use of tiger medicine in China be effective? * It hasn't to date. Look at what we know about where the poached tigers are going. *Maybe it is not all that effective now, but what of the future? * Well, as I said earlier, other parts of the world, including the EU and the US, are moving away from the use of tiger parts. I have talked to the CEO of a major TCM manufacturer and was told that their customers would abandon them if the company went in that direction. And the EU is banning animal derivatives in TCM starting next year, I believe. * 7)'*My expertise is in the business end and would prefer to invite qualified ethicists to weigh in on the matter.'* Who in your opinion is a qualified ethicist?Are you implying that one needs formal qualifications to have valid views on ethics? * No, anyone can jump in, but recognize Ethics is a field in itself and people do hold PhD's in it. Some have published papers on, among other, things, the ethics of using one group of a species to conserve another. * I would be keen to read your entire report along with the recommendations. Best wishes and kind regards, Sincerely yours, On 8/16/06, Kirsten Conrad <asiacat wrote: > > Dear All, > > A number of you have responded to yesterday's posting of Barun Mitra's > Op-Ed > on tiger farming. This is an important topic and public debate is > essential. To that end, I'd like to share my views and also some > information with you. > > I was part of the delegation invited to China's State Forestry > Administration's Department of Wildlife Conservation to advise them on > lifting the 1993 ban on domestic trade in tiger parts. This issue has > come > about due to a public enquiry made possible under the 2004 Public > Administration Act, which requires any government agency to respond to an > enquiry from the public within 90 days. China is considering four > options, > ranging from retaining the ban to a pilot test to partial and full lifting > of the ban. Because of the complex nature of this issue, SFA has been > able > to secure additional time to conduct the research required to take an > informed decision. The June delegation was part of that research. It > should > be noted that a number of conservation experts were invited or > opinions sought, including the IUCN Cat Specialist Group, which declined > to > attend. China invited me because I published an earlier paper on the tiger > breeding operation in Hengdaohezi and Harbin and because I developed a > proposal to conduct formal market and economic research into the issue; > more > on that below. > > It is not clear what lies behind the enquiry. Is is the breeders, who > continue to produce tigers and hence face economic pressure? Is it the > pharmaceutical companies, who stand to gain? Is this being driven by the > TCM community? I myself struggled with the underlying motive, and in the > end have concluded that it doesn't matter. If the end result is > alleviation > of poaching pressure on the wild tiger populations, that's a good thing. > > This is surely a gruesome thing to be considering. Ethics are a vital > part > of the discussion, and while I have not dealt with them that does not mean > > that I am discounting it. Rather, my expertise is in the business end and > would prefer to invite qualified ethicists to weigh in on the matter. > Personally, I do not believe that humans have any moral authority or > biological superiority that permits them to take the lives of other > sentient > beings. As a vegetarian, I look upon captive breeding in much the same > way > as raising domestic livestock, except that cats, and tigers in particular, > > hold critical positions in the eco-systems and are necessary for healthy > functioning. This is one reason why they should be maintained in the > wild, > but not the only reason. I also believe that any animal has an inherent > right to exist in its natural habitat, according to the laws of nature but > not man. However, I am also pragmatic and understand that China will go > ahead and do what it is going to do, regardless of what I think or want > them > to do. > > Before I went to China I made sure that SFA was aware that I neither > supported or opposed tiger farming (by that I mean commercial breeding of > tigers) and that my sole and overriding objective is the continued > existence > of wild tigers roaming freely in their natural habitats. > > We were taken to the tiger breeding facilities in Guilin and Harbin (which > collectively house more than 1,500 tigers), TCM hospitals, pharmacies, > medicine factories, as well as the Forestry University. We met with TCM > officials, SFA and CITES representatives, law enforcement and national, > provincial and local officials, and markets. Our group included > officials, > TCM doctors and pharmacists, representatives from CITES and the Chinese > Welfare Association. This was a full-fledged tour, comparable to what had > been done for the panda. Sure, we saw and heard what they wanted us to > see > and hear, but we also saw what many people do not get to see. > > Each of the delegates was asked to write a report. Mine included the > research proposal which I mentioned above, and I stressed to SFA that they > must conduct such research prior to making any decision. I also made a > number of other recommendations to SFA which I would be happy to list if > there is interest. > > My thinking on the issue is as follows: > 1.. Current measures to protect the tiger are not effective. While > habitat is unquestionably the issue in the long term, poaching has reduced > > many populations to relict status and has wiped out others. Once a > protected area has lost its tigers, political will to maintain that > protected area evaporates. > b.. Regardless of what I or others think about the efficacy of TCM, > " beauty is in the eye of the beholder " . We have tried to tell the Chinese > that alternatives to TCM exist, but that has little impact on demand. In > fact, the global TCM market is moving away from animal parts. And while > there are indeed TCM professionals in China and elsewhere who use > substitutes, there are many who swear by tiger bone. We simply cannot > dictate to people what to believe. There is a lack of information upon > which to take an informed decision about captive breeding. Conventional > wisdom holds that it is a bad way to go (will stimulate demand, allow an > entry point for poachers to legally sell their ill-gotten goods, farmed > tigers won't be accepted). > c.. It is now time to look at all possible conservation measures. > Positions against captive breeding have been taken, but in the absence of > any hard data. Instead, we have deeply held opinions, which do not give > rise > to fact-based analysis, with the result being that we may be ruling out a > viable conservation tool. Once we have some firm data, then we can take > an > informed position. > d.. Therefore we need to conduct a formal market research and economic > study to to ask the following questions. To do this study properly, one > would have to conduct primary and secondary research in China, and also > examine similar cases, such as ivory, rhino horn, and bear bile. > This is directly lifted from my report to SFA. > 1. What tiger products are currently being purchased and > consumed, > and by whom? For each different product, what are the current quantities > being consumed, and what prices are being paid for them? > > > 2. To what extent might captive-bred tiger products be acceptable to > TCM and other consumers? > > > > 3. Would tiger farming ultimately alleviate commercially driven > poaching pressures on the wild populations? Can captive populations be > managed in such a way so as not to require unsustainable replenishment > with > new stock from wild populations? > > > > 4. Are there ways to keep wild tiger derivatives from entering the > legal sales channels? To what extent can consumers be persuaded to buy > products from legal and sustainable sources rather than illegal ones? > > > > 5. How might the illegal trade network react to a competing legal > supply? Would it retaliate or simply shift to other > products/markets/businesses? What forms might retaliation take? > > > > 6. What would be the likely pricing model for an established, legal > supply? What are the cost structures of bringing captive-bred tigers to > the > market (farming, production, marketing, distribution etc.) and illegal > supply (poaching, illegal trading, bribes etc.)? > > > > 7. Is running a tiger farm an economically viable business under > various scenarios (natural death, 10-years old, bones only). If not, are > there any legitimate grounds to subsidize it? > > > > 8. What role do fakes and substitutes have? > > 1.. In the end, it does not matter what we think, but rather what the > Chinese think. And if they are going to go ahead, then best that they do > so > after a careful consideration of the issues. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.