Guest guest Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 Let the animals live in peace in their natural habitat.All environmentalists,conservationists and animal welfare activists should work for proper implementation and framing of laws in defence of all the animals in general and endangered species in particular. we have no right to commercialise the poor creatures for selfish motives under one or another pretext. Dr.sandeep K.jain On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 Kirsten Conrad 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...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 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. 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? 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? Which measure is totally and comprehensively effective? 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? * 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. 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. The article mentions reintroduction of tigers as a possibility. Can you come up with an example of a successful tiger reintroduction programme? Also, how do you define 'conservation'? *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? If sanctions are imposed on them for trade in tigers, will they be effective? 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? Maybe it is not all that effective now, but what of the future? 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? 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...
Guest guest Posted August 18, 2006 Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 Dear colleagues I have worked on various animal welfare issues in China over the years, and I would like to highlight some serious concerns that are applicable to the issue of tiger farming in China: 1) Good animal welfare is very rare – the concept is not really accepted. Standards of husbandry are low, with very little environmental enrichment. Worst of all, there is no law to ensure that animals will not suffer. 2) A huge number of animals suffer in China, and cases of extreme cruelty can be seen all over the country. This cruelty is seen in all areas of animal use, from zoos, circuses, and research to livestock factory farming and commercial wildlife breeding farms (e.g. bears, turtles, mink, foxes). Most of these facilities fail to meet the basic needs of the animals. Most of us will recall a report on fur farming in China published in 2004 by EAST, showing that the animals were kept in unacceptable conditions and killed by extremely inhumane methods. If commercial tiger breeding farms were allowed in China, it is very doubtful that the welfare of these animals would be acceptable by any standards. 3) Commercial tiger breeding farms will not help in conservation of tigers. a. On the contrary, it will increase the poaching of wild tigers. The bear farms in China still catch cubs from the wild to get new stock. b. When wildlife products are consumed, wild-caught animals are always more valuable than captive bred farm products. People who can afford it will demand wild-caught animal products. While the demand exists, there will always be killing. c. It has been recognised by various conservationists that the captive breeding of an endangered species will most likely increase and legitimise the use of products from these species. This will stimulate global trade and products will continue to come from wild animals, with a negative impact on the wild populations. This has happened in the case of bears. 4) Many Chinese TCM practitioners have clearly stated that there is no need for the use of tiger bone in TCM. The pressure to lift the ban is clearly driven by a few tiger breeding farms for their own profit. 5) Currently there is no identification scheme in China that allows the differentiation of bear gall bladders into captive-bred and wild- caught products. All the bear gall bladders which are openly sold in Chinese pharmacies are claimed to be from breeding farms. 6) The arguments given in this discussion for tiger farms are based on an economic angle to increase the value of the tiger through putting a price on it. Apart from the ethical reasons for discounting such an argument, this obviously does not take into account the social and political situation of China. In summary, the positive conservation impact of tiger farming on the wild tiger population is questionable, while the poor standards of animal welfare in China are undeniable. We should not risk our precious and critical tiger population by allowing the commercial breeding of tigers in China. Pei F. Su ACTAsia 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.