Guest guest Posted December 25, 2006 Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 Thank you, Maneka, for highlighting the livestock donation issue. I have been sending letters to Dutch agencies to stop this programme for yet another reason: the animals are generally slaughtered in an inhumane manner. In Nepal for instance there is only one slaughterhouse (in the capital). This means that virtualy all livestock is being killed with often-not-too-sharp-knives causing much suffering to the animal and possibly to the butcher. I've met quite a few people who lost fingers while trying to kill a goat! >> >> On 12/20/2006, " " >> wrote: >> >> >*HATS OFF TO YOU, MRS GANDHI, FOR HITTING THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. * >> >** >> >*Of those charitable organizations* >> > >> http://www.weeklyblitz.net/index.php?subaction=showfull & id=1166563020 & archive= & s\ tart_from= & ucat=5 & cat=5 >> > >> >*Of those charitable organizations*** >> > >> >*Maneka Gandhi from **India* >> > >> >Nothing irritates me more than the charities abroad that collect money >> and >> >purport to give it to women or children or for animals in Asia or Africa.. >> >Very little reaches the country or the cause for which it is meant - I >> have >> >seen this happen in the animal world so many times. Most of it goes >> towards >> >their own " infrastructure " , which means rent, staff, travel and >> > " investigation " . >> > >> >One organization ran a campaign for many years for saving bears in India.. >> It >> >came to India six times a year to see the situation of bears. It hired >> >consultants from Australia and Argentina. No money came to India. I >> >complained to Charity Commission of that country and it was discovered >> the >> >fine print said that the organization could do what it wanted with the >> >donated money. Finally, the head of the organization was investigated and >> >removed. >> > >> >A little money was sent to us and a small bear sanctuary was built. A >> horse >> >care organization came to India after running a campaign abroad on how >> badly >> >Indian horses were treated. They brought money, gave it to a lawyer who >> >bought a house and car with it and disappeared. Now it teaches about five >> >farriers a year and that's it. But their international campaign for money >> >continues. >> > >> >Yet another organization came in to keep donkeys. In 10 years they have >> kept >> >70 donkeys in their enclosure and treated another 50. They come from >> >Europeat least once a month, three days at a time, and stay in five >> >star hotels to >> >check whether their Indian doctors are working. >> > >> >Recently, a watch company held an elephant polo match. The company gave >> half >> >a million pounds to an international organization that collects money to >> >save Indian elephants for a foreign charity. The Indian elephant NGO that >> >had been reluctantly roped into this illegal and unhappy venture got >> 8,000 >> >pounds with a promise of 25,000 more. That's it. >> > >> >Now Oxfam and Christian Aid have come out with their own scam. For anyone >> >who wants to feel good by giving a present to someone who has everything >> >already, you can buy a goat in their name or a donkey, pig, chicken, calf >> or >> >rabbit. Once the donor pays, the animal is sent to a " developing " >> country. >> >The scheme is sold by describing it as a " real statement to world >> >development and poverty alleviation " . There are 750 Oxfam shops in >> England. >> > >> >These charities are wooing the ethical shopper with pictures of goats >> >wearing Christmas hats and promises of helping the poor in developing >> >countries. According to environmentalists, it is madness to send goats, >> cows >> >and chickens to areas where they will add to the problems of drought and >> >desertification. >> > >> >Goats have a devastating effect because each goat eats all the grass and >> >shrubbery on two hectares of land a year. A goat destroys the fertility >> of >> >land and any milk or dung it may give is very little compared to the >> havoc >> >it wreaks. Within two years, the people who have goats have an even >> poorer >> >lifestyle - there are village quarrels on community grazing; the children >> >are taken out of school to graze the goats, water becomes even scarcer. >> > >> >All farmed animals require proper nourishment, large quantities of water, >> >shelter from extremes and veterinary care. Such resources are in >> critically >> >short supply in much of Africa and Asia. These programs are irresponsible >> >and misguided. Instead of helping impoverished communities in the >> developing >> >world flourish it is spreading disease, damaging the environment and >> wiping >> >out vital water supplies. >> > >> >Two goats can reduce the amount of farmland available to local people and >> >result in villages becoming deserted while a cow, at £750, will drink up >> to >> >90 liters of water every single day. >> > >> >Oxfam and Christian Aid now say that its critics have misunderstood its >> >program. The purchase of a goat, the charities said, did not necessarily >> >mean that a goat was bought! The money goes into a farming and livestock >> >fund to be distributed by local project managers. This means, basically, >> >that more staffers will be given money. >> > >> >If people have paid money for 5,000 animals, less than 200 will actually >> >reach - I can bet on it. This is simply cynical exploitation of animals >> and >> >poor people. There is a huge appetite for ethical gifts - it has trebled >> in >> >the last three years. It is easy to use India or Africa as a way to raise >> >money. But basically it is a fundraising mechanism for charities - with >> >about 10 per cent reaching the designated country. >> >*Posted on 19 Dec 2006 by Root* >> > >> > >> > 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.