Guest guest Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 >Petition to save the tiger from WWF: With all due credit to the role of WWF in promoting Project Tiger more than 30 years ago, saving the tiger from WWF is presently as necessary as saving the tiger from poachers, tiger ranchers, bureaucracy, ineptitude, corruption, and habitat encroachment. The primary reason is the WWF doctrine of " sustainable use, " which originally meant " producing a constant surplus of animals for trophy hunting, " and in many parts of the world still does. Eventually this concept broadened into " sustainable use " of habitat, as well as of individual animals. This in turn became the pretext for continuing authorization of livestock grazing, wood-gathering, grass-gathering, fruit-picking, and all sorts of other economic activities based on exploiting the habitat. Each of these activities diminishes the capacity of the habitat to support the prey base that tigers and other large carnivores must have. Each increases the opportunities for tigers and other large carnivores to prey upon livestock and become " maneaters. " Each increases the temptation for people using the habitat to protect themselves, their families, and their livestock by killing tigers, lions, leopards, et al, or at least looking the other way while poachers do the killing. Further, the more economically dependent people become on the protected habitat, the greater the temptation for them to live there, or close by, inevitably encroaching upon it, and meanwhile hemming it in with development, posing a constant opportunity for a large predator to wander into trouble. At the same time the prey base of the habitat is diminished, habitat neighbors bring populations of livestock, working animals, dogs, and cats, as well as their children, all of whom are potentially alternate prey to hungry predators. Meanwhile, the people living in proximity to the protected habitat gradually become a politically formidable mass, with the capacity to vote themselves further largess from the habitat, and ultimately, to reduce the protected habitat to little more than town squares. This is not a process unique to India. The same thing has occurred many times in the U.S., Latin America, other parts of Asia, and in Europe--mostly centuries ago in Europe. In the U.S., the people who are called " encroachers " in India are called " inholders, " and instead of being among the poorest of the poor, they often include some of the richest of the rich. Instead of gathering grass, they pump oil & natural gas--but the cattle grazing problem is remarkably similar. Protected habitat can become a significant community revenue generator--but only if it remains strictly protected. That means no grazing, gathering, etc., and requires maintaining secure perimeters. That means the WWF doctrine of " sustainable use " has to go. The only use that successfully mingles with habitat protection is non-consumptive, whether one is trying to protect tigers in India or prairie dogs in Colorado or checkerspot butterflies on a hill in South San Francisco. -- Merritt Clifton Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE P.O. Box 960 Clinton, WA 98236 Telephone: 360-579-2505 Fax: 360-579-2575 E-mail: anmlpepl Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide, founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations. We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year; for free sample, send address.] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 <saving the tiger from WWF is presently as necessary as saving the tiger from poachers, tiger ranchers, bureaucracy, ineptitude, corruption, and habitat encroachment.> Not to forget that its also extremly necessary to save the Gentle giants (Elephants) from the wrath of WWF. Check the archive post on AAPN Message No: Message #10357 WWF in favour of elephant culling in South Africa, is Asia next ? Or South Africa Should Consider Elephant Cull - WWF Link: http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/40499/story.htm Azam Siddiqui On 6/8/07, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl wrote: > >Petition to save the tiger from WWF: > > > With all due credit to the role of WWF in promoting Project > Tiger more than 30 years ago, saving the tiger from WWF is presently > as necessary as saving the tiger from poachers, tiger ranchers, > bureaucracy, ineptitude, corruption, and habitat encroachment. > > The primary reason is the WWF doctrine of " sustainable use, " > which originally meant " producing a constant surplus of animals for > trophy hunting, " and in many parts of the world still does. > > Eventually this concept broadened into " sustainable use " of > habitat, as well as of individual animals. This in turn became the > pretext for continuing authorization of livestock grazing, > wood-gathering, grass-gathering, fruit-picking, and all sorts of > other economic activities based on exploiting the habitat. > > Each of these activities diminishes the capacity of the > habitat to support the prey base that tigers and other large > carnivores must have. Each increases the opportunities for tigers > and other large carnivores to prey upon livestock and become > " maneaters. " Each increases the temptation for people using the > habitat to protect themselves, their families, and their livestock > by killing tigers, lions, leopards, et al, or at least looking > the other way while poachers do the killing. > > Further, the more economically dependent people become on > the protected habitat, the greater the temptation for them to live > there, or close by, inevitably encroaching upon it, and meanwhile > hemming it in with development, posing a constant opportunity for a > large predator to wander into trouble. > > At the same time the prey base of the habitat is diminished, > habitat neighbors bring populations of livestock, working animals, > dogs, and cats, as well as their children, all of whom are > potentially alternate prey to hungry predators. > > Meanwhile, the people living in proximity to the protected > habitat gradually become a politically formidable mass, with the > capacity to vote themselves further largess from the habitat, and > ultimately, to reduce the protected habitat to little more than town > squares. > > This is not a process unique to India. The same thing has > occurred many times in the U.S., Latin America, other parts of > Asia, and in Europe--mostly centuries ago in Europe. In the U.S., > the people who are called " encroachers " in India are called > " inholders, " and instead of being among the poorest of the poor, > they often include some of the richest of the rich. Instead of > gathering grass, they pump oil & natural gas--but the cattle grazing > problem is remarkably similar. > > Protected habitat can become a significant community revenue > generator--but only if it remains strictly protected. That means no > grazing, gathering, etc., and requires maintaining secure > perimeters. > > That means the WWF doctrine of " sustainable use " has to go. > The only use that successfully mingles with habitat protection is > non-consumptive, whether one is trying to protect tigers in India or > prairie dogs in Colorado or checkerspot butterflies on a hill in > South San Francisco. > > > > -- > Merritt Clifton > Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE > P.O. Box 960 > Clinton, WA 98236 > > Telephone: 360-579-2505 > Fax: 360-579-2575 > E-mail: anmlpepl > Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org > > [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing > original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide, > founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the > decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations. > We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year; > for free sample, send address.] > -- http://www.stopelephantpolo.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 12, 2007 Report Share Posted June 12, 2007 Another petition to urge China to keep the ban on Tiger trade: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/973664192 I understand that folks have issues with some policies of WWF, but to completely blacklist WWF is improper. Anand aapn , " Anand A. Parikh " <aaptwo wrote: > > Petition to save the tiger from WWF: > > http://passport.panda.org/campaigns/campaign.cfm? uNC=49153588 & uCampaignId=1581 > > > Please read and sign the petition urging China to take steps for > tiger conservation: > http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/549656012 > > Thanks, > Anand Parikh > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 >I understand that folks have issues with some policies of WWF, >but to completely blacklist WWF is improper. There are many organizations trying to stop the tiger trade. Not all of them have the sort of history that WWF does. Among the highlights-- WWF on animal testing: In response to criticism by Paul McCartney and PETA of WWF support for animal testing, WWF in December 2005 declared that it " advocates the use of non-animal testing methods and, where none exists, we call for the development of non-animal alternatives as a matter of urgency. However, " WWF continued, " we believe that immediately advocating a total ban on testing on all animals, regardless of need, could halt vital progress in science, conservation and public health. " WWF on sealing: Newfoundland and Labrador premier Danny Williams stated on CNN's Larry King Live on March 3, 2006 that WWF endorses the Atlantic Canada seal hunt, supports the Newfoundland government's position on the hunt, and approves of the humaneness of the hunt. " We do not claim any of these positions, " responded WWF. " WWF-Canada has been in contact with the premier's office to clarify this misunderstanding. In our view, the seal hunt is at present sustainable. Consequently, WWF does not perceive it to be a high priority as a conservation issue. The Premier misspoke when he said that we have said the hunt is humane. We are not an animal welfare organization and we have never had a position on whether or not the hunt is humane. " WWF on hunting: WWF " recognizes that responsibly conducted hunting can be an appropriate wildlife management tool, " but " opposes hunting which might adversely affect the survival of threatened or endangered species. " Founded in 1961 by trophy hunter Sir Peter Scott and pals, among them captive bird-shooters Prince Philip of Britain and Prince Bernhardt of The Netherlands, the whaler Aristotle Onassis, and then-National Rifle Association president C.R. " Pink " Gutermuth, WWF is the leading global voice of the idea that wildlife should " pay for itself " through " sustainable use, " meaning sport hunting and the sale of wildlife products. Position on Animal Rights: " Animal rights is a threat to conservation, " WWF/South Africa conservation director Rob Little opined in November 2003. " As the population of the wealthy 'developed' nations move ever further from their daily interactions with Nature, " Little explained, " they move into a realm where simplistic 'animal rights' approaches/solutions to mankind's interaction with wildlife become ever more appealing to 'the man in the street.' WWF/South Africa believes that the conservation community completely underestimates how devastating this trend could be, if allowed to proceed unchecked. " Most animal advocates could probably find other organizations whose attitudes much better reflect their own. -- Merritt Clifton Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE P.O. Box 960 Clinton, WA 98236 Telephone: 360-579-2505 Fax: 360-579-2575 E-mail: anmlpepl Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide, founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations. We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year; for free sample, send address.] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 <Not all of them have the sort of history that WWF does.> U cannot be Half Pregnant. Either U are or U are not. WWF petitions will never be taken seriously at least by we animal people if it does not get over its destructive ideologies, some of which Merritt has correctly highlighted. They are simply outrageous. It still remains to be seen though who can bell a cat like WWF, together maybe we can someday. Azam On 6/13/07, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl wrote: > > >I understand that folks have issues with some policies of WWF, > >but to completely blacklist WWF is improper. > > There are many organizations trying to stop the tiger trade. > > Not all of them have the sort of history that WWF does. > > Among the highlights-- > > WWF on animal testing: > > In response to criticism by Paul McCartney and PETA of WWF > support for animal testing, WWF in December 2005 declared that it > " advocates the use of non-animal testing methods and, where none > exists, we call for the development of non-animal alternatives as a > matter of urgency. However, " WWF continued, " we believe that > immediately advocating a total ban on testing on all animals, > regardless of need, could halt vital progress in science, > conservation and public health. " > > WWF on sealing: > > Newfoundland and Labrador premier Danny Williams stated on > CNN's Larry King Live on March 3, 2006 that WWF endorses the > Atlantic Canada seal hunt, supports the Newfoundland government's > position on the hunt, and approves of the humaneness of the hunt. > " We do not claim any of these positions, " responded WWF. > " WWF-Canada has been in contact with the premier's office to clarify > this misunderstanding. In our view, the seal hunt is at present > sustainable. Consequently, WWF does not perceive it to be a high > priority as a conservation issue. The Premier misspoke when he said > that we have said the hunt is humane. We are not an animal welfare > organization and we have never had a position on whether or not the > hunt is humane. " > > WWF on hunting: > > WWF " recognizes that responsibly conducted hunting can be an > appropriate wildlife management tool, " but " opposes hunting which > might adversely affect the survival of threatened or endangered > species. " > Founded in 1961 by trophy hunter Sir Peter Scott and pals, > among them captive bird-shooters Prince Philip of Britain and Prince > Bernhardt of The Netherlands, the whaler Aristotle Onassis, and > then-National Rifle Association president C.R. " Pink " Gutermuth, WWF > is the leading global voice of the idea that wildlife should " pay for > itself " through " sustainable use, " meaning sport hunting and the > sale of wildlife products. > > Position on Animal Rights: > > " Animal rights is a threat to conservation, " WWF/South > Africa conservation director Rob Little opined in November 2003. > " As the population of the wealthy 'developed' nations move ever > further from their daily interactions with Nature, " Little > explained, " they move into a realm where simplistic 'animal rights' > approaches/solutions to mankind's interaction with wildlife become > ever more appealing to 'the man in the street.' WWF/South Africa > believes that the conservation community completely underestimates > how devastating this trend could be, if allowed to proceed unchecked. " > > Most animal advocates could probably find other organizations > whose attitudes much better reflect their own. > > -- > Merritt Clifton > Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE > P.O. Box 960 > Clinton, WA 98236 > > Telephone: 360-579-2505 > Fax: 360-579-2575 > E-mail: anmlpepl <anmlpepl%40whidbey.com> > Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org > > [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing > original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide, > founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the > decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations. > We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year; > for free sample, send address.] > > -- Fight captive Jumbo abuse, end Elephant Polo http://www.stopelephantpolo.com 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.