Indian humane societies clash with PETA & government over wildlife rescue role

[Guest guest]

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, April 2007:

 

 

Indian humane societies clash with PETA & government over wildlife rescue role

 

by Merritt Clifton

 

BANGALORE--PETA/India, the Karnataka state forestry agency,

and the Central Zoo Authority of India are aligned against all five

of the local humane societies in a turf war over who has the right to

house and treat wildlife.

Summarized The Hindu on February 27, 2007, " In a petition before

the Supreme Court, PETA seeks the closure of all unrecognised zoos

and unauthorized rescue and rehabilitation centers, " allegedly

because " poor infrastructure has led to unnecessary pain and

suffering of animals housed in them. "

The CZA recognizes 15 zoos and wildlife parks in Karnataka

state, but does not recognize six privately operated zoos, and

" has withheld the applications filed by People for Animals, the

Wildlife Rescue & Rehabilitation Centre in Bannerghatta run by

Compassion Unlimited Plus Action, the Karuna animal shelter, and

the Animal Rescue and Rehabilitation Trust, " The Hindu reported.

The only approved non-governmental wildlife rescue facility

in the Bangalore area appears to be the bear rehabilitation center

operated by Wildlife SOS on land within Bannerghatta National Park.

Access is closely restricted by the park administration.

Visiting the CUPA Wildlife Rescue & Rehabilitation Centre in

January 2007, soon after visiting the River Trail Nature Center and

The Grove nature center in the Chicago area, and the renowned

Wisconsin Humane Society wildlife rehabilitation wing in Milwaukee,

I found that the quality of animal care was about the same.

The CUPA facilities hold far fewer animals, with only one

full-time staff member, and operate under limitations including lack

of a working well on the premises, but CUPA has much more space to

expand into, as funding permits.

CUPA returns to the wild any animals who can be released

safely. Some birds who were released successfully some time ago

still fly back for daily visits.

Meanwhile, official governmental wildlife care centers

around India often have their own problems--and have also come into

conflict with the Central Zoo Authority.

" At the Forest Department's Deer Research and Animal Rescue

Centre in Bidhannagar, " reported Rakeeb Hossain of the Hindustan

Times on January 2, 2007, " rescued animals are crammed into small

transport cages with hardly any space to move. They have no proper

housing, round-the-clock medical facility, full-time veterinarian,

or veterinary unit. There are hardly any employees trained to handle

the animals.

" Though it was set up a decade ago as a rescue centre, "

Hossain explained, " the department also tried to use the facility

as a deer research park, without necessary permission or facilities.

After the Forest Department applied to the CZA for recognition of the

center, CZA scientific officer Bipul Chakraborty in June 2006

visited the Bidhannagar centre. He found 188 animals of 14 species,

cramped in a space 'only two hectare in area and surrounded by the

Krishnapur water channel, the Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, and

the residential area of Salt Lake.' "

Among the animals were 15 spotted deer, 15 rhesus macaques,

seven langurs, five bonnet macaques, a jackal, a palm civet, 33

soft-shelled turtles, 63 star tortoises, 15 parakeets, and 25

munias, Hossain said.

Even if all of the Animal Rescue Centres now accredited by

the CZA expand to their maximum projected capacity, they will be far

from enough to accommodate all the former captive wildlife and

rescued wild animals in India who need safe housing.

Major Indian humane societies such as CUPA, Compassionate

Crusaders of Calcutta, the Bombay SPCA, the Animal Help Foundation

of Ahmedabad, Help In Suffering, and the Visakha SPCA of

Visakhapatnam have always integrated wildlife care into their

missions, building facilities to house wild species in small

numbers.

Recently, however, many have been asked to handle more than

just the occasional wild animal. Crackdowns on wildlife trafficking

have produced a surfeit of confiscated animals such as star

tortoises, common in captivity but rare in the wild. Usually these

animals cannot be returned to the wild because of the risk that they

may have been exposed to diseases while held in filthy, crowded

conditions by traffickers, and might take the diseases back into the

wild population.

Star tortoises, for example, seldom seen in shelters as

recently as five years ago, are now relatively ubiquitous. Because

they are endangered, they cannot be adopted out. Because they have

street value, they require special security precautions to keep

safely.

But star tortoises are the least of the longterm wildlife

care problems now confronting Indian humane organizations, who find

themselves expected to house animals that government agencies, zoos,

and the Animal Rescue Centres either cannot or will not

accommodate--and also find themselves subject to regulations written

for exhibition facilities, that they have difficulty meeting.

 

Monkeys are the biggest problem.

 

As Animal Birth Control programs reduce the populations of

street dogs, rhesus macaques and Hanuman languors are increasingly

becoming an urban nuisance, much more likely to bite and do property

damage than the dogs whose places they take around trash heaps.

The conventional municipal response is so far mostly just to

round monkeys up and dump them in the countryside, but urbanized

monkeys typically find their way back into town, much as dogs did

when the same method was tried with them.

Most Indian humane societies have so far avoided taking in

street monkeys, other than occasional special cases who have been

injured in accidents.

The Chennai-based Blue Cross of India, however, has gained

experience at housing whole troupes by taking in an entire laboratory

colony several years ago. The survivors now occupy two large cages

at one of the Blue Cross Animal Birth Control clinics on the Chennai

outskirts.

Blue Cross chief executive Chinny Krishna doubts that large

numbers of monkeys really can be given good lives, within the

limitations of funding and space that humane societies deal with. He

has also argued for decades that doing Animal Birth Control, rather

than sheltering large numbers of dogs, cats, or cattle, should be

the focal role of Indian humane organizations.

Yet the Blue Cross does shelter hundreds of dogs, cats, and

cattle, because the public and donors expect it, and because Chinny

Krishna himself admits that he cannot refuse shelter to an animal in

urgent need.

 

 

 

--

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.]