Guest guest Posted July 27, 2009 Report Share Posted July 27, 2009 No hard feelings here Shub, we are all in the fight together, and as recently mentioned people have different approaches to the work, and that¹s probably a plus. But I wish there were protestors in Nepal taking their kits off! Burning tires is as exciting as it gets here. Anyway, keep up the good work at TRAFFIC within the WWF. It does not matter how evil an org is or isn¹t, I believe that good people can have a good impact no matter what banner is flying overhead (certain restrictions apply, see product packaging for details). When it comes down to it, its real people saving troubled animals, and not the abbreviation that describes them. It is disturbing however, to read about the Indian/Nepali battle going on just 200 km south of here. Seems like the elephants and the tigers are getting caught up in an age-old human animosity, with Nepalis shooting at elephants that cross from the Indian side and and Indians getting ready to shoot at Nepalis just for good measure. Everyone is ready to shoot a the tiger if they see one. It¹s just nuts, and I still advocate for the complete bio-armament of wildlife (RPG tuskers and Wolverine-like modifications to tiger anatomy), as at this point they are fighting for their lives without the proper battlefield equipment. I pitched this idea to my friend at the WWF, but he just shook his head and said I was nuts. Cheers, Jigs in Nepal On 7/27/09 5:49 PM, " " wrote: > As far as donations to ANIMAL NEPAL are concerned, I will certainly recommend > them to potential donors and I am perfectly fine that they specialize in > domestic animals. More power and strength to them I say and apologies again to > Jigme for causing any offence. It was unintentional and reactionary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 Thank you Jigme. No hard feelings from my side either. I however repeat that, TRAFFIC's job is monitoring, research and training whereas enforcement is the government's job(This is a legality). TRAFFIC can provide input and assistance for enforcement. With the exception of House Mouse, Rat, House Crow and Flying Fox, trade in all other indigenous species is restricted in India and TRAFFIC works to ensure this. More needs to be done for sure. On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Jigs Gaton <herojig wrote: > No hard feelings here Shub, we are all in the fight together, and as > recently mentioned people have different approaches to the work, and that’s > probably a plus. But I wish there were protestors in Nepal taking their > kits off! Burning tires is as exciting as it gets here. > > Anyway, keep up the good work at TRAFFIC within the WWF. It does not > matter how evil an org is or isn’t, I believe that good people can have a > good impact no matter what banner is flying overhead (certain restrictions > apply, see product packaging for details). When it comes down to it, its > real people saving troubled animals, and not the abbreviation that describes > them. > > It is disturbing however, to read about the Indian/Nepali battle going on > just 200 km south of here. Seems like the elephants and the tigers are > getting caught up in an age-old human animosity, with Nepalis shooting at > elephants that cross from the Indian side and and Indians getting ready to > shoot at Nepalis just for good measure. Everyone is ready to shoot a the > tiger if they see one. It’s just nuts, and I still advocate for the > complete bio-armament of wildlife (RPG tuskers and Wolverine-like > modifications to tiger anatomy), as at this point they are fighting for > their lives without the proper battlefield equipment. I pitched this idea > to my friend at the WWF, but he just shook his head and said I was nuts. > > Cheers, > Jigs in Nepal > > > On 7/27/09 5:49 PM, " " > wrote: > > As far as donations to ANIMAL NEPAL are concerned, I will certainly > recommend them to potential donors and I am perfectly fine that they > specialize in domestic animals. More power and strength to them I say and > apologies again to Jigme for causing any offence. It was unintentional and > reactionary. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 2009 Report Share Posted August 1, 2009 Dearest Shubho, This is certainly one of the best logics put forward in favour of WWF. Thanks for your comprehensive stand on the issues like Sustainable Use and Elephant Polo etc. One can really read your mind between the lines on threads like Allegience to Cause and Organisations and vice versa. Regards Raja Chatterjee On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 5:34 PM, < journalistandanimals wrote: > Hi, > > We have discussed most of these issues before but I am OK to consider > them again. There is no need to make a guess, wild or otherwise as to where > I am working, for I have openly said it that I am working for TRAFFIC India > at WWF in New Delhi. And if people would take a look at my previous posts > on > WWF before I joined TRAFFIC, I reckon that they would find that I have > always been a WWF defender. Responses in no particular order to some issues > raised: > > > > 1) History of WWF : Open to interpretation and debate. But history > cannot be changed, for what has happened has happened even though it may > not > have been pleasant. One cannot live in the past and the important thing is > to move on. An understanding of the past is essential to chalk out one’s > future plans but it is not very fruitful to continue berating anyone > because > of the past. We all have done things in the past we would do differently > given the chance, wouldn’t we? I, for one, certainly would. > > Two wrongs do not make a right, but it is important to consider the history > of the growth of the animal protection movement in the West to gauge the > contradictions involved in the movement. A lot of the early animal > protectionists in UK were colonialists and army people who had done > terrible > things to people of other races. A good reference point is R K Narayan’s > autobiography ‘My Days’ where he speaks of one such individual in Madras > who > used to ill treat his servants and mollycoddle his pets, an attitude that > prevails among some animal protectionists till this day. > > > 2) Sustainable use : Most conservation organizations endorse sustainable > use > of wild animals and all organizations that promote meat eating also promote > sustainable use of domestic animals. Animal welfare organizations would not > openly say that they promote ‘sustainable use’ but the reality is that > endorsing humane slaughter implies endorsing sustainable use. In my > opinion, > the vegetarianism debate is still open and therefore the issue of > sustainable use. > > Also situations where hunter gatherer communities depend on killing some > animals for meat only for subsistence, that is a low level of sustainable > use for survival. The main contentious issue is commercial sustainable use > and this is something certainly to be discussed. As far as WWF India is > concerned, there cannot be any question of sustainable use of wild animals > here since it is illegal under the Wildlife Protection Act. As far as WWF > International is concerned, there is a conflict of interest and I recognize > and acknowledge this and there should be more efforts to address this at > CITES and other platforms. It is very good that people are questioning > 'sustainable use' policies and this should continue. Just for the record, > the WWF/TRAFFIC policy on sustainable use of tigers is currently 'no use' > or > 'zero level' use. I would be very glad if this could be replicated for > other > animal species, wild or domestic. > > > 3)Elephant polo : I would never say that an animal organization is under > any > obligation to protest elephant polo and certainly not a conservation > organization like WWF(because elephant polo is in essence an animal > rights/welfare issue.) Organisations or individuals may not like to state > either opposition or support to this game and I am quite willing to live > with that although I would much rather prefer that they did. For example, > if > I understand it correctly, ANIMAL PEOPLE has a non committal position on > this issue. They do not support elephant polo, in the sense that they do > not > promote or advocate it, but neither do they oppose it. I am quite willing > to > live with this although I am personally totally opposed to this sport. But > this position of ANIMAL PEOPLE does not mean that all their other work goes > invalid and people should start making fun of them by creating funny > acronyms. I do not think. It might also be an idea to write to the > organizations who have been silent on the elephant polo issue and see if > they respond now rather than launching rhetorical questions on AAPN. Help > In > Suffering supported one elephant polo match but they have done a lot of > work > for elephants and the same applies for Elephant Family. My personal > position > is to look at these things on a case by case basis and not to draw general > conclusions on organizations or individuals based on areas of disagreement. > And Elephant polo is only one issue concerning WWF or any other pro or non > committal group. They may have done hundreds of other good projects for > elephants that should be recognized regardless of their stance on elephant > polo. WPSI is Elephant Family’s partner, they openly criticized elephant > polo but cooperate with them on other issues and that is just fine in my > opinion. Taking an extremist view would suggest that an organization should > never cooperate with Elephant Family because they endorsed elephant polo > but > I do not share this view. > > > 4) Pornography and workshops: I am not sure I approve of pornography for > any > purpose even though it may attract attention of laymen for I do not > to the policy of ‘any port in a storm’ to promote animal > rights. Mentioning this is not counter criticism but a very germane point > to be mulled over. Do groups that allegedly promote pornography do good work > for animals? Yes they certainly do and groups that conduct workshops do so > as well. Also, is it OK to be openly racist like Brigitte Bardot and promote > animal rights? Not in my book but has she done good things for animals? > Certainly. It is basically a matter of comparative judgment. > > > I am personally very open to constructive criticism and WWF has faced these > issues too. I have a lot of material on this which I would gladly share, > mainly on the issues concerning culling and animal experimentation. > > > And as far as shifting allegiance to organizations is concerned, > organizational allegiance may not always necessarily conflict with > allegiance to a cause. My commitment to helping animals remains just as > strong at WWF as it would be in any other capacity. > > > Merritt Clifton has raised an important point on WWF not addressing the > vegetarianism issue at length, I will have to study that document to > comment > on it. WWF, as an organization, has changed over the years, as any other > organization, most certainly in India, and I know of several cases where > they have cooperated with animal welfare organizations. Maybe the > vegetarianism argument for environmentalism will kick in the future, but as > I said, I would need to read the Living Planet report to make up my > mind regarding this. But I know many young people working at WWF India who > are vegetarians and endorse animal welfare and rights. It is a pleasure to > interact and work with them and I certainly would not launch personalized > missiles on them because they are aligned to an organization that promotes > sustainable use internationally. > > > As far as donations to ANIMAL NEPAL are concerned, I will certainly > recommend them to potential donors and I am perfectly fine that they > specialize in domestic animals. More power and strength to them I say and > apologies again to Jigme for causing any offence. It was unintentional and > reactionary. > > > My bottomline is this : I do not resent criticism of WWF(India and > International both), I would welcome it, but what I do resent is exclusive > criticism of WWF for I think there is a legitimate concern about bias > working there. > > > Thank you very much for airing your views on WWF. > > > Cheers, > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 Dear Rajada, I have just returned from Nagpur from a WWF training for forest department personnel and found your email in my inbox. Thank you for your compliments. The main principle is not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. On AAPN there have been views posted on Salman Khan's possible re entry into the wildlife conservation sector and also that his case is getting a lot of undue attention because he is a celebrity. This case is still sub judice and I had an opportunity to discuss this with the consultant lawyers of WWF only a couple of days ago, they are of the unanimous opinion that he should be inflicted the severest penalty and the media attention surrounding him on this issue is wholly justified and stands on its own merit regardless of other wildlife offences that allegedly go unpunished elsewhere. I am saying this because I do not question the 'allegiance to the cause' of those individuals who proposed that Salman Khan should be allowed to do work for wildlife conservation just like I do not question the 'allegiance to the cause' of individuals associated with WWF who hunted in the past like Sir Peter Scott and Billy Arjan Singh. One would do well to remember that Ashoka, one of the world's first conservationists, was an avid hunter before his conversion to Buddhism. Trust your work is going well. Best wishes and kind regards, On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 11:53 PM, raja chatterjee <rajachatterjee1wrote: > Dearest Shubho, > > This is certainly one of the best logics put forward in favour of WWF. > Thanks for your comprehensive stand on the issues like Sustainable Use and > Elephant Polo etc. One can really read your mind between the lines on > threads like Allegience to Cause and Organisations and vice versa. > > Regards > > Raja Chatterjee > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 5:34 PM, < > journalistandanimals wrote: > 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.