-
-
related tags:
- Ivory
- Asian Elephants
- Ivory-trade
- Circuses
- African elephants
- Circus Animals
- Elephant Sanctuaries
- Elephant Exploitation
- captive animals
- ivory trade
- captive elephants
- Elephant Tusks
- Poaching
- Animal Abuse
- Rhinos
- Zoos
- Giraffes
- CITES corruption
- The Elephant Sanctuary
- Ringling Brothers
- CITES
- Wildlife
- elephant
- Illegal Wildlife Trade
- Animal Videos and News
- Animal Rights
- Zoo
- animal exploitation
- illegal animal-trade
- Animal Cruelty News & Animal Cruelty Videos
- ida
- Namibia
- Animals in Captivity
- Dallas Zoo
- Circus Elephants
- Endangered Species Videos & Endangered Species News
- animal cruelty
- Animal Conservation
- poachers
- Animal Welfare News & Animal Welfare Videos
- Animal Protection
- Circus
- Lions
- Human Disgrace
- Extinction
- Animal Rights = Veganism
- Animals
- Inhumane
- illegal hunting
- Safari
tagged w/ Elephants
-
CITES conference risks driving a split in international efforts (by UN Agreements) on the conservation of species
Protecting elephants, manatees and polar bears: the elusive commodity of international cooperation
On the 3rd of March the international body established to manage trade in endangered species (CITES) will meet in Bangkok, in line with its 3 year political cycle. The fate of many species including elephants, manatees and polar bears is on the agenda and Governments around the world are now firming up their positions to accept or reject proposals to give each of the species greater levels of international protection.
CITES is one of the five biodiversity conventions complemented by another that conserves migratory species (CMS), another on wetlands and on World Heritage and the high profile convention on biological diversity. The intent is that there should be ‘synergy’ and ‘cooperation’ between each convention. In the main their objectives complement each other. The Secretariats for each have developed various accords about ‘sharing information’ and working towards ‘common goals’, but in reality each body operates as an island in a sea of political confusion. Cooperation is an elusive commodity in international wildlife politics.
Perhaps that can be excused where the subject is as ambiguous as ‘defining when a representative sample of temperate ecosystem fungi is adequately protected’. It should be simple when the subject is an easily visible animal, with quite clear threats impacting it’s future. It should be even more straightforward when only two conventions really need to pay attention – CITES and CMS.
So much is shared between CMS and CITES. Each convention focuses on protecting wild animals and each has clear and complementary objectives– CITES on reducing the threat of trade to specific species and CMS on reducing other threats and protecting habitats – simple. Each has their headquarters in Europe making regular communication a simple matter. There are 109 Governments who are Parties to both conventions, which is 92 percent of CMS’s total Parties and 62 percent of CITES’s total Parties. Yet a ‘disconnect’ exists between the two.
First it must be said that Governments are inconsistent in the way they approach CMS and CITES. Their decisions often contradict or undermine what they have set out to achieve in one or the other, such as over elephants in Africa. When Governments are operating through CMS they consider elephants as regional populations (even species) and take steps to progress regionally specific measures to reduce threats and protect elephant habitat, recognizing that in some parts of Africa these habitats have shrunk to such a extent that many elephant populations are facing extinction. When the same Governments approach CITES they take the position that elephants across Africa are one species and that the only threat they face is illegal trade in ivory. Moreover they force international decision making over elephants to be focused through CITES, so that habitat loss becomes a second tier issue. It is a frustrating conundrum that from the outside seems so obvious – why not require that each body works together on the ‘two halves of the whole’?
But the disconnect stems from within as well. In 2008 West African manatees were determined by CMS’s Parties to be endangered (CMS Appendix I) by unanimous consent. The acknowledged manatee experts- the IUCN Sirenian Specialist Group – had made the case that habitat loss, destructive fishing techniques, local hunting and illegal sub-regional trade of manatee as bushmeat are imperiling the future of this gentle species. Manatees are a tropical species that live in and around mangroves and estuaries in a heavily populated sub-region of Africa that struggling under some of the most difficult political and economic conditions anywhere in the world. Most of the Governments in the manatee’s region have done their level best to change their national law to match what they agreed to do through CMS. They even created a specific regional agreement and action plan for manatees, and through this determined they wanted CITES to also ban international trade of the animals to help them strengthen their national laws. It seems so obvious that the world community should support such a request. However, as we approach the CITES meeting, the CITES Secretariat itself has argued against the proposal on the grounds that the science isn’t solid enough and the trade not “international” enough. The Secretariat has recommended that the proposal be rejected.
The problem extends to CITES assessments of species in the polar north as well. For the past decade the acknowledged scientific experts on polar bear – the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group – have been blowing a warning siren that many polar bear populations face extinction, as major parts of the Arctic ecosystem succumb to the impact of global warming. Indeed, polar bears have become the symbol of climate change, but the pressure on the species is made worse because some populations are still hunted for commercial trade. In 2011 the CMS Scientific Council advised that there was a strong case for CMS to determine polar bears as endangered, and during the subsequent political meeting, which echoed with scientific alarm about the extent that climate change is already impacting many migratory species around the world, CMS Parties agreed to consider polar bear for listing as endangered by CMS at its next meeting in 2014. Yet the CITES Secretariat’s advice about the same tenor of proposal put, by the Unites States of America, to CITES is that such a measure would be ‘disproportionate to the anticipated risk to the species at this time’. Again, the CITES Secretariat has recommended that the proposal be rejected.
In both cases the CITES Secretariat will defend is position by looking to the fine detail and definitions of the convention, but as they do so they are missing the bigger picture. Governments have been agitating for years that the international environmental governance system has become too complex, that there is too much duplication in some areas with too much disconnect in others. Without doubt, this is their own responsibility as the architects and decision makers for every international legal process that exists today. However, there is also a case to be made that as ever more complex science and management discussions have developed in the past 30 years, Governments now need some simple cooperative solutions to be brought forward by the professional bodies that service the five biodiversity conventions. Obvious and seemingly deliberate disconnects between the biodiversity conventions do nothing to benefit our collective imperative to protect the fractions of the planet’s ecosystems and wildlife that we have left. Let us hope that sense prevails and by the time we are casting our eyes in CMS’s direction in late 2014 that we won’t have a similarly bleak analysis to report. For now, cooperation still seems an elusive commodity in international wildlife politics.
This opinion is also published on www.wildmigration.org
Margi Prideaux, is the Policy and Negotiations Director for Wild Migration.
Email: bureau@wildmigration.org Twt @WildPoliticsProtecting elephants, manatees and polar bears: the elusive commodity of international... more-
- ShiftingValues
- added this
- 3 months ago
- |
- 0 comments
-
-
Malaysia Sacrifices Borneo's Endangered Pygmy Elephants for Palm Oil & Logging Industry
Photo: A baby elephant mourning its poisoned mother
http://www.rainforest-rescue.org/newsletter/1519/3df89752537a4a654e22273665a4ff98
It was a shocking sight for the rangers of the Gunung Rara Forest Reserve: a baby elephant trying in vain to wake its mother with its trunk. She had been poisoned, along with 13 other animals. Their carcasses were found over the past four weeks on land controlled by Yayasan Sabah, the state wood and palm oil group. The elephants all belonged to the same herd, which had been staying at the edge of the rainforest reserve – in close proximity to a logging camp and oil palm plantations.
“The elephants ate rat poison. That’s how the plantation workers prevent the animals from eating the fruit of the oil palm”, suspects Laurentius Ambu, director of the local conservation authority. The Borneo pygmy elephant is a rare forest elephant subspecies, of which no more than 1,500 animals remain – almost all in Sabah.
Malaysia continues to rely on exporting tropical timber and palm oil. Policymakers are in the process of clearing the last remaining rainforest areas in the states of Sabah and Sarawak for plantations. And with those forests, Borneo is losing an incredible wealth of animal and plant species, including endangered rhinos, orangutans and proboscis monkeys.
Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman is driving the deforestation by personally granting permits to clear the rainforest and establish palm oil plantations. He is also Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the state-owned Yayasan Sabah Group. In late 2012, the company started to cut down another 70,000 hectares of rainforest for plantations, leaving no room for the forest elephants.
Call on Aman and the Malaysian government to put an immediate end to this crime against nature and to work toward protecting the rainforests and their residents.
https://www.rainforest-rescue.org/mailalert/905?ref=nl&mt=1519Photo: A baby elephant mourning its poisoned mother... more-
- julesrs007
- added this
- 3 months ago
- |
- 2 comments
-
-
A Heart-Melting Baby Elephant Rescue in Kenyan National Park
When an eight-month-old baby elephant fell into a muddy watering hole at the Aboseli National Park in Kenya, a team of conservationists from Amboseli Trust for Elephants, which works to protect and study elephants, rushed to figure out a way to rescue the calf. Although she was just a baby and too small to climb out of the hole herself, the calf was too large for rescuers to lift out of the hole. Amboseli Trust for Elephants’ Vicki Fishlock used her Land Rover to force the calf’s mother away from the hole so that rescuers could reach the stranded elephant. After more than a half-hour, rescuers were able to finally get a rope around the calf and slowly pull her out of the hole.
They captured the rescue operation on video, which has a beautifully happy ending and rather hilarious off-camera commentary: “So this is Zombe’s calf, who we’re all delighted is so big and fat and healthy, until we have to pull her out of a hole!” After the rescue, Fishlock stated: “Relief! Rescues where family members are around are stressful, and I’m always happy when everyone is safely back in the cars. And I have to admit that the reunions always bring a tear to my eye. The intensity of their affection for each other is one of the things that makes elephants so special.”
This piece includes photographs and the heart-warming video.
http://disembedded.wordpress.com/2012/10/21/a-heart-melting-baby-elephant-rescue-in-kenyan-national-park/When an eight-month-old baby elephant fell into a muddy watering hole at the Aboseli... more-
- disembedded
- added this
- 7 months ago
- |
- 21 comments
-
-
The Relevance of Elephants
Ian Redmond talks about African elephants, their importance to the environment, their declining numbers, poaching and the potential damage to the global climate that the loss of elephants can cause.Ian Redmond talks about African elephants, their importance to the environment, their... more-
- Vierotchka
- added this
- 7 months ago
- |
- 1 comment
-
-
Two Herds of Wild Elephants Walk 12 Hours to Gather Inexplicably to Mourn the Death of Their “Elephant Whisperer” at His Home
.
.
PART ONE...
.
Author and legendary conservationist Lawrence Anthony died March 7. His family tells of a solemn procession on March 10 that defies human explanation.
.
For 12 hours, two herds of wild South African elephants slowly made their way through the Zululand bush until they reached the house of late author Lawrence Anthony, the conservationist who saved their lives. The formerly violent, rogue elephants, destined to be shot a few years ago as pests, were rescued and rehabilitated by Anthony, who had grown up in the bush and was known as the “Elephant Whisperer.”
For two days the herds loitered at Anthony’s rural compound on the vast Thula Thula game reserve in the South African KwaZulu – to say good-bye to the man they loved. But how did they know he had died March 7? Known for his unique ability to calm traumatized elephants, Anthony had become a legend. He is the author of three books, Babylon Ark, detailing his efforts to rescue the animals at Baghdad Zoo during the Iraqi war, the forthcoming "The Last Rhinos", and his bestselling "The Elephant Whisperer".
There are two elephant herds at Thula Thula. According to his son Dylan, both arrived at the Anthony family compound shortly after Anthony’s death.
They had not visited the house for a year and a half and it must have taken them about 12 hours to make the journey,” Dylan is quoted in various local news accounts. “The first herd arrived on Sunday and the second herd, a day later. They all hung around for about two days before making their way back into the bush."
Elephants have long been known to mourn their dead. In India, baby elephants often are raised with a boy who will be their lifelong “mahout.” The pair develop legendary bonds – and it is not uncommon for one to waste away without a will to live after the death of the other.
But these are wild elephants in the 21st century, not some Rudyard Kipling novel. The first herd to arrive at Thula Thula several years ago was violent. They hated humans. Anthony found himself fighting a desperate battle for their survival and their trust, which he detailed in "The Elephant Whisperer:“
"It was 4:45 a.m. and I was standing in front of Nana, an enraged wild elephant, pleading with her in desperation. Both our lives depended on it. The only thing separating us was an 8,000-volt electric fence that she was preparing to flatten and make her escape. Nana, the matriarch of her herd, tensed her enormous frame and flared her ears. ’Don’t do it, Nana,’ I said, as calmly as I could. She stood there, motionless but tense. The rest of the herd froze. ’This is your home now,’ I continued. ‘Please don’t do it, girl.’ I felt her eyes boring into me.
“’They’ll kill you all if you break out. This is your home now. You have no need to run any more.
"Suddenly, the absurdity of the situation struck me,” Anthony writes. “Here I was in pitch darkness, talking to a wild female elephant with a baby, the most dangerous possible combination, as if we were having a friendly chat. But I meant every word. ‘You will all die if you go. Stay here. I will be here with you and it’s a good place.’
"She took another step forward. I could see her tense up again, preparing to snap the electric wire and be out, the rest of the herd smashing after her in a flash. I was in their path, and would only have seconds to scramble out of their way and climb the nearest tree. I wondered if I would be fast enough to avoid being trampled. Possibly not. Then something happened between Nana and me, some tiny spark of recognition, flaring for the briefest of moments. Then it was gone. Nana turned and melted into the bush. The rest of the herd followed. I couldn’t explain what had happened between us, but it gave me the first glimmer of hope since the elephants had first thundered into my life.”
It had all started several weeks earlier with a phone call from an elephant welfare organization. Would Anthony be interested in adopting a problem herd of wild elephants? They lived on a game reserve 600 miles away and were “troublesome,” recalled Anthony. They had a tendency to break out of reserves and the owners wanted to get rid of them fast.
" If we didn’t take them, they would be shot."
The woman explained, "The matriarch is an amazing escape artist and has worked out how to break through electric fences. She just twists the wire around her tusks until it snaps, or takes the pain and smashes through."
“’Why me?’ I asked."
“'’I’ve heard you have a way with animals. You’re right for them. Or maybe they’re right for you.’”
What followed was heart-breaking. One of the females and her baby were shot and killed in the round-up, trying to evade capture.
.
CONTINUED...
.
.
PHOTO: A line of gentle elephants approaching Lawrence Anthony's house.
.
.
.. . PART ONE... . Author and legendary conservationist Lawrence Anthony... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 35 comments
-
-
Unimaginable Horror as Helicopter-Borne Poachers Massacre 22 Elephants Before Hacking Off Their Tusks and Genitals
Daily Mail...
.
.
Unimaginable horror as helicopter-borne poachers massacre 22 elephants before hacking off their tusks and genitals
Record numbers of ivory seizures amid rise of organised crime gangs
.
PHOTO:
Barbaric: In a scene too graphic to show in full, the carcasses of some of the 22 massacred elephants lay strewn across Garamba National Park in the Congo after being gunned down by helicopter-borne poachers
.
By Simon Tomlinson
PUBLISHED: 17:35 EST, 24 April 2012 | UPDATED: 17:53 EST, 24 April 2012
.
In a scene of inconceivable horror, these slaughtered elephant carcasses show the barbaric lengths poachers will go to in their hunt for nature's grim booty.
The bodies were among a herd of 22 animals massacred in a helicopter-borne attack by professionals who swooped over their quarry.
The scene beneath the rotor blades would have been chilling - panicked mothers shielding their young, hair-raising screeches and a mad scramble through the blood-stained bush as bullets rained down from the sky.
When the shooting was over, all of the herd lay dead, one of the worst such killings in northeastern Democratic Republic of Congo in living memory.
'It's been a long time since we've seen something like this,' said Dr Tshibasu Muamba, head of international cooperation for the Congolese state conservation agency, ICCN, as he surveyed the macarbre scene at Garamba National Park.
After the slaughter, the killers set about removing their tusks and genitals before likely smuggling them through South Sudan or Uganda, which form part of an 'Ivory Road' linking Africa to Asia.
Elephant and rhino poaching is surging, conservationists say, an illegal piece of Asia's scramble for African resources, driven by the growing purchasing power of the region's newly affluent classes.
When the shooting was over, all of the herd lay dead, one of the worst such killings in northeastern Democratic Republic of Congo in living memory.
'It's been a long time since we've seen something like this,' said Dr Tshibasu Muamba, head of international cooperation for the Congolese state conservation agency, ICCN, as he surveyed the macarbre scene at Garamba National Park.
After the slaughter, the killers set about removing their tusks and genitals before likely smuggling them through South Sudan or Uganda, which form part of an 'Ivory Road' linking Africa to Asia.
Elephant and rhino poaching is surging, conservationists say, an illegal piece of Asia's scramble for African resources, driven by the growing purchasing power of the region's newly affluent classes.
A record number of big ivory seizures were made globally in 2011 and the trend looks set to continue in 2012 as elephant massacres take place from Congo to Cameroon, where as many as 200 of the pachyderms, listed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature as 'vulnerable', were slain in January.
In South Africa, nearly two rhinos a day are being killed to meet demand for the animal's horn, which is worth more than its weight in gold. More are being killed each week now than were being taken on an annual basis a decade ago.
Conservation group TRAFFIC, which monitors the global trade in animals and plants, said 2011 was the worst year for large ivory seizures in the more than two decades it has been running a database tracking the trends.
After the trade in ivory was banned at the end of the 1980s - a policy implemented to stem a slaughter of elephants at the time - the illegal trade declined sharply, helped by the co-operation of Japan from where most of the demand had been coming.
Conservationists say there was a spike in the mid 1990s driven by emerging Chinese demand that bubbled for a few years, then dropped off as red flags were raised.
Zimbabwe-based Tom Milliken, who manages TRAFFIC's Elephant Trade Information System, said since 2004 'the trend has been escalating upwards again, dramatically so over the last three years.'
Ben Janse van Rensburg, head of enforcement for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), the international treaty that governs trade in plants and animals, said: 'The biggest challenge is that in the last few years there has been a big shift from your ordinary poachers to your organized crime groups.'
This was on display in Congo last month, where investigators determined the poachers shot from the air because of the trajectory of the bullet wounds.
Helicopters do not come cheaply and their use points to a high level of organization.
Ken Maggs, the head of the environmental crimes investigation unit for South African National Parks, said one person recently arrested for trade in rhino horn had 5.1 million rand ($652,400) in cash in the boot of his car.
South Africa is the epicenter of rhino poaching because it hosts virtually the entire population of white rhino - 18,800 head or 93 per cent - and about 40 per cent of Africa's much rarer black rhino.
As of the middle of April, 181 rhinos had been killed in South Africa in 2012, according to official government data.
At this rate, more than 600 will be lost to poachers this year compared with 448 in 2011.
A decade ago, only a handful were being taken.
.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2134696/Scene-unimaginable-horror-helicopter-borne-poachers-massacre-22-elephants.html#ixzz1tbKCGg2f
.
.Daily Mail... . . Unimaginable horror as helicopter-borne poachers massacre... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 9 comments
-
-
The elephant's face on Mars | Digg Topnews
cool!-
- cclark_productions
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 0 comments
-
-
No More Elephant Rides at Orange County Fair - Finally!
KNBC News | Los Angeles...
.
No More Elephant Rides at OC Fair.
The rides were part of the fair for 25 years, and were stopped with a 6 to 1 vote.
.
By Samantha Tata
| Thursday, Mar 22, 2012 | Updated 6:25 PM PDT
Elephant Rides Nixed from OC Fair
.
Endangered Asian elephants were at the heart of the board's decision to nix elephant rides at the OC Fairgrounds.
Something big will be missing from the OC Fair this summer. Elephant rides, which have been part of the fair for 25 years, have been nixed.
The fair board voted 6 to 1 to get rid of the rides, which have drawn the ire of veterinarians, animal rights groups and elephant experts.
The private company Have Trunk Will Travel lost their contract with the fair after being notified 10 days ago that they were on the chopping block.
"It didn't make a bit of sense to me," said Kari Johnson.
Johnson said liability concerns were blamed for why she and her husband's company were let go from the fair after more than two decades.
"I think a lot of people are going to be surprised when they learn about this," said Johnson, who discovered from a blog that liability would play an role in Thursday's hearing.
She doubted the legitimacy of those fears, namely because her team of 6 elephants had never posed any problems on the road and the company has more insurance than the fair requires.
Still, animal rights concerns seemed to seep into the decision to stop the rides.
A television special chronicling elephant behavior inspired OC Fair board director Nick Berardino to examine how his own company was handling the endangered species, he said.
"I remember last year, right after I was appointed to the fair board, the fair had elephant rides and there were protesters there," he said. "So, I began to look into it."
That's when he suggested the board discontinue the rides, which cost about $7 per person and lasted for several minutes in a 50 by 100 foot grass enclosure.
Johnson's company would typically supply the fair with two to three elephants, and stay there for the five days a week that it operated before heading back to their Perris ranch.
"It was a month-long gig, and quite a chunk of income for us," Johnson said, adding that the company is privately funded and does not receive donations or grants.
The large audience, which spilled into the lobby, at Thursday’s board meeting was split on the issue.
Citing new research into how elephants react in captivity, advocates against elephant rides said using fear and "extreme human dominance" with such a large animal is unnatural and insensitive.
While others, including commercial animal trainers and singlular "nay" voter David Ellis, defended the rides by citing an incident-free history at OC Fair, coupled with a educational and sentimental value was proof enough to keep the attraction.
"We love animals elephants, and that's what we do," Johnson said, adding that Have Trunk Will Travel operates their own breeding program and is heavily involved in elephant conservation and research.
Supporters' "prime motivating factor is: we've had them for 25 years and we've never had an incident," Berardino said. "Now, given our action, we guarantee we will never have an incident."
More than 60 community members were each allotted two minutes to make their case in front of a packed board room.
Johnson also two minutes and was not asked questions by the board. She met with Berardino prior to the meeting, but suspects the rest of the board made up their minds beforehand.
"I don't think we could've done anything to please them," she said. Her husband, the company's co-founder and co-owner, was unable to make the meeting due to short notice.
Notable voices weighed in on the contested rides, including that of "The Price is Right Host"-turned-PETA supporter Bob Barker, who sent a letter to the board opposing the use of endangered Asian elephants for entertainment.
"Offering [elephants] for rides send the wrong message about how we treat our planet's rare and vanishing species," Barker wrote.
Have Trunks Will Travel is no stranger to the backlash that comes with keeping elephants in captivity. They had a similar issue at the San Diego County Fair.
That fair decided to keep the rides and revisit their liability worries in 2014, when new guidelines set by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) will go into affect barring trainers and elephants from sharing space.
Bererdino cited those restrictions as part of his decision, but Johnson said she's not sure why the blanket rule would apply to them.
AZA "continuously recertifies us, even though we offer rides, which is in conflict with their rules against elephant rides at zoos," she said. "We're not a zoo. ... We have a higher degree of training than most zoos can provide.
"I didn't quite get it."
Thursday's decision makes the fair the second Orange County entity in three months to end elephant rides.
The Santa Ana Zoo put an end to them last December following allegations of elephant abuse, which were not confirmed by a city investigation.
.KNBC News | Los Angeles... . No More Elephant Rides at OC Fair. The rides... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 3 comments
-
-
Rhino Poaching: "These Animals Are All Too Easy to Kill"
The Telegraph...
.
Rhino poaching: 'These animals are all too easy to kill’
A close friend of Prince William talks of the senseless slaughter of a favourite rhinoceros.
PHOTO:
Proud beast: Max the rhino on the Lewa Wildlife Conservancy in Kenya Photo:
TEEKU PATEL/WWW.SOKOMOTO.COM
By Victoria Moore
7:00AM GMT 01 Mar 2012
.
It’s a terribly patchy mobile telephone connection to northern Kenya when I speak to Ian Craig. We’re shouting and repeating ourselves, whole sentences vanishing frustratingly into the ether as I try to talk to the conservationist about the brutal murder by poachers of a very special and rather famous white rhinoceros called Max.
The Duke of Cambridge has said he is “appalled” by the animal’s “senseless slaughter”. As a close friend of Craig and his daughter Jecca, with whom he was once linked romantically, he has been a regular visitor to the family’s Lewa Wildlife Conservancy in Kenya where Max was hand-raised. He would have seen the rhino as it was growing up.
The Prince takes a keen interest in the plight of these animals, which are at ever-increasing risk from the poachers who sell their horns for more than the price of gold. They need protection and on a recent visit, he agreed to sponsor a black hook-lipped rhino at a cost of £6,000 a year. The beast was named William in his honour.
“Rhino are so vulnerable,” says Craig. “They have bad eyesight. They’re all too easy to kill.”
Then suddenly the line is crystal clear, as if it’s being held together by the great force of his wrath. I can hear every word he says.
“How do I feel about yet another rhino being killed by poachers who only want to sell its horn?” says Craig. “It’s such a massive, deep anger. That we have failed to protect these animals. And that the world can have such a demand for something that in real terms is just worthless. The value of rhino horn, which is thought in some cultures to have medicinal properties, is founded on myth. The case of Max highlights the fate of so many other rhino. It’s important that the world sees what’s going on because it’s very real. We need to do more about it.”
Rhino horn can be traded illegally for up to £60,000 a kilogram in some Asian countries, where it is renowned for its supposed therapeutic benefits. Over the past few years, its rising value has created a surge in poaching incidents. In 2007 in South Africa, where the rhino population is closely monitored, the number of rhinos poached was just 13. The following year it was 83; then up to 333 in 2010.
But, as Craig points out, this is not a South African but a “pan-African” problem.
Conservation has long been his passion. Kenyan-born, he converted the family cattle ranch into a rhino sanctuary back in the Eighties and went on to found the Lewa Wildlife Conservancy in 1995.
In 2001, Prince William spent six weeks working at Lewa as a volunteer and has returned on several occasions since, even becoming a patron of the Tusk Trust [a conservation and community development organisation] after being inspired by Craig’s work.
Kenya is certainly a country close to the Prince’s heart; it was there that in 2010 he took Kate on the romantic holiday in the wilds during which he asked her to be his wife. And it was with the Craigs at the Lewa Wildlife Conservancy that the couple enjoyed their first, very informal, celebratory drinks after the Prince had proposed.
It was to Lewa that Max the rhino came too, as a two-week-old after Craig got a call from an animal sanctuary saying he needed a new home.
“His mother was missing, presumed killed,” says Craig, who was speaking to me yesterday from Northern Kenya where he is helping the charity Save the Elephants treat an injured matriarch called Monsoon. “We flew to pick him up, blindfolded him, put cotton-wool in his ears, and brought him home. He was hand-reared on Lewa by teams of rangers: fed every four hours on lactogen and vitamins, kept warm at night in stables, taken out during the day and walked around. Whether it’s a rhino or a Labrador, you pick up a very close bond with an animal. Max became like a dog. He knew people. He wasn’t aggressive at all.”
When he was two years old Max was moved from Lewa to the Ol Pejeta Conservancy where, in common with other rhinos, he was dehorned in the hope of protecting him from poachers.
Poaching can be highly sophisticated. As the financial stakes have become higher, so the gangs can afford to invest in more equipment, deploying helicopters as well as night-vision goggles in search of their bounty, chainsaws (to remove the horn) and shotguns. It is becoming an increasingly bloody battle between conservationists and poachers, as even the prospect of excavating a few scraps from a rhino that has been dehorned makes an animal a lucrative kill.
This was to be Max’s bloody fate in June 2011 – although news of the death emerged only this week. He was six years old when, at 3 o’clock in the morning, Craig took a phone call to say that gunshots had been heard in the conservancy. Later, Max’s carcass was found lying in the warm mud. He had been shot 17 times and poachers had sliced deep into his face in an attempt to hack out what remained of the precious stumps of his horns, leaving it a grisly mess.
“I didn’t go to see him,” says Craig. “I didn’t want to go near. I put my energies into working with the police to try to apprehend the guys who had done it.”
In Craig’s view, so much more could be done to contain the poaching problem. “The issues for elephants and for rhinos are different and not just because ivory is a luxury product for wealthy people. Elephants are free-ranging animals. It is easier to keep rhino alive in a sanctuary by paying for high levels of security. But it costs a lot.
“Kenya has been relatively successful at protecting its rhino. The number dropped at one stage to 260 and now it is three times that. The government’s been putting a lot of resources into it. But you also have to remember that’s money that could be going into schools or water.
The demand for ivory and rhino horn is coming from outside Africa. It’s a world issue – but Africa is having to pay for the protection.”
And, sadly, not every rhino is lucky enough to have a royal sponsor.
.The Telegraph... . Rhino poaching: 'These animals are all too easy to... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 0 comments
-
-
Nearly 300 (THREE HUNDRED!) Elephants Slain Since Mid-January in Massive Massacre for Ivory, Government Minister Confirms
CNN...
.
Nearly 300 elephants slain in Cameroon for ivory, government minister confirms
From Tapang Ivo Tanku, for CNN
.
updated 7:21 PM EST, Mon February 20, 2012
.
The government in Cameroon has launched a crackdown on poachers who have been killing elephants for their tusks.
.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Poachers are killing the elephants for their tusks
The ivory is smuggled to markets in Asia and Europe, an animal welfare official says
Money from ivory sales buys arms for use in regional conflicts, the official says
.
(CNN) -- Poachers in search of ivory in northern Cameroon have slaughtered nearly 300 elephants for their tusks since mid-January, according to the country's minister of forestry and wildlife.
Minister Ngole Philip Ngwese backed up a claim by the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) that an armed gang of Sudanese poachers had killed the free-roaming elephants in the Bouba Ndjida National Park, on Cameroon's border with Chad.
Park officials say many orphaned elephant calves have been spotted, and concerns are high the babies may soon die of hunger and thirst.
One park official, Bouba Jadi, told CNN the deaths are worsening the situation for Cameroon's already threatened elephant populations. According to official estimates, there are between 1,000 and 5,000 elephants in Cameroon.
Officials on a tour Monday saw at least 100 elephant carcasses. More carcasses are expected to be found in unexplored regions of the national park. A massive crackdown on poachers has been launched, according to officials in the west Central African nation.
"It was common for armed gangs of poachers to cross from Sudan during the dry season to kill elephants for their ivory. But this latest massacre is massive and has no comparison to those of the preceding years," IFAW official Celine Sissler Bienvenu told a local newspaper, The Voice.
She added that the ivory is smuggled out of West and Central Africa for markets in Asia and Europe, and money from ivory sales funds arms purchases for use in regional conflicts, particularly ongoing unrest in Sudan and in the Central African Republic.
Cameroon shares a porous border with Chad. Armed insurgents from Sudan and the Central African Republic seeking elephants frequently travel through Chad.
Observers in Cameroon have been blaming the raids on poorly trained and ill-equipped park guards, who are pitted against professional gangs of poachers.
.CNN... . Nearly 300 elephants slain in Cameroon for ivory, government minister... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 12 comments
-
-
How to Steal a Tuk Tuk in Thailand
The first episode of Jet Set Zero: Thailand has all the answers!-
- Mulcahey
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 0 comments
-
-
Tucson Zoo Problem Involves Two Beautiful Elephants and Bob Barker
Los Angeles Times...
.
Tucson zoo fight involves elephants, Bob Barker
January 18, 2012 | 3:52 pm
PHOTO:
Elephant herd at San Diego Zoo's Safari Park
.
Connie is an Asian elephant, Shaba an African one. Nonetheless, they formed a bond, paling around together for three decades at Tucson’s Reid Park Zoo.
So when zoo officials announced plans last year to move Connie to the San Diego Zoo –- without her buddy Shaba -– animal activists were enraged.
The Tucson zoo was planning to bring in a herd of African elephants from San Diego, the Arizona Daily Star reported. Because zoo accreditation standards demand that new herds not mix African and Asian elephants, "due to multiple species differences and possible disease transmission issues," Connie would join other Asian elephants in San Diego.
But local activists Tracy Toland and Jessica Shuman considered the separation cruel. It “defies everything we know about elephants: their intelligence, profoundly deep social bonds (females remain with their mothers for life) and the capacity for deep emotion,” they wrote in the Daily Star.
The women launched a campaign to keep Connie, 44, and Shaba, 31, together and added some celebrity sizzle to the debate. At their behest, former “Price Is Right” host and well-known animal advocate Bob Barker recently offered to contribute $500,000 to send the elephants to a California sanctuary if others could raise matching funds.
This week, Tucson zoo officials reversed course, announcing that Connie and Shaba could both move to San Diego, the Daily Star said. Turns out, San Diego’s Asian elephant herd already has an African member, so Connie and Shaba’s cross-species kinship will fit right in.
.Los Angeles Times... . Tucson zoo fight involves elephants, Bob Barker January... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 4 comments
-
-
Dramatic Rescue of Mother and Baby Elephant | Sinking Elephants Pulled from Mud
CNN...
.
Dramatic rescue of mother and baby elephant
By Dominique van Heerden, CNN
updated 4:20 PM EST, Thu November 10, 2011
.
(CNN) -- Most conservationists would agree that you should not interfere with mother nature. But there are exceptions to every rule.
Staff and tourists at Kapani Safari Lodge in Zambia were caught by surprise when a mother and baby elephant became trapped in mud.
Saying they couldn't just "stand by and watch them slowly die," what ensued was a dramatic rescue.
Together with the South Luangwa Conservation Society (SLCS) and the local wildlife authority, the team devised a plan to get the elephants out. The rest of the herd initially tried to help the screaming mother and baby escape, but they were stuck too deep.
Team managers from the conservation society slipped a rope around the baby and after a few attempts managed to pull her out of the muddy pit. The team says it took a lot of coaxing to get her out and on her feet though, adding that she "was terribly frightened and wouldn't leave her mum's side".
Getting the adult elephant out of the mud was a far more challenging task -- by the time the baby had been rescued, its mother was dehydrated and exhausted. But the SLCS team eventually pulled her out too, using a tractor and rope.
Staff at Kapani Lodge say it was "heart-warming to see how many local people joined in the efforts to free the two elephants... it was the happiest possible ending."
.CNN... . Dramatic rescue of mother and baby elephant By Dominique van... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 21 comments
-
-
Sadness: Bella (the Dog) Has Died... Tarra (the Elephant) Has Lost Her Best Friend of Eight Years
[My note: I hate this particular news article, but so far, it's the only thing I can find about the sad ending to Bella and Tarra's beautiful, inspiring friendship. Hope this hits your heart, too.]
.
From Hufffington Post...
.
Bella The Dog Dies; Tarra The Elephant Mourns At Tennessee Sanctuary (VIDEO)
.
First Posted: 11/4/11 01:23 PM ET Updated: 11/4/11 01:24 PM ET
.
Tragedy struck a pair of unlikely friends who had captured the hearts of caretakers and animal lovers.
Tarra the elephant and Bella the dog began their friendship at The Elephant Sanctuary In Tennessee about eight years ago, according to CBS. Last week, Bella was believed to have been attacked by coyotes and died, leaving Tarra to mourn the loss of her best friend.
Bella and Tarra played and ate together, and often had sleepovers in a barn, according to the Leavenworth Times.
Sanctuary caretakers believe Tarra found Bella's body after the attack and carried her to the spot they often spent time together.
"The idea that she couldn't leave that body and brought it back home is just heartbreaking, but so inspiring," Robert Atikinson, CEO of the Elephant Sanctuary, told Nashville's WKRN News 2.
Once, when Bella suffered a severe spinal cord injury, Tarra patiently waited for her friend's recovery. CBS detailed the moments in a 2010 story:
For three weeks the elephant held vigil: 2,700 acres to roam free, and Tarra just stood in the corner, beside a gate, right outside that sanctuary office...
Then one day, sanctuary co-founder Scott Blais carried Bella onto the balcony so she and Tarra could at least see each other.
"Bella's tail started wagging. And we had no choice but bring Bella down to see Tarra," Blais says.
Bella was first spotted at the sanctuary in the fall of 2003, and died on October 26, 2011. The Elephant Sanctuary set up a tribute page in honor of the deceased canine.
.
.
[My new note: I've since added a bit more, including something from The Elephant Sanctuary, as well as more videos and photos. The most touching addition is a commentary done by Steve Hartman last night on CBS.]
.[My note: I hate this particular news article, but so far, it's the only thing I... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 29 comments
-
-
Federal Appeals Court Upholds Dismissal of Animal Rights Activism Lawsuit Against Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus
http://jonathanturley.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/article-0-07af1e86000005dc-547_634x387.jpg
.
Federal Appeals Court Upholds Dismissal of Animal Rights Activism Lawsuit Against Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hiBq32WYajbxiTSP-kaKE4Z4zzOw?docId=deda6c3aa956465db3fb5cb0be82b3cb
AP | The Associated Press...
.
Appeals court upholds dismissal of elephant suit
By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press – 15 hours ago
.
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court on Friday upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by animal rights activists that claims the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus abuses its elephants.
The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington agreed with a lower court judge that the Animal Protection Institute and a former Ringling employee Tom Ryder did not have the legal standing to sue the circus. The lower court found that Ryder was "essentially a paid plaintiff" because he received at least $190,000 from the animal rights activists pursuing the case.
The lawsuit claimed the circus is violating the elephants' protection under the Endangered Species Act with the use of bullhooks for training and prolonged chaining during train rides between shows.
Feld Entertainment Inc. argued the elephants are not hurt and that the instruments are necessary to keep the animals under control and protect public safety. The Vienna, Va.-based company runs the circus and has an elephant sanctuary in Florida.
Feld attorney John Simpson said the appellate ruling supports the company's $20 million racketeering lawsuit against Ryder, animal rights groups and their attorneys that claims they committed bribery, obstruction of justice and other illegal acts in filing the elephant suit. Simpson said the purpose of the company's suit is to keep animal rights groups from using the federal court system to pursue "radical agendas."
"Feld Entertainment is the target today and some other businesses are going to be targets tomorrow," Simpson said in a telephone interview. "And at some point it has to stop."
The Animal Protection Institute declined to comment on the ongoing litigation. But they are asking a judge to dismiss Feld's racketeering suit, calling it "a transparent effort to stifle any criticism of FEI's elephant treatment practices" and to bankrupt and punish the animal rights groups.http://jonathanturley.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/article-0-07af1e86000005dc-547_634x38... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 1 comment
-
-
Elephant Rides Should Be a Thing of the Past
Los Angeles Times...
.
Editorial
Elephant rides should be a thing of the past
Elephant rides are a tradition at the L.A. County Fair, but it's one tradition the fair should abandon, both for the animals' and the public's sake.
PHOTO: Rosie, an Asian elephant, cooled herself off with water during a break from giving rides at the Los Angeles County Fair. (Los Angeles Times)
.
September 7, 2011
The Los Angeles County Fair is steeped in traditions, from its Ferris wheel to fried everything. But elephant rides are one tradition the fair should do without.
The Humane Society of the U.S., the country's most influential animal welfare organization, is against them, saying that elephants are typically trained for rides and other performance activities through the use of bullhooks and electric prods. The Assn. of Zoos and Aquariums "strongly encourages" its member organizations to discontinue rides in the interest of safety.
The elephants at the fair are supplied by the Perris, Calif.-based outfitter Have Trunk Will Travel, a member in good standing of the association. But its founders, Kari and Gary Johnson, are accustomed to controversy following in their elephants' footsteps. Officials of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, who asked the fair to cancel the rides, circulated a video from Animal Defenders International that purportedly shows trainers from Have Trunk Will Travel using bullhooks and electric prods to get elephants to perform.
In a statement, the Johnsons said the video was six years old and heavily edited. "We stand by our care and training methods," said the statement. Kari Johnson confirmed that the trainers use bullhooks — "the pointed end is to push them away, the curved end is to pull them toward you." But she defended the company's care of its six Asian elephants, saying they are well treated on a 10-acre ranch and noting that the outfitter is involved in research on and conservation of the endangered species.
What's more, the company has supplied Asian elephants to the fair off and on for 20 years without incident or evidence of inhumane treatment on the grounds, according to fair spokesperson Leslie Galerne-Smith.
In our view, the video is beside the point here. Zoos, including the L.A. Zoo, are spending millions to create elaborate habitats for elephants, which are the world's largest land mammals. Some zoos have reevaluated whether their facilities can sufficiently accommodate the needs of pachyderms. Some are also instituting a policy of almost no unprotected contact between keepers and elephants, which is considered more humane and safer for all. At a time when the management of captive elephants is focusing on conservation and the animals' well-being, hoisting people onto their backs seems out of step.
The animal welfare groups, the elephant supplier and the fair officials all say they care deeply about elephant conservation. If that's true, there ought to be a way to allow people — including fairgoers — a chance to see and learn about these stately creatures of the wild without riding them.
.Los Angeles Times... . Editorial Elephant rides should be a thing of the... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 1 comment
-
-
Los Angeles Considers Putting L.A. Zoo Operations into Private Hands | Why Not Create a Sanctuary, Instead?
L.A. considers putting zoo operations in private hands
Officials say the change would save nearly $20 million over five years and prevent possible closure. Critics question the savings and say the move could mean less transparency in animal welfare.
Los Angeles Zoo
Photo: Zoo patrons view a pair of Masai giraffes at the Los Angeles Zoo. Two potential private operators have expressed interest in running the zoo. (Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
By Kate Linthicum, Los Angeles Times
July 28, 2011
.
Someone else may soon be tending to the misty artificial rain forest at the Los Angeles Zoo where Bruno, a 300-pound orangutan with a wispy orange beard and a hulking frame, makes his home.
The city opened the zoo and botanical gardens in 1966, but officials are now considering a proposal to turn over management to a private operator. That means the gardeners, plumbers and other city employees who help run the zoo could be transferred to other departments and replaced with private workers.
Like any issue involving labor — or animals — the fight over the fate of the zoo has caused a considerable stir.
City officials say the change would save nearly $20 million over the next five years and rescue the zoo from possible budget reductions or even closure. But opponents of the plan question the savings and warn that privatization could mean steeper ticket prices for the zoo's 1.5 million annual visitors and less transparency when it comes to animal welfare.
The zoo plan is only the latest example of a shift in how budget-strapped officials think about "core services" and City Hall's basic obligations to taxpayers. They are also considering proposals to privatize the Los Angeles Convention Center, an animal shelter in the San Fernando Valley and several arts facilities.
Such public-private partnerships are common in Los Angeles County. The Los Angeles County Museum of Art and the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History are two county facilities operated by nonprofit organizations.
"It's not a revolutionary idea," said Miguel Santana, L.A.'s chief administrative officer, who came to City Hall from the county in 2009. "This model has worked across the country as a way of ensuring services are maintained in an era of declining revenues."
According to a draft proposal for the zoo plan, which the City Council's Arts, Parks, Health and Aging Committee will consider Thursday, Bruno and the rest of the animals would remain the property of the city, along with the zoo's Griffith Park grounds.
All current staff would remain employees of the city, but those who do not hold zoo-specific jobs might be transferred to other city departments. Future hires would be employees of the new operator.
Two potential operators have already stepped forward.
One is the Greater Los Angeles Zoo Assn., or GLAZA, a nonprofit headquartered on the zoo's campus that raises money for the institution, manages its memberships and operates its concessions. In 2010-11, it raised about $13 million for the zoo, according to GLAZA President Connie Morgan
The other party is Parques Reunidos, a Madrid-based theme park operator that runs 70 amusement parks, water parks and zoos worldwide.
Dave Towne, a former consultant for the L.A. Zoo, said that if a private company takes over, the face of the zoo may change. "Any private, for-profit operation is going to Disney-fy it," he said. "That's just what they do."
Towne, former director of the Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle, oversaw the transition of that zoo's management to a nonprofit 10 years ago. He said private operators run the majority of the nation's major zoos and are often more successful at marketing and fundraising than cities, in part because they are less encumbered by bureaucracy.
Animal activists fear that could result in a lack of transparency. Catherine Doyle, of In Defense of Animals, said that if the zoo is privatized, "it will become even more secretive and insular."
She and others have long accused the zoo's management of not being forthcoming about animal care, and have asked that the operator be required to answer to a city-appointed animal welfare commission.
Adriana Hawkins, a zoo gardener for six years, says everyone will suffer if longtime employees are reassigned. The zoo will lose expertise, she said, and the employees will lose jobs they love.
"I don't want to go down to the harbor; I don't want to spend my life on the freeway," Hawkins said. "I have a passion for the zoo."
Santana and others have said that privatizing the zoo will allow it to flourish. A report he commissioned said that under private management, the zoo would be able to reap up to $3.8 million more each year in revenue, thanks to new opportunities for corporate sponsorship, fundraising and special events.
But City Councilman Richard Alarcon said that's all the more reason to keep control of the zoo. "If a private corporation can make it profitable, why can't we?" he said.
It costs $26 million a year to run the zoo and pay the salaries, benefits and pensions of more than 200 employees. The city contributes about $14.6 million; the rest of the budget comes from ticket sales and donations.
Officials say if the city does not privatize management, that figure could grow as high as $19.4 million by 2015. But even if it does complete a deal, the city will still contribute about $13.8 million to the zoo in 2015, according to the proposal.
The savings may be small in the short term, but Santana insists that it adds up. Next year, he and other officials will have to find a way to close a $200-million budget deficit.
.L.A. considers putting zoo operations in private hands Officials say the change... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 0 comments
-
-
Article: The impact o population growth on wildlife
Ten thousand years ago, the mass, the weight, all of the humans on the earth, plus all our pets, plus all the livestock we keep to feed ourselves, was 0.1% of 1% - one tenth of one percent - of the mass, the weight, of all the mammals on the earth. The rest of the mammals - elephants and tigers and rhinos and whales and kangaroos etc - made up 99.9% of the mass of all the mammals on the earth.
By 200 years ago, humans, our pets and our livestock had increased from 0.1% to 10-12% of the mass of the mammals of the earth.
Now, we, our pets and our livestock make up 96% - 98% of the mass of the mammals of the earth. The poor old elephants and tigers and rhinos and whales and kangaroos and all the rest of the mammals have gone from 99.9% to just 2 - 4%.Ten thousand years ago, the mass, the weight, all of the humans on the earth, plus all... more-
- frankpatton
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 0 comments
-
-
Victory in the Campaign to Ban Circus Animals
The Independent | London...
Victory in the campaign to ban circus animals
Government concedes defeat after bribes and intimidation fail to deter rebels
By Martin Hickman, Consumer Affairs Correspondent
Friday, 24 June 2011
MPs of all parties unanimously backed a ban on circus animals
MPs voted to ban wild animals in circuses last night after David Cameron's attempts to bully Conservative backbenchers into voting against the measure backfired and ended in a humiliating public defeat. In a decision hailed by campaigners as an "historic victory for animal welfare and protection", MPs of all parties unanimously backed a ban and the Government signalled that it would introduce one, ending forever the days of lions, tigers, elephants and other wild animals in the big top.
In an act of desperation, Conservative whips had warned they would impose the most serious parliamentary voting sanction, a three-line whip, to bring recalcitrant backbenchers to heel and get them to support the Government's alternative proposal of a licensing system. But in a victory for The Independent's campaign for a ban and for the long campaigns waged by animal welfare organisations, Downing Street backed down when it became apparent that it would lose the vote despite what backbenchers described as "desperate" measures. One of the three MPs who brought the cross-party motion for a ban disclosed that he had first been offered a government job – and then threatened that the Prime Minister would look "very dimly" on his recalcitrance – unless he amended or withdrew the motion. Mark Pritchard, a Conservative backbencher, stood firm and insisted that the measure be voted upon.
As astonished MPs listened, Mr Pritchard said: "Well I have a message for the whips and for the Prime Minister of our country – and I didn't pick a fight with the Prime Minister – I may just be a little council house lad from a very poor background but that background gave me a backbone. It gives me a thick skin and I'm not going to be cowed by the whips of the Prime Minister on an issue I feel passionately about and have conviction about.
"There may be some other people with backbones on this side and they will speak later, but we need a generation of politicians with a bit of spine, not jelly. And I will not be bullied by any of the whips."
MPs from all sides of the House including the Liberal Democrat MP Don Foster, Labour's Nia Griffiths and the Green leader Caroline Lucas attacked the Government's position, saying that both public and parliamentary opinion was in support of a ban.
The motion was to "direct" the Government to introduce a ban.
Shortly before the vote, the Animal Welfare minister, Jim Paice, said: "If at the end of this debate the House were to approve this motion then of course we will have to respect that."
Animal welfare groups were ecstatic. The RSPCA said: "This is a win for democracy as well as animal welfare." It said it hoped the Government would quickly and formally announce a ban.
Animal Defenders International, the group which shot undercover footage of the beating by a Romanian groom of Anne the elephant at Bobby Roberts Circus, said: "This debate and vote has exposed the Government and demonstrated just how out of touch they have been with their peers, the public, and animal welfare groups."
Mary Creagh, the shadow Environment Secretary, said: "The public will be absolutely delighted that MPs from all parties have stood up to the Tory-led Government on this issue to achieve such a fantastic result. The vote brings to an end 48 hours of chaos and confusion from the Government about their position on a ban. It is extraordinary that David Cameron used such bully-boy tactics to threaten his own MPs and tried to impose a three-line whip on the vote."
The Government had initially planned to ban wild animals from circuses but the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs was forced to do a U-turn, and instead proposed a licensing system, after Mr Cameron, a keen hunter and shooter, blocked the move.
Mr Paice blamed a court challenge to a ban in Austria for the decision, but there was no court challenge and he was forced to admit during an emergency debate, called because of the misinformation, that he had misled the Commons. The Government's subsequent claim that a ban could be challenged under the Human Rights Act or the EU Services Directive was challenged by lawyers and the European Commission.
The Government and MPs came under intense pressure from voters. More than 32,000 signed The Independent's online petition calling for the Government to change its mind, and supporters of the protest group 38 Degrees, which had forced Defra to abandon plans for its forests sell-off, deluged MPs' offices with hundreds of emails, letters and phone calls.
During the debate, MPs said the issue was emblematic of wider animal welfare issues. But the most astonishing contribution came from Mr Pritchard who had secured the backbench debate, which should have had a free vote. He said: "On Monday if I offered to amend my motion or drop my motion or not call a vote on this motion – and we're not talking about a major defence issue or an economic issue or an issue of public-sector reform, we're talking about a ban on wild animals in circuses – I was offered reward and incentive. If I didn't call for a ban – I was offered a job. Not as a minister, it was a pretty trivial job.
"Then it was ratcheted up to last night and I was threatened. I had a call from the Prime Minister's Office directly and I was told unless I withdrew this motion that the Prime Minister himself would look upon it 'very dimly indeed'."
He told MPs: "It remains a mystery why the Government has mounted such a concerted operation to stop there being a vote on this motion."The Independent | London... Victory in the campaign to ban circus animals... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 13 comments
-
-
"Kill All the Elephants" | Uneasy Truce Between Maasai and Nature
Uneasy truce between Maasai and nature
From David McKenzie, CNN
June 15, 2011 12:57 p.m. EDT
Maasai learn to be wildlife guardians
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Around 80% of Africa's elephants live outside of protected parks in the wild
The Maasai people are a pastoral tribe living along the border of Kenya and Tanzania
Some Maasai have turned to farming, bringing them into conflict with local elephants
The Maasailand Preservation Trust is trying to teach locals to live peacefully with the wildlife
Maasailand, Kenya (CNN) -- For tourists visiting Kenya, elephants represent the majesty of nature -- but for those living on the land the animals are often seen as pests.
At the foot of Chyulu Hills in Kenya, an area famous for its wildlife and the Maasai people that call it home, getting the balance right between the two has always been a delicate task. As more people farm in the region the strain on wildlife increases.
Around 80% of Africa's elephants live outside of protected parks in the wild. One conservation group has turned to local communities in an attempt to find solutions to everyday problems so man and beast can live peacefully.
"You know, that elephant that we are seeing down there now, the chances are that last night he was out raiding a field -- or if you go out and see a lion I guarantee you within the last week he has probably killed something belonging to one of the landowners here," explained Richard Bonham, conservationist and founder of the Maasailand Preservation Trust.
The Maasai people are a pastoral tribe living along the border of Kenya and Tanzania. Their long-preserved culture and traditional way of life has made them one of the area's most famous tourist attractions.
But conflict between the Maasai tribe and the region's elephants is on the rise and can lead to tragedy.
If this elephant problem doesn't get any better then we should just kill all the elephants.
--Reuben Silati, Maasai elder
One of the locals, Ndiari Ole Lemungur, was walking in a group near his homestead at night when he heard something moving.
"We were really scared ... at first we didn't know what was happening. But when we realized that it was an elephant two of us ran away and two stayed behind," he said.
He explained that one boy hid and narrowly escaped but another member of the tribe, Onetu, couldn't get away and was trampled to death.
"My son was young," said Onetu's father, Maasai elder Reuben Silati. "He had a long future ahead of him and I was hoping that he would take care of my homestead when I was gone. I am getting older every day and my son should have been the one to help me."
Silati called the trust and rangers tracked down and killed the elephant within hours. But this was not an isolated incident. As domestic animal and human populations grow conflict between animals and humans is more likely.
"If this elephant problem doesn't get any better then we should just kill all the elephants, because there is no need to live with them," Silati continued.
The Maasai have also taken up farming, something that is completely unlike these semi-nomadic people. But frequent droughts, put down to climate change, have led them to start growing food.
Kipareu Olesayiore is a Maasai farmer. He's begun growing melons and peas using irrigation. The practice has helped him supplement his income and survive the droughts.
Yes, you can choose to kill all the wildlife, but then what happens 10 years down line?
--Antony Kasanga, Maasailand Preservation Trust
But farms eat into wild habitats and the melons are candy for the elephants.
"You chase them (elephants) out of the farms and if you follow them a little bit they will attack you," said Olesayiore. "They have been here for three years, but this year is by far the worst."
Olesayiore has started putting up flashlights and solar lamps to try to stop the elephant raids but the method isn't very effective. He says that from time to time foreigners come and tell him to protect the animals.
"I will work with foreigners coming in, I will listen to their ideas, but sometimes I wont listen because there isn't much wildlife left where they come from, is there?" he said.
But the Maasailand Preservation Trust has been working with the Maasai community to use arguments that make sense to the people that need to understand them.
"When I was a young boy I used to just think wildlife is a nuisance; there is no value," said Maasai Antony Kasanga, who now works for the trust.
"Yes, you can choose to kill all the wildlife, but then what happens 10 years down the line? You have a kid and in 20 years time he says 'Daddy, I want to go see a lion.' Where do you take him?" he continued.
Kasanga works with the farmers; he doesn't preach to them but instead gives out solutions.
He hands out thunder flashes to scare the elephants away and if their cattle are killed by lions the trust gives them compensation.
The organization has also started the only primary school in the area and gives out scholarships to help educate the next generation.
Its efforts to engage with the local communities and win their hearts and minds may be the best hope for securing free ranging wildlife in Africa.
.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/06/15/t1larg.maasai.cnn.jpgUneasy truce between Maasai and nature From David McKenzie, CNN June 15, 2011 12:57... more-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
- 1 year ago
- |
- 5 comments
-
