Forest Dam Threatens Thailand'S Tigers: Wwf

[george]

Forest dam threatens Thailand's tigers: WWF

Bangkok, Aug 29, 2012 (AFP) - A proposed dam that would flood part of a national park in western Thailand represents a "significant new threat" to the kingdom's tigers, wildlife group WWF warned on Wednesday.

It said the success of conservation efforts in the area near the border with Myanmar -- highlighted by new video footage of a tigress and her two cubs filmed by camera traps close to the proposed dam site -- were now at risk.

"As tigers need large amounts of food, especially when they are nursing their young, the new footage indicates that prey in the Mae Wong-Klong Lan forests is abundant enough to support tiger reproduction and recovery," said WWF conservationist Rungnapa Phoonjampa.

Many tiger prey species including wild pig and deer were also seen in the area, according to the group.

"Years of successful conservation efforts will be washed away if the dam construction goes ahead," said Rungnapa. "The Mae Wong dam must be stopped or we risk losing our tigers."

Fewer than 300 tigers remain in the wild in Thailand while around the region the Indochinese tiger is under threat from shrinking habitat, illegal trade in tiger parts for traditional medicines and a scarcity of prey, WWF said.

The multi-million dollar dam project would destroy more than 20 square kilometres (7.7 square miles) of national park home to sambar deer, an important prey species for tigers, the group warned.

-- (c) Copyright AFP 2012-08-29

[OzMick]

Typical greenie BS. The park is nearly 900 sq km, but a 20 sq km dam "represents a "significant new threat" to the kingdom's tigers"

[KireB]

Typical greenie BS. The park is nearly 900 sq km, but a 20 sq km dam "represents a "significant new threat" to the kingdom's tigers"

Typical greenie BS. The park is nearly 900 sq km, but a 20 sq km dam "represents a "significant new threat" to the kingdom's tigers"

The lake might only be 20 square km's, but knowing the Thais we will see hordes of 'disco' boats appearing on them noise polluting the entire 900 squared km!. Same in Tak province.

[Reasonableman]

Every dam is sacred,

Every dam is great.

If a dam is wasted,

God gets quite irate.

[kimincm]

Do you think a tigress+ cubs are going to sit and wait to drown,she's a provider,the biggest risk to her and her offspring is Thai greedy see you nt's and Chinese "medicine" and here lies the usual problem,police who refuse to act like police.Don't they turn your stomach,at the local Mum and Pop shop,the wife of the local BiB comes and cooks her food,uses what she finds and then takes it home.I ask"Why do you let this happen"? reply "What can we do"And you people are worried about the tigers.I am but I'm sure it doesn't figure in the big picture.

[DeepInTheForest]

Several reasons to oppose the proposed Mae Wong dam, and none of them have to do with tigers:

1) No plan has been put forth to compensate villagers for losses that may be suffered as a result of the dam.

2) The project has been illegally steamrollered through the acceptance process by the government. On April 10 the Cabinet pushed through a budget of 13 billion baht for the project. The government said to heck with the 1992 Environmental Act, which requires it to have an environmental impact assessment (EIA) and consent from the National Environmental Board. Posters here who regularly complain about the lack of attention to the rule of law, please take note. (Dare we also mention the law prohibiting construction in a national park?)

3) The project was previously turned down by the National Environmental Board in 2002 because environmental impact studies by experts predicted at the time that the loss from environmental damage would be greater than the projected benefits from flood management and irrigation. Which is probably why the government circumvented the legal process. See number 1) above.

4) Alternatives are available. A recent study came up with five different ways forward. The first was to improve management of existing infrastructure (assumedly this would include dredging of canals, etc.) No budget increase needed for this one. The second would invest in small dams along the river. The bill: 579 million baht. The third would build small dams and include a “monkey’s cheek” reservoir on farmland. Cost: 1.8 billion. Fourth: build small dams and develop an underground water system. Cost: 600 million. The fifth was the construction of the molly wugging dam. Cost: 13 billion. Guess which one of these options is being touted as the answer to our problems? Posters who regularly rail against excessive government expenditures, take note. And the person pushing hardest is posters' favorite politician. Need we say more?

5) A main reason for the push for the dam, as with any large infrastructure project, is the huge profits it will guarantee to a select group of contractors and investors. Posters who object to corruption, please note.

6) Dams—often built in Thailand to provide irrigation—remove forest. The removal of forest throughout Thailand has caused a lack of groundwater, as well as impacting the ability of the land to absorb water. Which leads to drought, as well as more floods, (causing both drought and floods simultaneously seems counterintuitive, but deforestation does both, since water cannot be absorbed as well).

Why did we build the dams again?

http://pattayatoday....-hearing-today/

http://www.nationmul...m-30181982.html

http://www.nationmul...t-30182859.html

http://www.nationmul...e-30181175.html

Edited August 29, 2012 by DeepInTheForest

[cup-O-coffee]

Did anyone even bother to ask the tigers if they want to be protected in the first place?

And what if the tigers are behind this whole "Dam" thing? Maybe it's the tigers who are trying to get the dam installed so their food is nearer to their lairs.

Maybe that is why these tigers are always so bent out of shape and try to eat Thais; because the Thais are always meddling into the tiger's personal affairs.

Why, I'll lay odds that the tigers have no idea who this Ringnappy Pajama character is, and why he or she is even bothering to start a cottage industry by barging in on their private affairs. I say respect these tigers and let them fend for themselves, just as we respect the rights of all the tiger's distant relatives; the poor and impoverished human cousins; whom we abandon and ignore whilst building dams and roads and huge high-rises right next to their humble little lairs. Maybe it's because tigers need 100 square kilometers to survive, and Thais only need a small concrete room with a telly to survive that we ignore the rights of the poor Thais and champion the rights of the tiger. Sheesh. Who knows! It gives my poor head an ache.

Oh, the humanity!

Edited August 29, 2012 by cup-O-coffee

[asiawatcher]

DeepInTheForest forgot to mention the impact down stream of those relying on flow of water. By holding back or diverting water, creates a lot of issues for a thousand kilometres for those relying on the necessity of the water.

Apart that is from the already mentioned corruption and the loaded contracts. Populist policies and plots to skim are the 'norm' in this country, and they don't give a dam_n about environment and its impact.

[JurgenG]

What is the forest department doing ? Damrong makes a lot of noise when kicking out poor farmers and forest dwellers from their home but what he is really doing behind his smoke screen is clearing the scene for the large state corporations. It has already been discussed in this forum, the objectives of the officials of the national parks is the financing of the national parks (and their officials !!!!) through running resorts, logging and mining. You have read correctly, logging and mining. Is it something you want to see in a national park ?

Have you noticed that when Damrong was questioned for his action, the only NGOs, the only "grassroot" support he received was from organizations ran by his former classmates ? The big international organization abstained from any comment. And when a respected organization like the WWF warned about the consequences of a major project in a National Park, where is Mr Damrong ?. Fortunately at last the press is waking up, there is a very courageous editorial today in the source that can not be named. Just lets hope people will finally open their eyes and realize for who the the forest department is really working for.

Edited August 30, 2012 by JurgenG

[Reasonableman]

What is the forest department doing ? Damrong makes a lot of noise when kicking out poor farmers and forest dwellers from their home but what he is really doing behind his smoke screen is clearing the scene for the large state corporations. It has already been discussed in this forum, the objectives of the officials of the national parks is the financing of the national parks (and their officials !!!!) through running resorts, logging and mining. You have read correctly, logging and mining. Is it something you want to see in a national park ?

Have you noticed that when Damrong was questioned for his action, the only NGOs, the only "grassroot" support he received was from organizations ran by his former classmates ? The big international organization abstained from any comment. And when a respected organization like the WWF warned about the consequences of a major project in a National Park, where is Mr Damrong ?. Fortunately at last the press is waking up, there is a very courageous editorial today in the source that can not be named. Just lets hope people will finally open their eyes and realize for who the the forest department is really working for.

Damrong is not the topic of this thread. Agreed that dams, resorts, logging and mining inside national parks are anathematic. However, you should really declare your interest in benefiting from encroachment on restricted agricultural land and park lands before you make such alarming (possibly libelous) claims against Damrong, and at least attempt to substantiate them if you want them to be taken seriously.

Edited August 30, 2012 by Reasonableman

[JurgenG]

What is the forest department doing ? Damrong makes a lot of noise when kicking out poor farmers and forest dwellers from their home but what he is really doing behind his smoke screen is clearing the scene for the large state corporations. It has already been discussed in this forum, the objectives of the officials of the national parks is the financing of the national parks (and their officials !!!!) through running resorts, logging and mining. You have read correctly, logging and mining. Is it something you want to see in a national park ?

Have you noticed that when Damrong was questioned for his action, the only NGOs, the only "grassroot" support he received was from organizations ran by his former classmates ? The big international organization abstained from any comment. And when a respected organization like the WWF warned about the consequences of a major project in a National Park, where is Mr Damrong ?. Fortunately at last the press is waking up, there is a very courageous editorial today in the source that can not be named. Just lets hope people will finally open their eyes and realize for who the the forest department is really working for.

Damrong is not the topic of this thread. Agreed that dams, resorts, logging and mining inside national parks are anathematic. However, you should really declare your interest in benefiting from encroachment on restricted agricultural land and park lands before you make such alarming (possibly libelous) claims against Damrong, and at least attempt to substantiate them if you want them to be taken seriously.

Sorry but my post are substantiated not yours. Yours it's just a personal attack.

You contribute to nothing but the bad feeling that everybody complains about. If you have a point, make it. But attacking other posters on regular basis like you do is not making a point, it's just trolling.

[Reasonableman]

What is the forest department doing ? Damrong makes a lot of noise when kicking out poor farmers and forest dwellers from their home but what he is really doing behind his smoke screen is clearing the scene for the large state corporations. It has already been discussed in this forum, the objectives of the officials of the national parks is the financing of the national parks (and their officials !!!!) through running resorts, logging and mining. You have read correctly, logging and mining. Is it something you want to see in a national park ?

Have you noticed that when Damrong was questioned for his action, the only NGOs, the only "grassroot" support he received was from organizations ran by his former classmates ? The big international organization abstained from any comment. And when a respected organization like the WWF warned about the consequences of a major project in a National Park, where is Mr Damrong ?. Fortunately at last the press is waking up, there is a very courageous editorial today in the source that can not be named. Just lets hope people will finally open their eyes and realize for who the the forest department is really working for.

Damrong is not the topic of this thread. Agreed that dams, resorts, logging and mining inside national parks are anathematic. However, you should really declare your interest in benefiting from encroachment on restricted agricultural land and park lands before you make such alarming (possibly libelous) claims against Damrong, and at least attempt to substantiate them if you want them to be taken seriously.

Sorry but my post are substantiated not yours. Yours it's just a personal attack.

You contribute to nothing but the bad feeling that everybody complains about. If you have a point, make it. But attacking other posters on regular basis like you do is not making a point, it's just trolling.

Your attacking Damrong without evidence is an ongoing personal vendetta, and also off topic here. Suggest you desist with the mudslinging or produce some hard evidence.

[JurgenG]

What is the forest department doing ? Damrong makes a lot of noise when kicking out poor farmers and forest dwellers from their home but what he is really doing behind his smoke screen is clearing the scene for the large state corporations. It has already been discussed in this forum, the objectives of the officials of the national parks is the financing of the national parks (and their officials !!!!) through running resorts, logging and mining. You have read correctly, logging and mining. Is it something you want to see in a national park ?

Have you noticed that when Damrong was questioned for his action, the only NGOs, the only "grassroot" support he received was from organizations ran by his former classmates ? The big international organization abstained from any comment. And when a respected organization like the WWF warned about the consequences of a major project in a National Park, where is Mr Damrong ?. Fortunately at last the press is waking up, there is a very courageous editorial today in the source that can not be named. Just lets hope people will finally open their eyes and realize for who the the forest department is really working for.

Damrong is not the topic of this thread. Agreed that dams, resorts, logging and mining inside national parks are anathematic. However, you should really declare your interest in benefiting from encroachment on restricted agricultural land and park lands before you make such alarming (possibly libelous) claims against Damrong, and at least attempt to substantiate them if you want them to be taken seriously.

Sorry but my post are substantiated not yours. Yours it's just a personal attack.

You contribute to nothing but the bad feeling that everybody complains about. If you have a point, make it. But attacking other posters on regular basis like you do is not making a point, it's just trolling.

Your attacking Damrong without evidence is an ongoing personal vendetta, and also off topic here. Suggest you desist with the mudslinging or produce some hard evidence.

Every other month, the same topic come back in the General Forum. "Enough is enough" "This is my last post" "I'm leaving ThaiVisa" all for the same reason, people get tired of meaningless personal attacks.

I made four points :

- The Forest department is doing nothing to address the threat denounced by the WWF

- There is no love lost between Damrong and international green organizations, the support he gets is purely local and misinformed at best

- Running resorts, logging and mining are the industries the forest department plan to develop inside the national parks in order to finance them. This point has already been discussed in a previous thread in this forum. And I expressed my surprise to see these industries associated with national parks.

- Damrong's master plan is to pave the way for powerful state corporation to take control of the nation's forests. That he says nothing against the dam mentioned in the OP is further proof of that point and also makes my post perfectly on-topic

And I'm not the only one to think this way, as a reference I mentioned today's editorial in the source that cannot be named.

So please stop your personal attacks and on the four point mentioned above let us know which ones you don't agree with and why.

Edited August 30, 2012 by JurgenG

[Reasonableman]

Thanks. It is indeed an interesting opinion piece in the "paper-that-cannot-be named". Like your original post, it would be improved by some specific evidence to back up the broad allegations, and some answers to the questions posed. What hard evidence is there of this purported "grand & devious plan" or is the evidence purely circumstantial?

1. The Forest department is doing nothing to address the threat denounced by the WWF

I have no evidence to support or refute the accusation that the Forest Department is sitting on its hands re the dam. Do you? What do you think the Department should be doing?

2. There is no love lost between Damrong and international green organizations, the support he gets is purely local and misinformed at best.

That is your opinion, and you have so far produced no evidence to support it.

3. Running resorts, logging and mining are the industries the forest department plan to develop inside the national parks in order to finance them. This point has already been discussed in a previous thread in this forum. And I expressed my surprise to see these industries associated with national parks.

Please provide hard evidence, a link, something tangible that supports/substantiates your opinions and the allegation.

4. Damrong's master plan is to pave the way for powerful state corporation to take control of the nation's forests. That he says nothing against the dam mentioned in the OP is further proof of that point and also makes my post perfectly on-topic.

The on-topic nature of your post is based on your own speculation, still without evidence. Please provide hard evidence, link, something tangible that supports/substantiates your opinion and the allegation. As we have seen elsewhere, there is no limit to what may be speculated in an information-free environment.

This is a complex issue and what holds for one area of rubber plantations (Trang's Ratsada district, in the Khao Bantad mountain region, referred to in the article) may be quite different from another area of encroachment into established agricultural buffer zones and parks/reserves. It appears that we are in agreement that logging, mining, and dams have no place in national parks (?). Regarding resorts being constructed in buffer zones or within the parks themselves, we may disagree.

Your assertions may all be true and correct, for all I know. I am not an apologist for Mr Damrong. Unfortunately for you, your known conflict of interest regarding encroachment on parks and reserves means your opinions and allegations regarding the people you oppose for other reasons must be taken with a large grain of salt in the current topic. If you can substantiate them, that would make for a far more interesting discussion.

[JurgenG]

Your assertions may all be true and correct, for all I know.

For all you know ...

Before starting any argument and pointing the finger at other posters, the minimum you should do is educate yourself about the subject at hand.

A lot of knowledgeable people have been put off this forum because of people like you. You start an argument, you accuse other posters of bias, but, on your own acknowledgement, you have no knowledge about the subject.

Please, before coming back, first educate yourself. That would make for a far more interesting discussion. In the meantime, you're just trolling.

Edited August 30, 2012 by JurgenG

[Reasonableman]

Your assertions may all be true and correct, for all I know.

For all you know ...

Before starting any argument and pointing the finger at other posters, the minimum you should do is educate yourself about the subject at hand.

A lot of knowledgeable people have been put off this forum because of people like you. You start an argument, you accuse other posters of bias, but, on your own acknowledgement, you have no knowledge about the subject.

Please, before coming back, first educate yourself. That would make for a far more interesting discussion. In the meantime, you're just trolling.

So you have no evidence or proof, just conspiracy theory. Thanks for the confirmation.

[billd766]

Do any of you actually live near Mae Wong and the national park? have you actually seen any plan for the area?

Look on Google and see if you can find where the dam is supposed to go and how big thepark actually is.

The Mae Wong national park actually runs along the back of my wifes' land and is great big park and where the dam is to be situated is at the populated end and nowhere near where the tigers are.

I have been told that there are tigers in the park but nobody around here has ever seen or heard one.

[HiSoLowSoNoSo]

I assume that the company to build this dam is related to the ruling The Pheu Thai government and that they will build a substandard earth wall dam (in an earthquake prone area) and charge the taxpayers 10 times the construction cost. This government should be legal responsible for building illegal dams in Thai national Parks.

[cup-O-coffee]

Do any of you actually live near Mae Wong and the national park? have you actually seen any plan for the area?

Look on Google and see if you can find where the dam is supposed to go and how big thepark actually is.

The Mae Wong national park actually runs along the back of my wifes' land and is great big park and where the dam is to be situated is at the populated end and nowhere near where the tigers are.

I have been told that there are tigers in the park but nobody around here has ever seen or heard one.

That sounds scary. You mean she has never seen any signs of the tigers (poop or tracks)? Has she seen any sign of their food source (wild pigs, etc.)? Both are usually keen to remain out of sight and on alert for the presence of others due to the the nature of their relationship between each other; predator / prey. Both also fear man and keep away from his sense of awareness unless driven to extreme impulses outside their hereditary behavior. The dam could push the wild life outside their normal haunts into the human sector; then she may get a few suggestions of their presence. Again, scary. I hope she does not have any livestock.

I doubt there are any man eaters roaming the park. More scary.

Edited August 31, 2012 by cup-O-coffee

[billd766]

Do any of you actually live near Mae Wong and the national park? have you actually seen any plan for the area?

Look on Google and see if you can find where the dam is supposed to go and how big thepark actually is.

The Mae Wong national park actually runs along the back of my wifes' land and is great big park and where the dam is to be situated is at the populated end and nowhere near where the tigers are.

I have been told that there are tigers in the park but nobody around here has ever seen or heard one.

That sounds scary. You mean she has never seen any signs of the tigers (poop or tracks)? Has she seen any sign of their food source (wild pigs, etc.)? Both are usually keen to remain out of sight and on alert for the presence of others due to the the nature of their relationship between each other; predator / prey. Both also fear man and keep away from his sense of awareness unless driven to extreme impulses outside their hereditary behavior. The dam could push the wild life outside their normal haunts into the human sector; then she may get a few suggestions of their presence. Again, scary. I hope she does not have any livestock.

I doubt there are any man eaters roaming the park. More scary.

As I said we live next to Mae Wong.

As an example of the size of the park in the last year or two a Thai Air Force helicopter was found in 2009 12 years after it crashed.

I believe it was found by accident. In the link it said that the area is sparely populated especially on that side and perhaps that is where the tigers are but it will certainly be nowhere near populated areas.

Even on our side there are few tracks to walk along and if you wander off them you could easily be lost for a long time.

[billd766]

Yesterday afternoon my wife along with quite a few other families went to the Pu Yai Bans house to get a form for selling some land to build a new dam at Mae Wong. She has a shop/small restaurant on 10 rai of land that the government want to build a dam on. She has to state a price per rai plus one for the building etc.

This dam has been surveyed and planned for quite a while but ii is not the same as the one in the main thread.

While it is NOT in the national park there is not a full land title though as far as we can understand the price to be agreed upon will be fair and reasonable depending of course on the governments ideas and ours of what IS fair and reasonable.

The area inside the blue line is waht they want.

[JurgenG]

While it is NOT in the national park there is not a full land title though as far as we can understand the price to be agreed upon will be fair and reasonable depending of course on the governments ideas and ours of what IS fair and reasonable.

It is nice to hear that.

With which government department are you dealing with ?

[Sayonarax]

I have no issue with it, if you don't mind me hiring a helicopter with a giant bucket of water and dumping that on your house..sure, why not?

Save them Tigers!

[barefoot1988]

"Years of successful conservation efforts will be washed away if the dam construction goes ahead," said Rungnapa. "The Mae Wong dam must be stopped or we risk losing our tigers."

get real. there are no years of successful conservation efforts. barely any tigers left

[billd766]

"Years of successful conservation efforts will be washed away if the dam construction goes ahead," said Rungnapa. "The Mae Wong dam must be stopped or we risk losing our tigers."

get real. there are no years of successful conservation efforts. barely any tigers left

There are no tigers near populated areas and especially as that dam is situated at one end of the park and is supposeddly 20 sq km from over 900 sq km.

About 20 km up the road from where I live there are hills/mountains over 1,000 metres high.

[billd766]

I have no issue with it, if you don't mind me hiring a helicopter with a giant bucket of water and dumping that on your house..sure, why not?

Save them Tigers!

Find out where the tigers are supposed to be living and then find out exactly where the new dam is supposed to be, work out the distance and then come back to me.

[cowslip]

I have no issue with it, if you don't mind me hiring a helicopter with a giant bucket of water and dumping that on your house..sure, why not?

Save them Tigers!

Find out where the tigers are supposed to be living and then find out exactly where the new dam is supposed to be, work out the distance and then come back to me.

you obviously don't understand the interconnected nature of environmental issues. Tigers need a large area for each animal and a supply of prey....they are the apex predator. THe environment in and around the dam area is also particularly suited to tigers - a large "lake" will drown out thw topography, and prey that these animals rely on.

A healthy tiger population means a healthy environment which in turn it good for humans.

their are moves afoot to create a zone that can support tigers stretching from Thailand as far as India - all this was discussed at the Tiger conferences last year. thailand of course said it was a great idea.....and now is taking action that will be directly detrimental to the survivl of both the species and th environment.

PS - tigers have legs and do not stay in one place.

I'm curious it when people categorically state there are no tigers in their area....I wonder how they know that.

Edited September 12, 2012 by cowslip

[billd766]

I have no issue with it, if you don't mind me hiring a helicopter with a giant bucket of water and dumping that on your house..sure, why not?

Save them Tigers!

Find out where the tigers are supposed to be living and then find out exactly where the new dam is supposed to be, work out the distance and then come back to me.

you obviously don't understand the interconnected nature of environmental issues. Tigers need a large area for each animal and a supply of prey....they are the apex predator. THe environment in and around the dam area is also particularly suited to tigers - a large "lake" will drown out thw topography, and prey that these animals rely on.

A healthy tiger population means a healthy environment which in turn it good for humans.

their are moves afoot to create a zone that can support tigers stretching from Thailand as far as India - all this was discussed at the Tiger conferences last year. thailand of course said it was a great idea.....and now is taking action that will be directly detrimental to the survivl of both the species and th environment.

PS - tigers have legs and do not stay in one place.

I'm curious it when people categorically state there are no tigers in their area....I wonder how they know that.

How about because I actually live here and talk to the Forest Rangers at the Mae Wong National park once or twice a week.

So tigers actually live in a populated area and not deep in the forest where human predators can get to them.

I wonder if the tigers know that?

Can you please tell me categorically the last time that tigers were seen in the area where they want the dam to be built. Obviously living right next to the park and talking to the local population it seems that all of us around here, locals included are both blind and stupid and wouldn't recognise a tiger if one walked up the drive.

[cowslip]

I have no issue with it, if you don't mind me hiring a helicopter with a giant bucket of water and dumping that on your house..sure, why not?

Save them Tigers!

Find out where the tigers are supposed to be living and then find out exactly where the new dam is supposed to be, work out the distance and then come back to me.

you obviously don't understand the interconnected nature of environmental issues. Tigers need a large area for each animal and a supply of prey....they are the apex predator. THe environment in and around the dam area is also particularly suited to tigers - a large "lake" will drown out thw topography, and prey that these animals rely on.

A healthy tiger population means a healthy environment which in turn it good for humans.

their are moves afoot to create a zone that can support tigers stretching from Thailand as far as India - all this was discussed at the Tiger conferences last year. thailand of course said it was a great idea.....and now is taking action that will be directly detrimental to the survivl of both the species and th environment.

PS - tigers have legs and do not stay in one place.

I'm curious it when people categorically state there are no tigers in their area....I wonder how they know that.

How about because I actually live here and talk to the Forest Rangers at the Mae Wong National park once or twice a week.

So tigers actually live in a populated area and not deep in the forest where human predators can get to them.

I wonder if the tigers know that?

Can you please tell me categorically the last time that tigers were seen in the area where they want the dam to be built. Obviously living right next to the park and talking to the local population it seems that all of us around here, locals included are both blind and stupid and wouldn't recognise a tiger if one walked up the drive.

it ios becoming increasingly clear you have no idea of the issues hear, tigers' behavioural patterns, how they relate to the eco-stystem nor concepts of conservation and environment. What you are asking is completely irrelevant. however you might read up on a few articles on Tigers in Thailand - google will help for a start. check up too on Allan Rabinowitz and the various Tiger conservation orgs.

Edited September 12, 2012 by cowslip

[Jim walker]

Thai people couldn’t care less about tigers some Thais keep tigers on the roofs of houses