Thailand and animal cruelty

[cumgranosalum]

Hardly a week goes by when there isn't some horrendous story in the media that has resulted from the total disregard for animal welfare by an owner/keeper whose attitude shows total disregard for the welfare of his/her charge and a complete ignorance of conservation issues....this is coupled with a lack of effective legislation to control or prevent this.......

in view of this deplorable situation in Thailand, it amazes me that Thaivisa has no forum for conservation and animal welfare issues - especially as some of it's problems are now on a worldwide scale. E.G - they are in breach of CITES regulations, a hub for endangered wildlife smuggling and world leaders in the ivory trade - yet TV in their wisdom sees no need for a discussion forum on these and related topics.

If anyone was in any doubt about the deplorable state of animal welfare and conservation issues in Thailand take a look a this video.

It is actually quite mild manned - but some of the comments by those in authority or running these places is quite jaw-dropping in their appalling ignorance of issues concerning wildlife and conservation.

101 East Savin Thailand's Animals

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/101east/2015/06/saving-thailand-animals-150616150713091.html

[cumgranosalum]

"Plants, Pets and Vets"? - you're 'avin' a laugh, ain'tcha?

[BuaBS]

Why do people make the distiction between wild life and other animals ?

So it is not ok to keep an elephant , tiger,....for comercial/touristic purposes , but the slaughtered meat on your plate , that's ok ?

What gives you the right to say the life of a wildlife animal is worth more than a pig or chicken in the the prison/meat-factories ?

[cumgranosalum]

Why do people make the distiction between wild life and other animals ?

So it is not ok to keep an elephant , tiger,....for comercial/touristic purposes , but the slaughtered meat on your plate , that's ok ?

What gives you the right to say the life of a wildlife animal is worth more than a pig or chicken in the the prison/meat-factories ?

What gives me the right? - nothing, absolutely nothing....

What I am talking about is the science of ecology and conservation....what is the function of wildlife - both flora and fauna within the biosphere that is the planet we live on.

We keep some animals and domesticate them but not others......... what is the purpose of keeping these respective animals and it that purpose necessary or justified?

Most of the answers are down to straightforward reason and logic.

As humans we need a functioning environment on the planet in order that we may survive - such animals as tigers are apex predators on a complicated but essential eco-system - take them out of the equation and that system dwindles and collapses - what do we need those systems for? Clean air and water a stable climate, healthy environment for the future. etc etc.

Domesticated animals are purpose bred by humans to provide a service of some sort, they can be working animals or companions or food.......they have been bred for millennia to achieve this. In most countries there are laws to protect even the animals we kill to eat.....Unfortunately there are few such laws in Thailand and domesticated animals have little or no legal protection. (Take some time out and go to a local slaughterhouse)

Now whether or not you are a vegetarian you still probably use animal products in your life, whether it is on you shoes, or clothing or in industrial processes...they are in intrinsic part of human life - our eco-system - if you like....but we try to keep them as humanely as possible and most countries have strict laws to oversee this. NB - how Australia suspended exports of livestock to Indonesia) - in Thailand this is hardly ever the case the laws that exist are feeble and seldom enforced. all animals are seen as a resource to be exploited.

So the difference between domestic and wild is not how we treat them, it is their function in the eco-system, the part they play on the planet. Keeping animals like tigers as pat or working elephant in tourism has two main effects. firstly the animals in Thailand are unprotected - the laws for domestic and wild animals in Thailand are not the same and seldom enforced.

Secondly and most insidiously the usage of these animals is often falsely portrayed as the "only solution" - to keep them alive....not only is this false in most cases, it lulls the general public into thinking its OK to have animals in zoos instead of having a fully functioning bio-system, and this actually contributes to the further demise of eco-systems and the animals on the planet.

The rates of extinction of flora and fauna on planet earth at present are believed to be faster than at anytime in the planets history - even the extinct of the dinosaurs, which in paleontological terms is viewed as a sudden catastrophic event.

so comparing a captive elephant or tiger with the concept of putting meat on a plate is in reality a false dichotomy....it isn't what conservation is about, and this is the primary concern with the ruthless untrammelled exploitation of endangered species.

[isanbirder]

Most conservation-related topics seem to appear in the General Forum, some in this one.

As the dominant species on this planet, we have the right to exploit it, but with rights always go responsibilities. Our responsibility is to keep the planet in optimum working order, which means protecting and fostering our environment. No clear-felling of forests, no stripping trees off the tops of hills (go to Nan and see what that does), no exploitation of wild species for trade, and so on.

As you say, cumgranosalis, this is nothing to do with vegetarianism; the way we treat the animals we breed for food could start another diatribe, but not this one.

[cumgranosalum]

Most conservation-related topics seem to appear in the General Forum, some in this one.

As the dominant species on this planet, we have the right to exploit it, but with rights always go responsibilities. Our responsibility is to keep the planet in optimum working order, which means protecting and fostering our environment. No clear-felling of forests, no stripping trees off the tops of hills (go to Nan and see what that does), no exploitation of wild species for trade, and so on.

As you say, cumgranosalis, this is nothing to do with vegetarianism; the way we treat the animals we breed for food could start another diatribe, but not this one.

"As the dominant species on this planet" - just about every word of that premise is questionable.

My main criticism would be of "we have the right" - so might is right???

To a greater or lesser extent, we have the "ability" to mistreat animals and the "ability" to affect the biosphere - climate, flora and fauna....but that is certainly not a "right".

i agree with "optimum working order" - which is a concept that is alien to many posters on this thread and the public at large in Thailand who fail to distinguish between an animal in captivity that is exploited and a creature in the wild forming part of a functioning eco-system.

as for where this item is posted - well I posted it in "General" and now it has without any announcement been transferred to pets - which would indicate that someone in Tv also has no concept of the difference between conservation and pet-keeping.