Published on October 20, 2005
Wildlife should be protected, not exploited for commercial gain
A baby gibbon was recently taken to Thailand’s leading wildlife sanctuary, Khao Luk Chang Wildlife Rescue Centre, by people from Bangkok who had bought it from Chatuchak Weekend Market and kept it as a pet for several months. The owners of the gibbon realised their actions were in fact perpetuating the illegal wildlife trade. For every wild animal that reaches the pet market for sale, there are at least 10 others killed. The gibbon, a highly endangered species, seems to be one of the biggest sufferers from the illegal trade in Southeast Asia. Young gibbons are appealing, due to their humanlike features and cute appearance.
It has come to the attention of the Wildlife Friends of Thailand that a leading producer of iced coffee in Thailand had previously used the now-rescued gibbon for a nationwide television commercial to promote their products. The baby gibbon was rented for Bt8,000 from wildlife traders at Chatuchak Weekend Market and later sold to the Bangkok couple as a pet for Bt8,000. The Bangkok couple was first asked to pay Bt15,000, as it concerned a “star” gibbon, according to the traders. The sale of illegal wildlife continues to be an ongoing problem within Thailand. Commercial exploitation further supports the trade and therefore hunting in the wild, pushing endangered species closer to the brink of extinction. Upon confirmation of our findings, we approached the coffee company for comment. The company explained that the gibbon had been used with the approval of and under supervision by a Bangkok-based wildlife rescue organisation. They denied that the rescued gibbon had been a “prop” in the commercial; however, they did not deny that the animal had been poached from the wild. The company said they donated a significant amount of money to the foundation that had helped with the shooting of the commercial. Edwin Wiek Wildlife Friends of Thailand Bangkok ------------------------------------- Not so sure about the swamp that could be Singapore Re: “Airport set to be the 77th province”, News, October 18. Nakhon Suvarnabhumi is a marvellous idea. This could ease the congestion in Bangkok. Businesses and hotels could be built there. However, until the cake is baked, let’s not keep boasting about how good it is going to be. Thailand could become the biggest laughing-stock. I never thought Thais were so attuned to boasting. So far, nothing has been better than in Singapore, other than the massage parlours. Cautious Bangkok ------------------------------------- Unique programming for a Thai audience will be missed Re: “Fans rally behind BBC Thai radio”, News, October 18. I wholeheartedly support the campaign to stop the closing of the BBC’s Thai-language programming. It is one of the very best media programmes broadcast on the radio, and I have listened to it for a long time. It is an important link between Thai people and the UK. I highly appreciate the service for recognising Thais living in Thailand and around the world. The programme provides insights that are different from BBC television news. It targets only Thai listeners, and that’s what makes it’s so special. Virawan Sombutsiri Bangkok ------------------------------------- BBC provides an alternative to overly nationalistic media Re: “Radio service’s cancellation may not be that great a loss”, Letters, October 19. I take objection to this letter about the BBC’s cancellation of its Thai-language broadcasts. Having both watched the BBC and read it’s website for years, I see no evidence of bias against Thais when it comes to reporting the violence in Thailand’s southern region. I would like to ask the writer which people he is referring to, as I thought both Buddhists and Muslims were considered Thai? Or is he referring to a bias against all Thais in general? It certainly sounds as if Lek does not consider Muslims in Thailand to be truly Thai! I would suggest to Lek that the BBC’s reporting is far more informed and impartial than the broadcasts he listens to or watches on Thai terrestrial television or radio, having tuned in to many of their broadcasts. As for his ranting about how the BBC has contributed to the “economic devastation in the area” of Phuket, I would like to point out that the BBC was reporting about the tsunami on a constant basis hours before any of the Thai terrestrial television stations cared to. [Thai stations] preferred to continue airing banal soap operas and game shows until the apparent severity of the disaster prodded them into action. Paul Angus Bangkok ------------------------------------- Radio news of yesteryear had a clearer identity Re: “Radio service’s cancellation may not be that great a loss”, Letters, October 19. I can understand Lek’s feelings about the BBC. In the darkest periods of the 20th century, particularly during WWII and the Cold War, the BBC was the voice of hope, freedom and democracy for millions of people enslaved by murderous tyrants. It represented the highest standards of objectivity and reason, represented all that was fine and noble about British culture. Unfortunately, in recent years the BBC has lost its way. It has been captured by leftist elites and minority interests. Today’s BBC is characterised by criticism of the US (particularly the Bush administration), of the Blair government, of capitalism, of traditional family values and Western culture generally. In Australia, we see a similar situation with the ABC, which seems increasingly alienated from mainstream society. Rodney Sheaves Sydney, Australia ------------------------------------- Wry take on Suvarnabhumi overload hits the right note Re: “Another day in my life from the year 2015”, Opinion, October 19. Kudos to Tulsathit Taptim for a very poignant, light-hearted critique! Simple, funny, direct, but with a hint of rib-tickling criticism – oh, what sarcastic criticism can do! More power to you and keep those thoughts coming. They’re a breath of fresh air. Albert Houston, Texas ------------------------------------- Protests not the only way to register disenchantment Re: “Thailand’s people power has fizzled out”, Opinion, October 18. Thepchai Yong writes of the decline in the willingness of the people to take direct action against the government and fears that it may be some time before society awakens to political realities. Down in the deep South, though, people have spoken through the ballot box. Not a single MP is from the government’s party. Having been ignored, they took very direct action indeed during the last election. Dom Dunn Chiang Mai ------------------------------------- Thailand and Malaysia should have warmer ties Any disputes between Thais and Malays can be resolve through negotiations. We should respect each other, find out what is wrong and fix it. Thailand especially prospered in the early 1990s and has the potential to do so again. Thailand and Malaysia should be close friends and not let any problems sour their relations. The countries should to try to understand each other, so that they can stand together again. Rafiq Bangkok ------------------------------------- A referendum would tell us what southerners really want Flare-ups of violence in Thailand’s three southern provinces are not new. This violence has been the response of the Yawi-speaking Muslims of Malay ethnicity to being governed from Ayutthaya, Thon Buri and Bangkok. One must see any insurgency in the region as age-old local resistance against alien rule. The oppression of the inhabitants of the South has often involved other regions of the Malay peninsula. Thus, the conflict has always been “international” in scope. The Thai government must implement reforms in the three southernmost provinces, including regional autonomy and power-sharing. Yet such reforms might never be enough. Perhaps a referendum could be considered as a way to determine the future of the three southern provinces. Locals could be asked to decide if they preferred independence, federation with Malaysia or to remain in Thailand. Jack Boyer Bangkok ------------------------------------- Politicians serve the people in mature democracies The nature of democracy requires that those who decide to pursue public office must acknowledge that they enjoy their privileged positions only through the will of the people they are meant to serve. More mature democracies have come to understand this, and all their leaders, are meant to eschew all other sources of income to concentrate on the job they have been elected to do. They also fully understand that it is the people who pay their wages, pass judgement on their decisions and who ultimately wield the real power. It is a sad reflection on the immaturity of Thai democracy that those who exercise power on behalf of the Thai people have not yet come to appreciate this and see the taking up of public office more as a means to self-enrichment than as acceptance of the duties they are supposed to perform. Russell Briggs Bangkok
Post your comment to this story here