Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 19:56:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Sean Barry <sjbarry@ucdavis.edu> To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg1689$foo@default> Subject: Re: Biodiversity convention - farcical "facts"
On Sat, 15 May 1999, Steve wrote:
> I'm glad I kept this extract from one of the news pages
> Perhaps, it will be of interest to anyone who thinks the info' on the
> slaughter was spurious.
Thanks for clarifying the highly distasteful incident--I took issue with
the inappropriateness of the post to CP (nothing in it about plants or
CITES), the clear distortion of some of the facts (squirrels, not monkeys
(the abuse of which angers people a lot more than does that of squirrels),
no government involvement other than refusal of entry, nothing about CITES
or the Biodiversity convention or about any conservation issues, most of
all, nothing about the squirels (or monkeys) being made into dog food) and
what seemed to me to be deliberate (=self-serving) distortions meant to
make conservationists seem unworthy of respect because they cause the
death by shredder of innocent monkeys who lack "proper documentation."
It appears that an overzealous airline official overzealously
misinterpreted the misinstructions of an overzealous agriculture official.
Must have been a quiet night up to then.
If the original contributor inadvertantly got his facts wrong, that's no
excuse because if you're going to attack someone be sure that your facts
are facts. In short, the "facts" as recited by the original contributor
seemed completely far-fetched, and I apologize for suggesting that there
was absolutely no basis for the reported incident. Nevertheless, the
facts as they were presented were indeed very far-fetched, and to review,
here's what he wrote:
> Did you see the story recently about the crate of rare monkeys that
> arrived in Holland from China without proper documentation? No
> Dutch institutions wanted them and the Chinese wouldn't take them
> back so they were put, still alive, into a mincer for dog food.
> Another victory for the conservationists? With success stories like
> these to their credit, conservationist is rapidly becoming a
> deprecated profession like tax inspector, used car salesman etc.
I think you'll agree that this is pretty distant from what appears to be
the credible explanation for the incident, and completely off-topic for
the CP list (inflammatory, off-topic, inaccurate material). Again,
though, note that in the news account there is nothing about CITES,
conservationists, the Biodiversity convention, or even about wildlife law.
And that's a fact.
Of course, I'm assuming that the news account is accurate.....
Sean Barry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:58 PST