|
|
Elephant 'Nadia' Forced to Quit Phuket Resort
By Prasit Tarnsirisin and Alan Morison Wednesday, April 8, 2015
PHUKET: Nadia, a juvenile elephant that became target of an online petition to ''save'' her from a Phuket resort, has been moved. She has a new home, a new job - and a new name.
Managers at the Marina Phuket Resort in Karon told the elephant's owners to move her at the weekend from the resort because of an online campaign being conducted at change.org.
The young elephant is one of several used over about 15 years to greet customers - especially children - at Dino Park, a quirky restaurant near the resort. The resort and restaurant have the same owners.
Nadia was ''worked'' for just two hours every evening, being petted and fed by kids who had mostly been guests at the restaurant.
The elephant's owners, Tip Yeelum and his wife, say the resort requested that Nadia stop work about three weeks ago because of pressure being brought to bear through the social media petition.
As of 9.40am today, the petition had attracted a whopping 58,752 signatories.
''The elephant was being allowed to stay on at the resort without having to work, but now we have had to move her,'' Khun Tip told Phuketwan yesterday.
He also disclosed that the three-year-old creature's real name is Choojai.
The name ''Nadia'' was adopted for the sake of continuity with 'Nong Nadia,'' her predecessor in the role outside Dino Park.
The original Nadia, now eight and no longer baby-sized, moved on about two years ago and is now carrying tourists on treks at a Phuket elephant camp, one of many on the holiday island.
She is being rented out at 15,000 baht a month.
Choojai, formerly Nadia, is now based at the Seaview elephant camp in Rawai, southern Phuket, at no charge.
It's not clear what her work involves at Seaview but it is likely to be similar to the relatively easy life she enjoyed at Marina Phuket Resort, as the star of tourists' photographs and selfies.
Khun Tip and his wife own and rent 26 elephants of various ages to elephant trekking businesses across Phuket.
The online petition, aimed at Marina Phuket Resort, which was assumed to own the elephant, claimed Choojai, formerly Nadia, ''leads a life of solitude and loneliness, forced to perform unnatural behaviors for visitor entertainment.''
The petitioner says ''There is a sanctuary willing to accept Nadia, to allow her the ability to live the life she deserves . . . Free, surrounded by other elephants, and in the care of those who will love and cherish her.''
However, the wishful thinking of the petition fails to take account of the reality on Phuket and elsewhere in Thailand, where the elephants are owned by individuals who often depend on the income.
Phuket has 216 registered working elephants, including 25 aged five or under. Some young elephants work at resorts, restaurants and retail outlets.
A team of government-employed livestock officials, including veterinarians, regularly check on the health of Phuket's elephants.
There may be unregistered elephants, too.
While the petition has a point about the cruelty involved in breaking and training, the notion that Nadia-Choojai is somehow the most deserving case falls well wide of reality.
Animal lovers should in future perhaps adopt a strategy for dealing with the issue effectively rather than target more ''Nadias'' where their energy is misplaced . . . and likely to be wasted.
The change.org petition reads:
Please release Nadia the baby elephant to a sanctuary immediately and let her live the life she deserves!
Nadia, the baby elephant, is the Marina Phuket Resort's "mascot", and leads a life of solitude and loneliness, forced to perform unnatural behaviours for visitor entertainment. When I saw Nadia, my heart sank. She was tied to a pole outside the hotel's restaurant, being made to take photos with passing tourists late at night. Furthermore, their own website boasts their "elephant rides", of which is common knowledge to be of detriment to the elephant spine, and when not being used for human "enjoyment",she is rumored to be kept in a small enclosure, starved of any other elephant interaction. Being a baby, she would have been taken from her mother so young, and likely to have been broken in by a process of "Phajaan", or cruel acts to break her spirit to obey. There is a sanctuary willing to accept Nadia, to allow her the ability to live the life she deserves ... Free, surrounded by other elephants, and in the care of those who will love and cherish her. Please, please, please, urge Marina Phuket Resort Hotel to release Nadia immediately. Their hotel is set amongst breath taking scenery, overlooking the beautiful Karon beach, and therefore do not need to have Nadia to attract tourists. Please sign and share today!
|
Comments
Comments have been disabled for this article.
"Animal lovers should in future perhaps adopt a strategy for dealing with the issue effectively rather than target more ''Nadias'' where their energy is misplaced . . . and likely to be wasted" - Ed,
factually incorrect as now the baby elephant is with other elephants as any intelligent animal should be especially elephants which are social based even when adult, especially females and she is hopefully not being exploited. AM you often attack your reader's comments and now this trait that you seem to be addicted to as clearly you cannot stop attacking them is seeping into your journalism.
Posted by
Welcome To Paradise
on
April 8, 2015 11:34
Editor Comment:
There are no other registered elephants at the Seaview camp so, regrettably, you continue to make foolish assumptions. If there are unregistered elephants at the camp, that's an indication of the level of care and concern there.
My journalism is none of your business.
"Streichelzoo" or "petting zoo" like in the western countries are ok,,,
"Animal Lovers" should inform themselves more about the habitat and country...
Posted by
Bob Reader
on
April 8, 2015 12:58
A sad day for commonsense when the web warriors score a win but have no idea what the real battle is and how to address is.
An observation: 26 elephants is a lot of elephants for one person to own. Years ago an adult female could easily cost 200,000 to 300,000THB to buy and then feeding and watering them is a costly exercise daily.
Posted by
Duncan
on
April 8, 2015 20:54
Good ol '"Change.Org"!
One person bleats on the Internet and a feeding frenzy starts!
Yes - elephants are naturally herding animals, yet there is no end of evidence of long, strong relationships between elephants and their "mahouts", most of it positive.
I think the originator of this particular frenzy should, perhaps, consider the strong pack instinct in dogs and ask the world to release all lonely domestic dogs so they can go off and form packs that they are naturally used to. Good idea? - Not!
I would imagine - statistically - the chances that an elephant would be cared for in a reasonable fashion, considering the high initial investment by its owner and the earning potential.
Posted by
Lenny
on
April 9, 2015 07:50
Editor Comment:
Wasteful and silly use of the power of the people.
I??m disgusted how elephants are treated in Thailand. It??s the responsibility of Thailand government and the tourism industry to end this animal abuse and to protect elephants!It??s also the responsibility of tourists to get informed and not to help finance this torture of elephants by riding elephants, watch elephants performing unnatural tricks, taking pictures with dressed up elephants, or pay for elephants forced to beg in streets! Why is it allowed that baby elephants are abused in the tourism industry? Why don??t you (editor, Phuket Wan Tourism News) help Nadia? You live in Thailand and you could help her to be transfered to an elephant sanctuary!
Posted by
Geraldine
on
April 11, 2015 19:35
Editor Comment:
Geraldine, we are concerned about the treatment of elephants but more concerned about human trafficking - the rapes, deaths and abuses involved - and the needless deaths of humans on Thailand's roads and in the water. Nadia is far from being the worst-treated elephant in Thailand. You and others like you should do more research. Target the abused elephants, not those leading relatively pleasant lives. Try getting your priorities right, please. By all means, complain loudly to the Thai government. Good luck.
So we should feel sorry for the people that exploit 26 animals and have them in horrible conditions? Nadia was underweight so that means she was underfed. We should never stay silent when seeing such horrible treatment to animals nor humans. There are other programs that have a kinder approach where elephants can still be elephants and humans can enjoy their presence but there is no need to ride them nor make them do ridiculous tricks. You should be writing about that not about these people that care nothing about the welfare of the animals. Trekking camps are the worst place an elephant can be, this is where they develop all kind of foot problems, are chained up when not having the tourist riding on their back are normally underfed and lead miserable lives... And let's not forget the training they must go through which is cruel and brutal and now you tell us that this is where Nadia was headed and we should feel bad about speaking up? I don't think so. People's understanding on what these animals need and how important family is to them that by the way someone said there was no proof of that is wrong! There are many studies that show that elephant families stay together all their lives. The males leave when they are young adults but the females remain together till their dying day. They also take care of their young and love them just like we do. With all this knowledge there is no way a person with a good heart and good common sense can just turn a blind eye. Don't be fooled by this article.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
April 13, 2015 23:13
Editor Comment:
Anonymous Zealot, Phuket has a livestock office that regularly checks the conditions for all elephants on the island. If you seriously intend to help, directing your time and energy at changes in Thailand by law would make sense. Grandstanding exercises in freeing juveniles from the ''pain and suffering'' involved in being petted by kids is a joke. Get serious about your beliefs.
Why don't you write articles about the young people you speak of. It is you that have taken the time to do this, seems to me that you have an invested interest. By the way who are you to say what my beliefs should be, get over yourself. What is important to you doesn't have to be important to anyone else which really doesn't seem so important because I don't see you putting your time an energy into writing about it or voicing your opinion, instead, you go after the people who have the guts to speak up. You should take a long hard look at the person you are if you do, I am sure you will not like what you see. I feel sorry for the sad person you seem to be. Good luck!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
April 14, 2015 10:50
Editor Comment:
you ''go after the people who have the guts to speak up''
What, a sanctimonious, self-opinionated no-name like you?
Not likely. We aim at readers with some intelligence.
I have read the response from the resort & it doesn't convince me that the right action has been taken for Nadia.
What I fail to understand is how people own elephants who by nature are born free.
Are they just there for the taking of anyone who is able to remove them from where they are born & decide their fate.
Using them as a tourist attraction & then when they are past their use by date sending them to work out the rest of their lives for trekking companies doesn't seem like the elephant will ever enjoy the life it was intended to live.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
April 14, 2015 11:17
Editor Comment:
What response from the resort?
A little off topic - but, Mr Morrison, as a "journalist" (writer, more like it), in a public forum, I hate to tell you that your work WILL be read, assessed & scrutinised on its factuality & impartiality.
You seem highly agitated by people's comments against your writing & blatant LACK of impartiality - you're there to write a story, publish facts, no? Whether you're in cahoots with all the Thai elephant mahoots, an extreme right-wing, ambivalent to animal rights or whatever, you come across as a really nasty man.
So may I suggest that if someone criticises your work, you take it on the chin & not tell them its "none of their business". Your journalistic skills ARE your readers' business! Your comments are really aggressive - I've never seen an Editor get that worked up on a public forum. Embarrassing!
The only FACTS here that anyone can be sure of are that we're talking about
a wild animal,
a baby animal,
a very intelligent, highly social animal, who in its natural environment would still be with its family.
Debatable? No.
What we "infer" from what we see is that she's captive, undeniably stressed & in a pretty disruptive environment.
And about the "livestock office" - good god... I can just IMAGINE the baht that changes hands there!! Don't go insulting anyone's intelligence now, please.
We are NOT Zealots - thanks for the name calling - we are good everyday human beings who care to see animals free from being USED (& probably abused, knowing the nature of a wild animal, that needs to be forcibly removed) for financial gain. God forbid you have a baby - would you hold it outside a restaurant for kids to pet & handle? So what's the difference?
Oooohhhh that's right... people are superior to other dumb creatures. Right.
You sir, should maybe look at YOUR beliefs (again, pretty damn offensive - wow, your readers really get up your nose, don't they?) & realise that the world is undergoing some changes!
Posted by
Annie
on
April 14, 2015 11:27
Editor Comment:
The point is, Annie, that we have some knowledge of what we are talking about. You don't. The mass hysteria generated by the thought of ''saving a poor, tortured baby elephant'' from the petting of children is laughable. I do wish you and like-minded zealots actually did your research. You know, checked your facts? Naah. Never going to happen. You can't even spell my name.
Well maybe Sir, & I can & will continue to be courteous to you (not really expecting any of the same & sorry about the big deal of misspelt name), some people in the world consider the treatment of animals - any sentient being - as an important indicator of the kindness & depth of our nature. You won't deter these people by your bitter comments & degradation of their beliefs, but we would NEVER, ever assume to belittle you or trivialise your wonderful work regarding human rights. Some care very greatly for people - the rest of us have equal care of & dedication to spare for animals as well.
I don't think I need to be there or know Nadia personally to see that it's an unnatural scene & I'd LOVE to be proven wrong. Really.
Did my research? On what? Thailand? Elephant? Journalists? Or just good old fashioned moral standards? Its been proven time & time again, that we don't need to keep things "chained up" to get what we need.
We're on a different level I suppose - you could always try exploring the possibility of opening your courageous work to all living things in desperation...
Posted by
Annie
on
April 14, 2015 12:12
Editor Comment:
You want elephants to be free? Take your campaign to the Thai government. Right now, thanks to your campaign, we have no way of knowing whether ''Nadia'' is better off or worse off. Don't waste your time and energy on me, please.
You're totally missing the point. people signing this petition were asking for this elephant to be taken to a SANCTUARY. not another tourist park or trekking park. That was the whole point.
Yes, we are fully aware of how corrupt thailand is and how no respect is given to animals and they are merely seen as a way to make money.
But making noise and signing petitions like this is actually a way to raise awareness to tourists about the cruelty of this animal trade and to educate people on avoiding these tourist attractions. No one said Nadia is the worst case out there - she is probably far from it. But to sit there and ignore it and do nothing, changes nothing.
The only way to stop it is to get rid of the demand. The only way to get rid of the demand is to create awareness about why it shouldn't be allowed.
Yes, it;s a long process and yes it will continue on for many years. There will always be dumb tourists too no doubt who will never care. thats just the idiot human race who think we are here to do and take whatever we please as if there's no consequences.
But any progress is progress. Any change is better than no change. Any noise is better than no noise because it signifies progress and creates awareness and momentum.
Not that you'll agree.
Your comments to other readers are pathetic. you should be ashamed. It's people with views like you that are the reason these attractions continue and exist.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
April 14, 2015 12:24
Editor Comment:
A pointless petition. Never going to happen . . . the elephant was not owned by the resort. Misguided, poorly researched, time-wasting exercises need to stop to make your campaign effective.
''It's people with views like you that are the reason these attractions continue and exist.'' Try involving your brain in the exercise. Relying on gut emotion is pointless.
Some of the elephants are well treated and some are not, the only people who can change this are the local authority for animal care doing their job properly
They are no longer used for logging which was a terrible life and not used for food like pigs, chicken's etc
If people cannot use them to make a living as long as they are looked after and fed properly what will happen to them
Posted by
peter allen
on
April 14, 2015 12:45
We have NO right to use animals at all
Posted by
Diane Easey
on
April 14, 2015 13:17
Editor Comment:
I guess you live in a pet-free household then but most people understand that horses and oxen and elephants were used for work for centuries and that cows, pigs and sheep are still raised for food. Don't forget fish. Best to construct campaigns that have a chance of succeeding.
all we just need to stop elephants being used as a tourist attraction. stop the bickering and comments.
I'm an animal lover and just want to see this stopped, this is not the way animals of any kind should be treated
Posted by
Karen Rowe
on
April 14, 2015 14:03
Editor Comment:
Well then, do something effective. This campaign is a waste of time and energy. It has achieved nothing except to put the elephant in a place where its health cannot be assessed so easily.
I'm glad this place has stopped the use of elephants for entertainment. One place one elephant at a time, very slow but eventually there may be NO elephants used for entertainment.
Posted by
Fay
on
April 14, 2015 14:09
Editor Comment:
Or give it a little while and another Nadia will suddenly appear in the same spot . . .
elephant lovers and tree hugging people tend to like poor people working for their cheap goods. Be it as slave worker on fishing boat or sweat shop worker in Bangladesh. So while eating sushi in a nicely looking shirt, they can rant online with their new iPhone about morality and get the little elephant fired from its pretty, not to heavy work by being petted by toddlers. Next time she will bring out the trees fr m the hill. Nadia will be eternally grateful.
Posted by
Lena
on
April 14, 2015 15:01
You have to appreciate the heartfelt effort that the authors have made to deflect any negative attention derived from this cause. Blaming activists for having a poor strategy, without offering a better alternative, is a weak and cringe-worthy move by people who sympathize with industries that profit from animal exploitation. This is reminiscent of comments from Sea World defenders who argued that animal rights "zealots" couldn't grasp that the cetaceans are "better off" in their tanks than in the wild. Circuses are in the habit of defending their methods of training and confinement as well, so we shouldn't be surprised by the editors' stance. What the authors clearly fail to understand is that elephants are wild animals, not commodities, and putting them to work for human profit is abusive, period.
Posted by
Kat
on
April 14, 2015 15:03
Editor Comment:
The authors are journalists who can put the issue in perspective. Activist blind to their own failings do no cause any good. In this case, the activists assumed the resort owned the elephant. Wrong. For that reason, the campaign has misfired. Do your research. Try to get it right. Otherwise, you fail your own cause.
(moderated)
Posted by
Eric Glare
on
April 14, 2015 15:28
Editor Comment:
The worst kind of activists, Eric, are the ones who blame the media. I don't have the time to respond point by point to your wasteful diatribe. Misplaced, silly, useless . . . try offering solutions. Try getting it right for once.
Another elephant at Nikki Beach Club resort has also been targeted by the broader campaign and they have responded saying "we will stop granting the requests for elephants at Nikki Beach Phuket. The Nikki Beach family will never stand for the mistreatment of animals[Telegraph, 31 March 2015]". Yet this story is absent from your account but instead we are told multiple times that petitioners are misplacing their energy. It just doesn't seem plausible that the elephants are not being abused because of the 'sensitivity' of the reporting.
Posted by
Eric Glare
on
April 14, 2015 17:08
Editor Comment:
If you wish to continue to attack our coverage, go right ahead. But if you take the trouble to do a search, you will find the Nikki Beach story fully covered. There is no link between the two campaigns. You will also find we have a track record on all types of animal abuse in the region. The difference between the Nikki beach case and the Nadia case is that Nikki Beach is an international brand, easily unsettled by bad publicity. The resort where Nadia was living is Thai-owned and they have done nothing wrong, so the reaction is different. You and your fellow campaigners seem to be pleased about small victories. I think you are wasting your time. The sad fact is Nadia may well be worse off because of this misdirected campaign. Let's leave it at that, shall we?
the elephants in Phuket are not wild elephants, they are domestic elephants and their descendants previously mainly used for logging and ceremonial purposes
they are no longer used for logging so who is going to look after and feed them.
As long as they are looked after properly I don't see the problem with them being used in the tourist trade, what would happen to them if they could not be used for this purpose
Any one volunteering their time and money to keep one as a pet the same as all the other pets people keep
Posted by
peter allen
on
April 14, 2015 17:53
Please release her. Tourists do not want to see unhappy animals!
Posted by
simone grant
on
April 14, 2015 19:28
Editor Comment:
We don't have her. Don't waste your time asking us. Do some research, please.
I am appalled by the editor's comments on this site. How dare you talk to people like that when they are only trying to make a difference for a life in need of saving.
Yes there are many problems in Thailand that need addressing. However, many more people are likely to fight for human rights (completely understandable) and that leaves animals with no one to fight for them. There shouldn't be an issue if a minority of us want to stand up for what WE feel is urgent. It's not a crime to feel something. Neither were we being aggressive towards you.
If you can't handle people's opinions you shouldn't be a journalist.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
April 14, 2015 21:19
Editor Comment:
'Nadia' needs ''saving,'' right? What I am suggesting, nameless, is that you come up with a strategy that works. Bumbling around with petitions directed at resorts that don't own elephants is a recipe for failure. If you are going to solicit signatures, why not first have a plan? Too hard?
By the way it would be in your best interest to let the owners know that change is happening and will happen whether they like it or not. If they don't go with the flow they will be out of business soon. Travel agencies, hotels,airlines ect are all starting to avoid this kind of bad publicity and tourist will not be part of any type of abuse. So here are some ideas: create a program to walk with the elephant not ride her, feed the elephant, watch the elephant be elephants, any interaction that is kinder and more compassionate. This way they will not lose their business and will be part of this change.
By the I do have a name you're just not worth sharing it with. Try to relax you are going to give yourself a heart attack. Write those articles of what you claim is so important, why keep waisting your time in this??
Posted by
Anonymous
on
April 14, 2015 22:07
Editor Comment:
Funny how activists are so shy and think that words from nameless people can change the world. Threats don't usually work. The problem is, you don't know whether Nadia is now worse off because of your actions.
its simple .... elephants are not ours to use in any way they should be free
Posted by
Anonymous
on
April 15, 2015 02:19
Editor Comment:
And what is the plan?
It matters not who owns the elephant, the simple fact is that a social animal is alone and being exploited. You journalists are defending the indefensible. More power to the petitioners. You should be working to end cruelty to all Thai elephants regardless of whether some elephants are treated worse than Nadia. Thailand has many attractive assets for visitors, so it is totally unecessary to exploit animals for entertainment.
Posted by
John Blair
on
April 15, 2015 05:19
Editor Comment:
We're not defending anything, merely saying that activists will waste a lot of time without a strategy. This petition assumed the resort owned the elephant: wrong. There is now no way of knowing whether 'Nadia' is better off or worse off. A dollar from each of 65,000 petitioners would buy a lot of elephant. A well-researched plan would be a good idea.
I cannot think of any fate crueler for baby elephants. In the wild, females live in family groups ALL THEIR LIVES. Leave it to humans to screw that up for these amazing animals. SHAME ON THE FAMILIES THAT HAVE STOLEN THESE BABIES!!!
Posted by
suzanne
on
April 15, 2015 06:30
Editor Comment:
Have you visited an abattoir lately, suzanne? Many animals are not treated well.
Sounds like a cover-up and Nadia is still hostage to vile and cruel treatment. Changing her name and moving her does not equate to saving her from cruel and barbaric treatment.
Posted by
Nancy Moore
on
April 15, 2015 06:54
Editor Comment:
Hello Nancy . . . thanks for using your real name . . . the elephant moved because of pressure from activists. As we have said, if all 65,000 signatories each put in a dollar, they could buy 10 or 20 Nadias.
I saw Choojai last year. I personally did not take part in any sort of animal touristing whilst in Thailand. It seems I am the anomaly. The problem is that people are willing to pay for a photo or ride or show that causes some varying amount of animal cruelty and exploitation. I doubt many Russians share my sentiment and see 20 baht for a photo with a baby elephant kissing them as great value, so the cycle continues. I guess instead of white knighting poor care of a single elephant the answer would be to donate to ecofriendly Elephant Sanctuary's.
Posted by
Jon
on
April 15, 2015 10:57
Editor Comment:
An advertising campaign in the Thai media would not be wasted money.
(moderated)
Posted by
BO
on
April 15, 2015 15:29
Editor Comment:
What's unprofessional, BO, are activists without a plan.
To everyone who has taken the time to sign this petition to try & help Nadia, good on you all. But I'm sure, most of you will be aware of how corrupt the Thai officials are (& obviously this 'editor' is included). He can't see the problem with Nadia. As the elephant is the national animal of their country, don't you find it absurd that there are none of them living free?? At least these smart animals have the sense to trample their handlers to death, when they get the chance. Editor, please don't bother to respond. You are the only uneducated moron in this forum!!! And as the 'editor' you really should be able to take criticism much better...as I'm sure you'd cop it ALL the time!!!
Posted by
Anna
on
April 17, 2015 12:34
Editor Comment:
Ah, so now we're all corrupt. What a self-righteous ninny you are, Anna. Do you think it's a good idea to run campaigns and to encourage people to sign up to ''save elephants'' when there's no chance of success? And then to blame innocent bystanders? Your mind seems to be short of logic and the ability to analyse. Elephants, sadly, have no hope of achieving freedom with you working on their behalf.
Dear Mr Tarnsirisin, Mr Morison and all who have written here. I have read, with interest, all your comments, and I come away with one clear message. Whilst I adore elephants (and all creatures) and passionately wish to see them treated in the very best way possible, I ultimately agree with the Editors' argument that it is vital for activists to have a well thought out strategy and not just act on impulse - however heartfelt and well meaning it may be. I too witnessed Choojai at work outside Dino Park restaurant and was deeply saddened by the life she was leading. I also witnessed many elephants at trekking venues. Whilst ultimately Choojai would likely have ended up at one of these trekking venues as she grew, the reality is that the change.org petition has only succeeded in forcing her into this life earlier than she would have been. Her life, however sad, at Dino Park was probably better than it is now. So what has the petition actually achieve for her? It only takes a quick visit to Trip Advisor to read the reports on Seaview Elephant Camp to know that Choojai is certainly no better off. When campaigning for the better treatment of elephants, we must also consider that the dream of all elephants suddenly being freed to live in perfect bliss in sanctuaries is simply not achievable. Many Thai people rely on these creatures for their livelihood. Education is the key. Firstly we need to educate ourselves before we try to impose our western ideals on Thai culture and practices. We need to educate tourists about the cruel methods used to train elephants and encourage them to talk to Thai operators and convince them that we would rather just walk with their animals and would be happy to pay to just witness them in a more natural setting. Not least, we need to inform the Thai government that continuation of these practices are not in the best interests of the Thai culture. All of this will take time, careful consideration and above all patience. There are many wonderful campaigners out there who are already doing all of this. I personally plan to visit Phuket again next year and spend some time visiting sanctuaries, talking to mahouts and tourism operators and trying to gain a greater understanding of this whole situation before I start actively campaigning on behalf of that wonderful creature, the Elephant.
Posted by
Suzi
on
April 18, 2015 09:15
Editor Comment:
Hello Suzi, I've written an update to a fresh article in which the activists are still keen only to ''free'' Nadia. Glad you see it clearly.
I love how the (nameless) editor keeps complaining about the nameless commentors. Pot meet kettle?!
A lot has been said already but I wanted to add to someone's comment claiming that Thai elephants are 'domesticated' elephants. The fact is that no such thing exists. Captive elephants are not domesticated. Elephants have not and will never become a species that we have domesticated. Only handful of species have. Not elephants.
Another thing I wanted to point out to the aggressive and confrontational 'editors' is that recently one of, if not the biggest circus who has for years exploited countless elephants while fighting any change in their practices, has recently announced they would be ending their use of elephants completely by 2018 (I believe). Another circus announced the same shortly after. Animal activists have been fighting for many years without any real success. But clearly it was working and it was successful over the long run. It was just a matter of people's minds and attitudes changing over time and eventually resulted in enough pressure on the circus owners to make the decision. Just look how SeaWorld is tanking and how public opinion has shifted and attitudes are changing. Having a nasty, aggressive attitude is really never going to help anyone. Not the elephants, not people. And it makes you unbelievably unpleasant!
Posted by
Annabelle
on
April 18, 2015 15:49
Editor Comment:
The name of the editor of this site is widely known but the title is what counts. I would be a walking ego to want my name repeated over and over again the way that the word Editor has to be repeated. Sorry Annabelle, what is your full name?
I am not aggressive or confrontational by nature but I am certainly prepared to challenge the fabricated beliefs of zealots and those who are just plain wrong. There's a sanctimoniousness that comes with mass hysteria. Many people who support animal rights causes do so without being able to explain why. Their endorsement is misused in cases like this, where the rationale, strategies and objectives are all plain wrong. I too want the elephants to be treated well and a sensible strategy to do that would be great. Indeed, circuses are ceasing to use animals and dolphins do not deserve their fate at Seaworld. If you think anything I've said in this thread is ''nasty'' or aggressive,'' (oooh, there are words and phrases I've used including zealot, self-opinionated and sanctimonious) then it's because you have problems with being challenged. Sorry. I do it every day. As we've never met, your judgement about me is just as cock-eyed as your opinion about some aspects of this misbegotten, foolish campaign.
Despicable to make animals work to support you why don't you and your wife get jobs
Posted by
cheryl campos
on
April 21, 2015 17:48
Editor Comment:
Are you the zealot nominated to prove the foolishness and lack of brain-power of the entire herd? Or does it come naturally?
"Animal activists have been fighting for years without any real success. But clearly it was working and was successful over the long run"
Interesting oxymoron!
Posted by
Mr M Anowar
on
April 21, 2015 19:00
Of course it's a paradox, I must be the one lacking oxygen
Posted by
Mr M Anowar
on
April 21, 2015 19:17
Release this lovely animals please
Posted by
Lubna abdullah
on
September 30, 2015 14:28
Editor Comment:
You've missed a few developments, Lubna. The young elephant never did belong to the resort and there are scores of elephants working in tourism on Phuket. To call for one to be released is not going to work.
|
Thursday November 14, 2024
FOLLOW PHUKETWAN
|
"Animal lovers should in future perhaps adopt a strategy for dealing with the issue effectively rather than target more ''Nadias'' where their energy is misplaced . . . and likely to be wasted" - Ed,
factually incorrect as now the baby elephant is with other elephants as any intelligent animal should be especially elephants which are social based even when adult, especially females and she is hopefully not being exploited. AM you often attack your reader's comments and now this trait that you seem to be addicted to as clearly you cannot stop attacking them is seeping into your journalism.
Posted by Welcome To Paradise on April 8, 2015 11:34
Editor Comment:
There are no other registered elephants at the Seaview camp so, regrettably, you continue to make foolish assumptions. If there are unregistered elephants at the camp, that's an indication of the level of care and concern there.
My journalism is none of your business.