Guest guest Posted January 25, 2004 Report Share Posted January 25, 2004 READ HERE HEAVY SARCASM: Sure, what's wrong with sending 3 silly chimps to China - especially if those 3 chimps had already endured hell and were finally recovering from their ordeal through the amazing good work of hard-working Ugandan conservationists?? Send them to a foreign country - and send some of those cute Ugandan children too - there's plenty of them and if it makes the Chinese happy and willing to give Uganda more money, what's the harm??? *********** To make this a race issue is absurd and just shows someone is feeling a little defensive about a decision they can't really justify or support. Uganda's a leader in conservation and while there are many 'whites', I'm most impressed with the UGANDAN conservationists themselves, and their commitment to their unique and endangered wildlife. I used to tell people to look at Uganda as an wonderful and proud example of Africans taking care of their own, so John Nagenda's attitude comes out of the blue and is disappointing, to say the least. I've travelled to Uganda as far back as 1971 and it's the PEOPLE of Uganda who most impressed me. Those people realizing selling off their natural heritage for short term profit isn't the way to go ... Sigh. Jane Dewar - " Shirley McGreal " <smcgreal <aapn > Sunday, January 25, 2004 2:07 PM China chimp deal > The New Vision, Kampala, Uganda, 24 January 2004 > > Note: John Nagenda is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Uganda > Wildlife Authority > > ONE MAN'S WEEK: UWA has considered the fate of the chimps > > By John Nagenda > > The Uganda Wildlife Authority has come under considerable small-arms fire > through its decision to gift three chimpanzees to the Chinese people. > Expect the noise to get louder. You might laugh that among the attackers is > the Jane Goodall Institute, who brought into our country a diseased > chimpanzee (or possibly three) last year from Tanzania. > The consequences could have proved disastrous to our wildlife population. > As it was, a man was savaged by one of the animals, losing body parts, and > the people of Entebbe went in fear of their lives before the chimps were > rounded up and put down. It makes you chary of taking just any advice, but > people love giving it! > On this chimp saga there has been a flood from the liberal (and some not > so liberal) white community who think it their right to lecture the rest of us. > Even when their advice is not erroneous or malicious; what sticks in the > craw is attitudinal, and often insulting. Indeed in meeting a trio of these > in my UWA office they drove usually mild Executive Director Arthur Mugisha > to exclaim, " Why don't you give advice to Africans and let them make their > own decisions? " Precisely! What's all this fuss about anyhow? > As the Vision put it on their front page article, " Chimps to China " : " The > Ministry of Tourism, Wildlife and Antiquities (probably they meant the > Ministry of Tourism, Trade and Industry) is to export three chimpanzees to > China by March 2004. " False, no date has been finalised. > Then wrote, " The proposal could lead to fears that Uganda's name as a > protector of great apes could be tarnished with a consequent loss of to " to > tourism and donor funding. " Reach me my puke bowl, Beulah! How would " loss > of tourism and donor funding " follow the export of three chimps to China? > This is the line prepared by our advice givers, including one who went as > far as to say that his organisation would recommend the stopping of funding > to Uganda. Poor soul, he would prove the one short of funds for his > research. But this line is swallowed hook line and sinker by the sometimes > silly Vision! > And how would the fund stoppage have benefited the remaining chimps after > the three had gone? As for the loss of tourists, which is plainly absurd, > were that to be the case I suppose out of 1.3 billion Chinese we might find > replacements? > The truth is that the Chinese asked for some of our chimps and behold we > found their wish good; but told them there would be many conditions to be > met before this could happen. > For example, what would be the conditions under which the animals lived? > We were told a new facility would be built. We would inspect this. Were the > chimps to be used for scientific research? No. We will also ask, following > what purports to be new evidence received on Chongsa Zoo this Wednesday, > whether the chimps will be trained for entertainment. We would never agree > to them being treated like this. UWA appointed a committee to look into all > this. It is still sitting. > Others wonder why send these animals to China at all? But the world > belongs to us all, as we remind donors when they puff their chests. Share > what you have. Why not three chimps to China? Besides, China has shared > with us, including financially. We may be poorer than some, but our Ugandan > hearts are rich. You do something for me, I'll do likewise, to my best. > Three chimps! It is a small matter in all conscience. If conditions are > fulfiled to Ugandan satisfaction, it shall be done. > > > For more information on Asian animal issues, please use the search feature on the AAPN website: http://www.aapn.org/ or search the list archives at: aapn > Please feel free to send any relevant news or comments to the list at aapn > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2004 Report Share Posted January 25, 2004 The New Vision, Kampala, Uganda, 24 January 2004 Note: John Nagenda is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Uganda Wildlife Authority ONE MAN'S WEEK: UWA has considered the fate of the chimps By John Nagenda The Uganda Wildlife Authority has come under considerable small-arms fire through its decision to gift three chimpanzees to the Chinese people. Expect the noise to get louder. You might laugh that among the attackers is the Jane Goodall Institute, who brought into our country a diseased chimpanzee (or possibly three) last year from Tanzania. The consequences could have proved disastrous to our wildlife population. As it was, a man was savaged by one of the animals, losing body parts, and the people of Entebbe went in fear of their lives before the chimps were rounded up and put down. It makes you chary of taking just any advice, but people love giving it! On this chimp saga there has been a flood from the liberal (and some not so liberal) white community who think it their right to lecture the rest of us. Even when their advice is not erroneous or malicious; what sticks in the craw is attitudinal, and often insulting. Indeed in meeting a trio of these in my UWA office they drove usually mild Executive Director Arthur Mugisha to exclaim, " Why don't you give advice to Africans and let them make their own decisions? " Precisely! What's all this fuss about anyhow? As the Vision put it on their front page article, " Chimps to China " : " The Ministry of Tourism, Wildlife and Antiquities (probably they meant the Ministry of Tourism, Trade and Industry) is to export three chimpanzees to China by March 2004. " False, no date has been finalised. Then wrote, " The proposal could lead to fears that Uganda's name as a protector of great apes could be tarnished with a consequent loss of to " to tourism and donor funding. " Reach me my puke bowl, Beulah! How would " loss of tourism and donor funding " follow the export of three chimps to China? This is the line prepared by our advice givers, including one who went as far as to say that his organisation would recommend the stopping of funding to Uganda. Poor soul, he would prove the one short of funds for his research. But this line is swallowed hook line and sinker by the sometimes silly Vision! And how would the fund stoppage have benefited the remaining chimps after the three had gone? As for the loss of tourists, which is plainly absurd, were that to be the case I suppose out of 1.3 billion Chinese we might find replacements? The truth is that the Chinese asked for some of our chimps and behold we found their wish good; but told them there would be many conditions to be met before this could happen. For example, what would be the conditions under which the animals lived? We were told a new facility would be built. We would inspect this. Were the chimps to be used for scientific research? No. We will also ask, following what purports to be new evidence received on Chongsa Zoo this Wednesday, whether the chimps will be trained for entertainment. We would never agree to them being treated like this. UWA appointed a committee to look into all this. It is still sitting. Others wonder why send these animals to China at all? But the world belongs to us all, as we remind donors when they puff their chests. Share what you have. Why not three chimps to China? Besides, China has shared with us, including financially. We may be poorer than some, but our Ugandan hearts are rich. You do something for me, I'll do likewise, to my best. Three chimps! It is a small matter in all conscience. If conditions are fulfiled to Ugandan satisfaction, it shall be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.