Religious Leaders Called to Protect Elephants

Elephant and woman - Gregory Colbert
The diameter of the awareness of the illegal trade in wildlife is increasing steadily beyond conservation circles.  I see hope in how the general public knows more thoroughly the costs of human desire on individuals, species, and habitats.

For instance I reported in November about wildlife trafficking, highlighting the uptick of massacred elephants killed for their ivory, which is largely used for religious artifacts in Asia.  A few weeks ago a family of eleven elephants were murdered in Kenya, including a two month old baby.  “We have not lost as many elephants in a single incident since the early 1980s,” said Patrick Omondi, head of the elephant programme at the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS). “This is a clear signal that things are getting worse.  “A kilogramme of ivory can fetch up to $2,500 in the black market, money that comes back to fund extremely organized gangs with sophisticated weapons.”

How is there hope when things are getting worse, with powerful organized crime involved?

Well criminals aren’t the only ones organizing. The Religion and Conservation Research Collaborative of the Society of Conservation Biology released a statement, “On the Use of Ivory for Religious Objects.”  Two of the positions in the statement charge religious leaders with the responsibility to use their influence to improve the well being of elephants and humans alike.

Religious leaders have the responsibility and influence to reorient their followers on the procurement and use of religious artifacts made from the ivory of African elephants, and the precarious life of the humans who protect them.

 Religion and conservation biology can be complementary in reaching the best possible outcome when religious faith is respected, religious communities are open to understanding the problems pertaining to the use of ivory, and religious leaders are willing to prompt a change in attitudes and practices that ensure the survival of the African elephant and the integrity of our planetary future.

Elephants with monks - Gregory Colbert

Religious leaders have such widespread influence because “there is a pervasive spread of environmental consciousness within approximately 90% of the global population that claims affiliation with the world religions.”

I dream of a world where every leader, no matter of what organization or movement, speaks passionately of the beauty and tragedy of this world, and the human response to preserve what we can and guard the well being of all.

The elephant in the room is that we are far from doing so.

Elephants with children

 

To help make room for the elephants on this planet, including knowing more and following the statement’s recommendations, go here.

Share

Releasing Wildlife as a Spiritual Practice

Audubon’s Shearwater (Photo by Dominic Sherony)

 

Many people are involved in rescue and rehabilitation of wildlife, such as after the Gulf Oil Spill a few years ago, and the current wave of shearwater rescues on Florida beaches.  This work can feel good for there is nothing like seeing a bird take wing after you have spent hours of your time offering care and healing.  In some ways, we humans too are healed when we care for others, and our spirits rise with the birds as they soar away.  I know that the group with whom I work in Honduras deeply connects with the flock of 15 released scarlet macaws that were rescued from the illegal pet trade and now are flying free over their village.

Released Scarlet Macaw Flying Over Village (photo by Hector Reyes)

Releasing wildlife clearly connects to spirituality in a practice known as “merit release.”  Practiced by Buddhists largely in Asia, this practice is “believed to me the most powerful means of attaining spiritual merit.”  Because it is so popular, millions of birds and animals are released each year as part of a large commercial trade. In Hong Kong, for instance, one study found that 680,000 – 1,050,000 birds were released each year.

At first glance, this sounds wonderful: So many birds are getting the chance to live in the wild after being held in cages!  There are, however, problems.  The animals are usually captured from the wild, often housed and managed inadequately and inhumanely, and when released, are not able to survive.  Hunters too recapture many of the animals only to resell them again.  Trapping so many wild animals endangers their numbers in the wild and releasing them risks introducing disease from the captive birds to wild populations and also introducing non native species which can compete with native species.  A study released just this week studied released birds in Cambodia and found that 10% were infected with avian flu virus, and lower numbers of birds also had Chlamydophila psittaci and Mycobacterium genavense. All these can also infect humans.

Buddhist Releasing a Lobster for Merit

Because this practice poses such a potential risk to biodiversity and animal well being, the Religion and Conservation Biology Working Group of the Society of Conservation Biology recently released a policy statement regarding merit release.  As a member of this working group, I learned more than I contributed about this issue and what might be done to ease suffering and protect wildlife.  The statement calls on religious leaders and adherents to look for sustainable methods of release that also meet conservation goals.  We deliberated about the delicacy of this policy statement and how complex is the social terrain when an outside group seeks to change religious practices and organizations.  To mitigate any multicultural goofs, we are undertaking a process of dialog, education, invitation, collaboration, and partnership with religious leaders as opposed to dictating “what should be done.”

Instead we ask, “What could be done?”  I ask the same of myself, and of you.  What could be done about biodiversity in your own area, and about caring for wildlife at both the species and individual level?  Whatever you decide to do, it will gain you merit in the eyes of our transspecies communities and hopefully inspirit others to follow your example.

Share

Trithing

Atlantic Puffin (photo by Erik Christensen)

 

In several religious traditions there are guidelines for the percentage of your resources you set aside for others. Christians and  some other groups “tithe” which means giving 10% of your income to the church.  In the Hebrew scripture there is “jubilee” where every 50 years you let farm land lie fallow, free your servants from their bonds, and returning all land to the original owners or their heirs.  Muslims have as one of the five pillars of the religion to give to charity in the amount of 2.5% of their wealth.

I wonder if these percentages are too low.

Here’s why I think so.

A recent study report in Science that the number of fledglings per breeding pair of sea birds started to decline when the abundance of forage fish dropped below one-third of the maximum observed amount.  Which sea birds you might ask?  The study looked at 14 seabirds from seven ecosystems around the world. That’s a pretty consistent finding:  leave one third of the fishes for the birds.

What if we cut back 1/3rd on all we consumed (that is, those who have disposable income and resources beyond the minimum to survive) or increased the way we giving by 1/3rd?     What would the world look like if we all consumed 1/3rd less Coke Zero or other processed beverages?   Used 1/3 less high metal technological gadgets? Used our cars 1/3rd less than we do know?  Spent 1/3rd more of our free time being grateful for the beauty around us?

I think then that ecosystem vitality would multiply like fishes and loaves.

What could you change by as much as one third?

One part for me, one part for we and one part so that the birds can fly free.

Share