Skip to main content

Free Mali, Manila Zoo's Lone Elephant. Inquirer. Editorial. Peter Wallace.


The battle rages on over Mali, the lone elephant at the Manila Zoo. In 1977, she was taken there as a a goodwill gift from Sri Lanka to Imelda Marcos. She was still a child back then. Yes, I refer to animals like they were humans. It is never "it," but always a he or she. Surely, a mind-shift whose time has come. When we relegate animals to a form of "it," we open the door to all sorts of abuse and liberties upon them. "It" makes them subhuman. What an incredible thought---something lower than a human.
Below is my response to an editorial that appeared in a local newspaper in Manila. The writer, obviously, supports the Stay Mali movement as opposed to the Free Mali movement. The former favors extending captivity while the latter favors freedom. We want Mali transferred to a sanctuary in Thailand where she can socialize with other elephants and live in an environment that may not be perfect but closer to reality. She has not been with another elephant for more than thirty years. Her life literally spent in solitary confinement. Mali lives in a concrete enclosure at the Manila Zoo with a leaky faucet for a waterfall and painted trees on the walls for greenery. The zoo officials gave her an old truck tire for a toy, and she ignored it. It is all so pathetic.
============================================
Peter, thanks for your opinion. It should be obvious to you that coming up with realistic solutions is far more difficult than editorializing on the fate of a nonspeaking, long-held captive animal. We can go around in circles discussing compassion and ethics, but seeking real solutions will inevitably have us confront the hard facts, the specifics that no conjecturing will resolve.

For one, there is the matter of space. The zoo covers approximately 5.5 hectares. Maali's enclosure is just a fraction of that area which, by my generous estimation, would come to 100x100 meters. An Asian elephant, in its natural environment, would cover a walking distance of 20-30 miles. And a herd of Asian elephants, living in the wild, would require an estimated roaming area of 30,000 hectares. If renovation is the answer, then the final product should come as close as possible to this ideal.

How would the the city bankroll such an expansive and expensive renovation? How could the city spend so much money on a zoo in the face of other pressing social problems? How? Please show us through the process, the money trail. The city is in a state of penury. You said it yourself.

The Singaporeans are not the answer. Stop pointing at the Singaporeans like they are cavalry on their way to our rescue. Cavalry have been known not to show up, and Estrada has said things that were never true. There are no specifics about the Singaporeans’ offer of a P2 billion renovation , no specifics about their construction plans, and no guaranty that Singaporean investors would invest money on a facility that, by your own description, cannot generate sufficient revenue.

The city cannot provide the proper care and environment for Maali. It’s time to evolve into a higher form of existence where the concepts of compassion and empathy are not incomprehensible but commonplace.

Comments

Ilene said…
This is awesome!

Popular posts from this blog

Philippines. Reporting Animal Cruelty. Emergency Numbers. RA 8485.

Because I belong to an group of animal welfare advocates in the Philippines, I can read the numerous discussions between group members and people who, seems to me, just signed up to make an urgent plea for help. There were two this week who begged for assistance concerning two dogs who were tied up under rain and sun with no food nor water. One was described to be on the verge of a heat stroke. The images that filled my mind disturbed me immensely, but I am also encouraged at the same time. There is a growing number of animal welfare advocates in the Philippines and ordinary citizens are beginning to reject animal cruelty, willing to take personal action against it. Just from this website, I can see from the visitor data that many are seeking information on how to report animal cruelty in the Philippines. You can find my previous post on the subject HERE . Keep in mind that your complaint has legal standing via the Philippine Animal Welfare Act which is also known as the RA 8485 .

Three Members of the Philippine Shooting Team and the Killing of Protected Philippine Wildlife

When a member of the animal or plant kingdom goes extinct, there will be no second chances. Evolution will simply not repeat itself. There are reportedly eighty bird species that are unique to the Philippines and many of them have already made it to the endangered list. And we, to a great extent, have indiscrimate hunting to thank for it. In spite of two national laws protecting Philippine animals, the carnage continues unabated. The killings could occur as arbitrarily as guys getting together for macho time, or as a result of a well-planned hunting trip involving speed boats, bird callers, and camouflaged outfits. Either way, the outcome is the same. Philippine wildlife, our natural treasures, inches closer to a state of irreparable vacancy. Not too long ago, we learned about the Bacolod Air Rifle Club (BARC) whose unbridled killing of Philippine birds and ducks became the subject of an online petition calling for immediate government intervention. My post on that most disturbing c

Movie Oro. Dog Cruelty. Alvin Yapan. Mark Shandii Bacolod. Friends for the Protection of Animals.

Position Statement on Oro The Friends for the Protection of Animals are opposed to the use of any animal for the purposes of entertainment, labor, experimentation, or as captive exhibits. We believe in their natural born rights to freedom and an unencumbered life, rights that are no less valuable or unalienable as our rights as humans. In this light, we condemn the bludgeoning death of a dog, perhaps two as alleged by an insider, for dramatic purposes in the film, Oro. We a bhor the insensitivity of the cast and crew whose apathy to an animal's suffering, coupled with their desire for personal glory and industry recognition, moved us to ponder just how deep can human depravity sink. We question their responsibility to decency and compassion which evidently they heeded to cinematic expediency. Reported responses to the press reveal that there was never any compunction to do so. We consider the killings to be a violation of the Animal Welfare Act which prohibits cruel and exp