khunwilko - if you had actually read his or her long-winded post...

The government brought about the end of logging.
Th will of the people is often secondary in Thailand to the whim of the government.
In this case it was a policy to save the remaining forests in Thailand. Which to some degree it has. It is very unlikely that private enterprise would have done that..in fact business and commerce are still the main threats to habitat in Thailand.
The maintenance and welfare of captive elephants is a massive task and requires a lot of land...This is available but mostly owned by government or crown....in this scenario trying to get private enterprise is not a viable alternative as demonstrated by the piecemeal and chaotic situation that currently prevails in Thailand.
Furthermore it is government that needs to introduce "humane" laws that at present are non existent in Thailand....I can't see how the Thai private sector can be expected willingly to execute this.

Thursday."As I wrote above, it is a matter of supply and demand"
What you at about tourists is true but the situation is more complicated by the current nature of the industry.
It is certainly true that in other countries it has been shown that tourists will still pay to see elephants in more natural circumstances....but in order to achieve this, the multitude of relatively small businesses in the industry need to be replaced by a national policy of managing the nation's stock of captive elephants.

Thursday."As I wrote above, it is a matter of supply and demand"
What you at about tourists is true but the situation is more complicated by the current nature of the industry.
It is certainly true that in other countries it has been shown that tourists will still pay to see elephants in more natural circumstances....but in order to achieve this, the multitude of relatively small businesses in the industry need to be replaced by a national policy of managing the nation's stock of captive elephants.
At present everyone an anyone can jump on the elephant bandwagon claim all sorts of green, conservationist and welfare credentials....there is no effective official system to check this and no restrictions on who can own elephants set up in business.

So the laws should be strengthened to the point where it is no longer viable to abuse the elephants in any way whatsoever, but I draw the line with government financing of sanctuaries, which is a costly and an impractical short term solution. As you say, "The maintenance and welfare of captive elephants is a massive task and requires a lot of land", so let this generation continue as is and plan for the future. That is my suggested solution.

Even if there weren’t already enough unnecessary insults on this thread, I’m sure I didn’t need to read an additional attack that wasn’t even relevant. Sigh. But again, illuminating.

In contrast, I find the continued discussion of the topic to be interesting and informative. I suspect that most of us have already drawn our own personal lines on this issue, but if the tone doesn’t turn people away, there is a wealth of information here to help others formulate an opinion, or at least formulate some questions.

Thank you jka. So true and yes the discussion is much better. I will continue to follow and have learned a lot.

The solution should be to keep captive elephants in conditions that are as near as possibly natural.
The continuing involvement of unregulated private companies means that resources are fragmented and due to profitability the continued breeding poaching and smuggling of elephants to satisfy the demand...and of course the promulgation of false claims by companies to attract customers as well as the proliferation of forcing animals into unnatural behaviours.
There are hardly any true sanctuaries in Thailand and even less that have enough space to house herds of normal size.
Thailand has about 4 times as many captive or show elephants than the rest of Asia put together and the vast majority are kept in cruel, stressful and inadequate circumstances.....I would say it is morally unacceptable to support this situation and suggest it should continue "as is".

The solution should be to keep captive elephants in conditions that are as near as possibly natural.
The continuing involvement of unregulated private companies means that resources are fragmented and due to profitability, continue breeding poaching and smuggling of elephants to satisfy the demand...and of course they promulgate false claims to attract customers as well as encouraging the proliferation of forcing animals into unnatural behaviours.
There are hardly any true sanctuaries in Thailand and even less that have enough space to house herds of normal size.
Thailand has about 4 times as many captive or show elephants than the rest of Asia put together and the vast majority are kept in cruel, stressful and inadequate circumstances.....I would say it is morally unacceptable to support this situation and suggest it should continue "as is".

Well at least we can both agree that the industry is sorely in need of regulation. That is the only way to bring about change and plan for the future. Suggesting that a few posters on this board refrain from going to these camps is not going to solve anything...

It may not solve the larger issue but the raising of awareness about it can’t hurt either. I will take that forward.

Craig I see you are from Connecticut. I hope you are not getting slammed by the weather. I also saw your next trip is NZ. We were there last month on a cruise, our first time. It’s beautiful indeed.

I don't think you'll find me suggesting people don't go...I believe that if they understand the situation they either won't go or if they do they will have had their eyes opened and be much more aware of the abuse.

I also think that a quick glance around any travel forum will show you that there is a groundswell of opinion that is critical of any form of animal abuse and exploitation and whereas one wouldn't expect people to plead guilty left right and centre, I think a lot of people who read forums are now far more critical of what they do with their hard earned holiday money .....

like it or not Fodors forum and others like it are part of the social media and this is now one of the main ways opinions information and news are disseminated.

"Well at least we can both agree that the industry is sorely in need of regulation. " - yes Craig and that requires government action.

Yes, khun - this is a situation where government can have a significant role.

Jacketwatch - going to NZ next month. Working from home today during the snow storm...

Good for you. Stay in.

One of the problems for people visiting any elephant camp, is they cannot possible see what goes on behind the scenes.

Wildlife Friends of Thailand have released this video of the treatment received by an elderly elephant blind in one eye that has to carry people every day.


https://www.facebook.com/WildlifeFri...4988348637657/

My God. Horrible.

Thank you for sharing that.

You are certainly Uber aware of these abuses. Now I am too.

Larry.

Just curious if the elephant activists here consider the Anantara Elephant Camp in the Golden Triangle area ethical. It's run by John Roberts, leading elephant conservationalist. We chose it in '07 (before it was insanely expensive) because it seemed the most humane place to visit at the time - focus on conservation, no exploitive circus acts, but it did include the riding of elephants.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...olden-triangle

I think that the above post has a couple of flaws - one the use of the phrase "elephant activist" the word "conservationalist" (is there such a word?) and secondly trying to ask lay people what they think of a particular establishment as if they are some kind of overseers of the elephant industry.

There are criteria for judging the treatment of animals in tourist attractions that are readily available on the net or in libraries.

It has long been my contention that before visiting or supporting any wildlife attraction people should educate themselves of the issues. They are then in a better position to make an informed decision about any place they might visit.

I'd draw you attention again to the statement by the Born Free Foundation "“The average tourist doesn’t have the capacity to identify cruelty to animals because sometimes that cruelty is not overt.”


The last four paragraphs from the article referred to above (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...olden-triangle) are the most significant....here's just one....
"A 2010 study by the University of Oxford’s Wildlife Conservation Research Unit exposed Thai elephant camps as some of the travel industry’s most irresponsible businesses—not only for their poor treatment of the animals on their premises but also for encouraging locals to kidnap calves, some less than a year old, from their mothers and force them into submission."


So Crosscheck, I'd suggest that you apply the same theories to any place you may have visited. and then you'll be in a better position to form an opinion.