Endangered species, protection, New Facebook

 

The current practice of reporting the monetary value of seized and seized wildlife items can increase the news of an article if it is not fully sensational – but it also draws the attention of potential criminals.

 

The tragic consequences of disclosing the information are to see everyone. The most obvious example will reveal the identity of the victim of crime. In a recent example of abusive defamation for privacy, the Delhi High Court imposed a fine of Rs 10 lakh on 11 media houses to reveal the identity of the Kathua rape victim. The bench of Acting Chief Justice Geeta Mittal and Justice C. Hari Shankar noted that on the freedom of expression we have to “fix our limits”. Another area of reporting where it is rational is the current practice of evaluating wildlife or wildlife products traded illegally in news articles. This practice can reach unknowable and destructive results for India’s incredible natural heritage.

Wild animals such as tigers, leopards, elephants, Langurs, geckos, star turtles, snakes and countless others are regularly stuck or trapped; then, to meet the demand of the secret wildlife business was crushed or survived in the hazardous situations. The quantity is shocking. For example, 450 species of birds have been documented in bird’s trade by Rajat Bhargava, a scientist from the Bombay Natural History Society. Plants and trees (for example, Lal Sandan, commonly known as Red Sanders) are also traded illegally. Live animals, skins, bones, other animal body parts, shells, trees and plants logs are some “products” in this business. Occasionally, enforcement agencies include merchants and seize products. Coverage of such visits should be taken into account in the news reports that animals and plants are often threatened with extinction, not only those items which can only be reported in terms of monetary value.

A cursory Internet search shows that news articles regularly report the value of the seized wildlife products, either in mind-in your face’s title or content. These reports describe wildlife “products” in terms of their monetary value but leave other important information like the threat of animals and the impact of such hunting on their population. Rather than being alive, emphasizing their value as an object has two serious harmful effects. First of all, it suggests that once they change into “products”, then wildlife has only value after death. Second, by putting a specific value on these “products”, it advertises the notion that dead animals are considered to be valuable and expensive products.

Why report about the tiger skin price? Is the news reaching viewers who will respond to animals only when they are attached to a price tag? Do publications have an extensive moral responsibility to prevent dangerous wild animals and plants from being thought of only objects? Who is assisted by such a report?

Keeping this exercise in mind, the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB), established the statutory multi-agency body to deal with organized wildlife crime in India issued a consultation in 2012. Advisor (No. 10-27 / WCCB / 2012/3874 dated August 9, 2012) Enforcement agencies were not directed to assign the monetary value to seize wildlife or wildlife products. The advisor cautions that the present practice of allocating such values can actually promote hunting and illegal wildlife trade, and states that for the first time some wildlife offenders have committed a crime after reading the newspaper report of the prices of wildlife products. Taken for

is it possible that only the mention of the monetary value of some wildlife “product” can have an unknown negative effect on the animal or plant? Think of the current Additional Chief Conservator of Shekhar Kumar Nruj, the forest of Tamil Nadu (Project Tiger) Explaining that the WCCB consultant was necessary, he agrees that the evaluation of wildlife products is problematic. Describing his vast experience as a former country head of traffic India, an organization dealing with illegal wildlife trade, he did not leave any words: “To woo youth [to commit wildlife crime] is very easy.” Citing the powerful combination of money, poor-ground enforcement and weak system of prevention, he also said that “anyone will be craved [to commit wildlife crime].”

As a follow-up advisor, WCCB is making enforcement agencies vulnerable. TLOTMA Verma, Additional Director of the WCCCC, said, “WCCB does not allocate all monetary values to seize wildlife or wildlife products in all inter-agency coordination meetings held at different places in the country. [Two] Fields on this aspect Make agencies responsive. “

While WCCB is focusing on enforcement agencies to make sensitive, Niraj has confirmed the need to make the media vulnerable. The current practice of reporting the monetary value of seized and seized wildlife items can increase the precaution of the article if it is not completely sensationalized. However, this practice does not help in the enforcement efforts or the killing of animals or smuggling for business.

Instead, there is a fire in the value of seizing wildlife products. Focusing on the quantity of seized objects (skins, bones, scales, logs, etc.) can help to establish the scale of the problem. The question can help in getting public support for conservation, including information about the endangered species of species and the impact of hunting or collection on its population. And for fictitious punishments and jail terms for hunting wild animals in news articles, it can prevent criminals for the first time.


Fortunately, this change in the report is already going on. Some news reports (for example, see this, this and this) have reduced the trend about illegal wildlife trade and have not listed the monetary values of seized wildlife products. Instead, they provide information about the threat of animal threats, fines for hunting wild animals and conditions of the prison, pre-determined conviction, number of killed animals etc. An exception is maintained instead of becoming this type of reporting standard practice.

Media is undoubtedly a very important stakeholder in protecting India’s natural heritage. In the media report, the cost of illegal wildlife products is unfavorable due to wildlife protection and enforcement. Instead, news reports will help India’s extinct wildlife, including other relevant information.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here