Interesting article.
https://www.ft.com/content/b542e45a-12a7-11ea-a7e6-62bf4f9e548a
Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk
https://www.ft.com/content/b542e45a-12a7-11ea-a7e6-62bf4f9e548a
Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
ParrotGenie said:this article and subsequent requests for donations are disingenuous
Maybe I was a little to harsh and more concentrated on the subject matter "Saving The African grey parrots", then no it will not benefit them in my opinion, especially considering where the funds will be allocated to? "If you are a UK resident and you donate before December 31, the money you give will be matched by the UK government – up to £2m. This fund-matched amount will be used by ZSL projects to help communities in Nepal and Kenya build sustainable livelihoods, escape poverty and protect their wildlife" Which I did mention. Nepal and Kenya neither of which have African Grey Parrots? The article was implying about saving the African Grey Parrot? Yet the donations they were requesting are suppose to go towards helping communities in Nepal and Kenya build sustainable livelihoods, escape poverty and protect their wildlife? It is misleading as the way article was written?ParrotGenie said:this article and subsequent requests for donations are disingenuous
Help me out here. A respected 200 year old charitable Conservation and scientific organization whose mission is wildlife wellbeing and education....
Puts out a request for donations to help wildlife....
And you malign and impugne them as disingenuous??
I think perhaps you may want to clarify your objection, because it would seem you left some important dots unconnected; this logic isn’t flowing.
That pretty much the way I see it. If anything it put them more at risk as poachers/smuggles will end up killing 100's to attempt sneak in a handful.A year ago I was reading a lot about if CITES I is good or not for them and I have a question what is your opinion? The article mentioned it but if something is "more" forbidden doesn't mean more illegal transport? If yes, CITES I is nonsense for grey parrots...
I wouldn’t call that misleading. Seems quite clear to me. The money people donate is being sent for the birds, as promised.
Government match, which has nothing to do with the donors and everything to do with the charity, is going elsewhere.
They are both being quite transparent, and in my opinion clever by killing two birds with one stone, so to speak. I have no problem with it.
I've just read a new article about CAG's and this seems to be right - CITES I doesn't help. Illegal transport still increasesThat pretty much the way I see it. If anything it put them more at risk as poachers/smuggles will end up killing 100's to attempt sneak in a handful.A year ago I was reading a lot about if CITES I is good or not for them and I have a question what is your opinion? The article mentioned it but if something is "more" forbidden doesn't mean more illegal transport? If yes, CITES I is nonsense for grey parrots...
ParrotGenie said:this article and subsequent requests for donations are disingenuous
Help me out here. A respected 200 year old charitable Conservation and scientific organization whose mission is wildlife wellbeing and education....
Puts out a request for donations to help wildlife....
And you malign and impugne them as disingenuous??
I think perhaps you may want to clarify your objection, because it would seem you left some important dots unconnected; this logic isn’t flowing.