Letter from Dr. James Mahoney (5/25/99)

More Information About IPAN Animal Refuge Veterinary Services Education Animal Conditions Project Reports "Loki" the Indian Elephant and related issues How you can help

AN OPEN LETTER

11 Rea Court
Monroe, New York 10950
United States of America

May 25, 1999

To whom it may concern,

I feel compelled to comment on a facsimile written by Mrs. Maneka Gandhi, an advocate for animals and cabinet minister in the former government of India. Her fax, dated April 7 of this year, concerned the plight of a previously wild makhna, a tuskless male elephant, estimated to be between 35 and 40 years of age. The elephant, now known by the name Loki, was captured in mid-July of 1998 by officials of the Forestry Department of Tamil Nadu, because he had been raiding crops and may have even killed people. He was severely injured during his capture and the following approximately 40-kilometer march he was forced to undergo in leg chains over an eight-day period to the Elephant Camp at Mudumalai, where he remains captive to this day.

I became involved with this elephant in December 1998, when I was asked by the India Project for Animals and Nature (IPAN) to go to India to evaluate and help in their program of spay/neutering of dogs, and their veterinary services program which they make available free of charge to the local communities for all animals. It should be noted that IPAN receives the support of the local village and tribal Panchayet, the locally-elected government body. I did not, I must emphasize, expect to become involved with a wounded elephant, although I did view an official video of the maknha’s capture before going to India to assist IPAN in its village and tribal outreach program. I was only one of many asked by IPAN for a professional opinion on how best to address chronic wound management and the long-term care of the elephant. The video of Loki was shown to me for this reason alone, and not as a pretext for some hidden purpose. I feel that IPAN should be commended, not attacked, for their efforts and professionalism. They bothered to seek the advice and help from a broad spectrum of individuals and organizations around the world, and never once did I get the impression of another agenda (except to help the elephant), as has been suggested by Mrs. Gandhi.

Since then a great deal of acrimony and bitter resentment has been created, and I cannot help wondering whether the main subject of the matter -- this innocent creature who should never be judged according to human terms of morality -- has been forgotten.

Mrs. Gandhi has shown great concern for the elephant, and has tried to bring her offices to bear on the subject of his cruel treatment. Yet, I find certain aspects of Mrs. Gandhi’s letter confusing, and even disturbing. She blithely comments, in relation to a recent visit she arranged for one of her staff to see the elephant, " ... I have already dealt with the matter.", as though that was actually the end of the saga. She went on to say that the makhna " .. is free to wander about the elephant camp.", even though I have heard from several reliable, independent sources, knowledgeable in the care of elephants, as well as viewing, myself, video documentation made since Mrs. Gandhi’s report, which clearly shows his "freedom" entailed his dragging a huge, heavy metal "drag-chain," which was attached to one hind limb -- and which he had to drag with every step he took -- and metal shackles on his front legs. Mrs. Gandhi goes on to say, "The major injury (to the elephant) is a bullet wound in the right front leg.", and later, she writes with an obvious note of optimism, "At present the elephant’s body weight is normal."

This latter comment is in sharp contrast to a statement made by Professor Raman Sukumar of the Indian Institute of Science in a letter dated March 12, less than one month earlier, to Mr. Sam Farr, United States Congressman, which said, "Some weight loss is not necessarily bad; it would have also reduced the load on his injured legs." As to the bullet wound of the right leg cited by Mrs. Gandhi, I saw no such injury when I treated Loki intensively in December, 1998. I must be fair here, however. To the cursory observer, it would be all too easy to confuse in one’s mind where each wound was situated, so extensive and severe were they. I found myself having to make careful and detailed written notes of where each wound was situated, and in what anatomical region of the body, in order not to become confused, myself.

Strangely, Mrs. Gandhi strongly condemns the authorities when she writes, "There is no doubt that the elephant was severely injured during capture and terribly ill treated thereafter in a misguided attempt to ‘train’ him.", yet she then concludes, " ... this is actually a case for praise rather than censure."

Mrs. Gandhi goes on to say, "Even though the hue and cry by Deanna Krantz is somewhat misplaced, I am nevertheless reassured by the prompt and emphatic international protest against this cruelty to an elephant." Mrs. Gandhi cannot have it both ways. I know personally that without Ms. Krantz, the field director of IPAN, the outside world would not have even heard of Loki and his cruel treatment.

Most of all, however, I am shocked and deeply saddened by the last paragraph of Mrs. Gandhi’s fax which opened with the sentence, "Finally I WOULD LIKE TO WARN AGAINST INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS LIKE IPAN WHO, THOUGH THEY MEAN WELL, HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO HELP ANIMALS HERE ( i.e., in India) MAINLY BECAUSE OF THEIR OPERATING STYLE (my emphasis)."

Having worked along with IPAN personnel, on-site at their refuge and in their hospital, I know first hand not only what the organization is achieving but also the response to their efforts by the local people. I categorically dispute Mrs. Gandhi’s statement. IPAN offers the only possibility for the spay/neutering of the dog population, thus avoiding the savage periodic roundup of dogs by government authorities and the then unbelievably barbaric killing of these hapless creatures as the only way of controlling their population and spread of disease. IPAN also routinely vaccinates the dogs against rabies, thereby helping to control the spread of this scourge to the human population, as well as to other animals, including wildlife. On top of this, IPAN routinely treats the dogs and cats for mange, another disease which threatens the human populace and wildlife, and provides the only constant veterinary care for animals in an area which covers at least twelve villages, and sometimes goes even further afield (e.g. Ooty and Gudular, and even for animals in the neighboring states of Kerala and Karnataka). I know this to be the fact because, as a veterinarian called in by IPAN as an unpaid volunteer to help, I participated in this program, not only by teaching and assisting in spay/neuters, but also by responding to emergency calls to dogs, calves and goats in the middle of the night. I saw also the compassion and caring of the IPAN staff, all local people I might add, and the response of the villagers and tribals who, themselves, also showed unbelievable compassion for their animals.

I cannot, in all conscience, allow Mrs. Gandhi’s statement to go unchallenged. This good lady must certainly have plucked the idea out of the ether: it could not have emanated from truth and reality. Do we conclude, for example, that ill-treatment of women, or the support of slavery, are acceptable in one part of the world, but not in another, because of cultural differences in social mores? I think not. Why would we then think that the treatment of animals would fall into a different category? I witnessed the beating of Loki (December 9, 1998), I heard his cries, I saw him almost broken! I also treated his wounds, wounds that took between three and 3-1/2 hours each day to treat. I worked with the Forestry department staff, and the IPAN personnel. I saw what started out as distrust and resentment between people develop into a team spirit of pride, as the mahouts, Forestry officials, IPAN workers and myself worked together. I have never felt so proud of the human spirit. Then it all evaporated, fell apart.

I found Mrs. Gandhi’s comment on IPAN’s "eagerness to turn every animal tragedy into a fundraising and self-promoting opportunity.", leading up to her final statement, "We do not market misery in India and do not appreciate those that do so.", unwarranted, hideous and cruel.

I cannot help but try to finish this open letter on a personal note. I have worked with animals and traveled the world for much of my life, yet I cannot bring to mind a more peaceful and beautiful experience than I had at the Refuge in the Nilgiris -- over two-hundred animals, all living in harmony -- 70-odd donkeys, rescued cows and bullocks, pushy ponies who think they own the world, cats, chickens, and a bunch of

character-filled dogs, and goats who think they are dogs -- every single one of them with a desperate story to tell yet now with the prospect for hope and fulfillment -- and the tranquility of the blue mountains in the background, and the gentle voices of the people as they move about the refuge working with the animals, and the big, gentle Nigel that animals seem to implicitly trust .... I would like to think that one day I shall return to this tranquility.

James Mahoney, D.V.M., Ph. D
Veterinary Surgeon and Research Professor
New York University School of Medicine
(Email: rocher@frontiernet.net)