Intellectual Property
Corporate Law
Environmental Law
Land expropriation
Environmental protection
Others
   
 
Animal releases can be bad karma

Animal releases can be bad karma

By Chan Shun-kuei 詹順貴

The Chinese-language magazine China Times Weekly recently published an article by media personality Sisy Chen (陳文茜). In the article, Chen talks about a lawyer who spent NT$5 million (US$164,000) buying 14,000kg of fish from a market and then took the fish to a reservoir where, with a nod to Amitabha, she set the fish free. It was a cathartic act. She had been feeling low and could not sleep without the help of pills, but she experienced a degree of emotional release from her feelings of solitude and heartache even as she released the fish.

The piece is well observed. Chen writes with eloquence and an understanding of how to manipulate emotions. However, her article casts the Buddhist religious practice of releasing animals in an overly positive light that leaves the reader with a false impression.

First, the reservoir already has too many fish and excessive numbers tends to reduce water quality. Would the reservoir, given the intended use of the water, be able to sustain so many fish? I have my doubts.

Second, in September 2004, the Environment and Animal Society of Taiwan (EAST) published a report about the phenomenon of religious groups in Taiwan releasing animals from captivity. The study was started in March 2003 and finished in August 2004, about 18 months in all, followed by a related documentary in November, two months after the report was published.

According to this study, of the 2,007 temples and religious groups questioned, 483 were found to have released animals into the wild, which was estimated to have cost at least NT$200 million a year, with more than 200 million animals released. Also surveyed were bird retailers within the three main catchment areas of northern, central and southern Taiwan. It was found that of 155 businesses surveyed, almost 60 percent sold birds of various types specifically for the purpose of releasing them into the wild and they had received orders in advance for specific types of birds, so they could catch or rear the birds in advance.

The animals were released in a variety of locations, including in the mountains, along rivers or waterways, around lakes, along the coast, in ports or harbors, reservoirs and even golf courses or parks. Furthermore, a whole range of animals were chosen for release, from birds to fish, crustaceans to shellfish, insects to reptiles (including poisonous snakes), soft-bodied organisms and even primates such as macaques, as well as living creatures smuggled in from abroad.

From January to September 2009, the EAST conducted a follow-up study to see whether the situation had changed after five years of education on the matter. It hadn’t. For example, many of the birds reared or captured for the purpose of release died before they could be let go and many farmed fish were released together into reservoirs or the sea, regardless of whether they were freshwater species or not.

These “animal release” groups are encouraging people to free animals into the wild to accumulate karmic merit and rid themselves of bad karma, even attributing miracles to the practice. The EAST’s records contain a reference to one such group that claims releasing animals in itself brings considerable karmic merit and that one should also consider the amount of money spent, because paying more “will be more efficacious.” It even gave an example of someone who had been bedridden before the release and afterwards was able to get up again, predominantly because, it said, they had spent a good deal of money, “bringing immediate results.”

From  TaipeiTimes  http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2011/10/01/2003514618

Date: 2011/10/1 PM 17:40

 

 
 
 
ADDRESS:
8F., No.94, Sec.2, Jhongsiao E. Rd., Taipei City 10053, Taiwan
TEL:
886-2-2391-3808
FAX:
886-2-2391-3828
COPYRIGHT© 2009 BY PRIMORDIAL LAW FIRM All RIGHTS RESERVED.