Local wisdom
True champions of the environment, such as the 11 individuals and groups that won Kalpataru awards on Tuesday, teach us many lessons — dedication and modesty in particular.
Take Soleman Ngongo, a sluice keeper from the East Nusa Tenggara village of Tematana, as an example. As an honorable state guest, Soleman opted to take off his footwear outside the State Palace to preserve the cleanliness of the dignified place.
And look at his response to the prestigious prize that his work earned him: “I work not for this award or because of an intention to meet with the President,” Soleman told the media.
The fact that he is happy enough to live on Rp 500,000 (US$59) per month is evidence of his commitment to the job, which he has been nurturing for 40 years.
Indeed, green heroes such as Soleman have nothing to prove, as the fruits of their hard work are real and benefit — financially — the communities around them. Soleman was the prime mover of upstream forestation to maintain water sources. Soleman planted two million trees with the help of local farmers, whose rice production has steadily increased thanks to the re-greening program.
Another winner, Sugiarto, a resident of the East Java village of Cowek in Pasuruan regency, was awarded for planting 474,390 trees on 475 hectares along the Welang River. Sugiarto’s work could supply water to 246 hectares of paddy fields, 1,098 hectares of fishery land and 7,251 residents in the village.
The winners’ list also includes the Nurul Hakim Islamic School in Kediri village, West Lombok, West Nusa Tenggara, which has successfully promoted green schools. It also built 50 nursery centers, distributed some 5 million seeds to be planted in the village and provided training to produce 100 kilograms of compost per day.
Local wisdom taught the environmental heroes to love the environment, and so they do whatever possible to protect it without fanfare or complaint. Without the much-vaunted global campaign against the adverse impacts of climate change, we believe the local wisdom would remain there to guide them to preserve the Earth.
Local wisdom is all that differentiates them from political elites who are good at rhetoric on environmental conservation but their actions and policies speak the other way around. They shout their promises to curb greenhouse gas emissions, calling out loud for a change in the business-as-usual policies, but continue endorsing subsidies for fossil fuels and doing only a little to develop clean energy.
Many political elites deem the environmental issues as opportunities that need to be explored to gain international fame, including for the coveted United Nations secretary-general post.
Through their simplicity, the Kalpataru award winners tell the government to get things done when it comes to saving the planet.
Reflecting on the green heroes, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono perhaps does not need to complain about foreign countries that continue receiving illegal timber from Indonesia, but exercise his power to ensure the supply of the smuggled logs ceases to exist.
Take Soleman Ngongo, a sluice keeper from the East Nusa Tenggara village of Tematana, as an example. As an honorable state guest, Soleman opted to take off his footwear outside the State Palace to preserve the cleanliness of the dignified place.
And look at his response to the prestigious prize that his work earned him: “I work not for this award or because of an intention to meet with the President,” Soleman told the media.
The fact that he is happy enough to live on Rp 500,000 (US$59) per month is evidence of his commitment to the job, which he has been nurturing for 40 years.
Indeed, green heroes such as Soleman have nothing to prove, as the fruits of their hard work are real and benefit — financially — the communities around them. Soleman was the prime mover of upstream forestation to maintain water sources. Soleman planted two million trees with the help of local farmers, whose rice production has steadily increased thanks to the re-greening program.
Another winner, Sugiarto, a resident of the East Java village of Cowek in Pasuruan regency, was awarded for planting 474,390 trees on 475 hectares along the Welang River. Sugiarto’s work could supply water to 246 hectares of paddy fields, 1,098 hectares of fishery land and 7,251 residents in the village.
The winners’ list also includes the Nurul Hakim Islamic School in Kediri village, West Lombok, West Nusa Tenggara, which has successfully promoted green schools. It also built 50 nursery centers, distributed some 5 million seeds to be planted in the village and provided training to produce 100 kilograms of compost per day.
Local wisdom taught the environmental heroes to love the environment, and so they do whatever possible to protect it without fanfare or complaint. Without the much-vaunted global campaign against the adverse impacts of climate change, we believe the local wisdom would remain there to guide them to preserve the Earth.
Local wisdom is all that differentiates them from political elites who are good at rhetoric on environmental conservation but their actions and policies speak the other way around. They shout their promises to curb greenhouse gas emissions, calling out loud for a change in the business-as-usual policies, but continue endorsing subsidies for fossil fuels and doing only a little to develop clean energy.
Many political elites deem the environmental issues as opportunities that need to be explored to gain international fame, including for the coveted United Nations secretary-general post.
Through their simplicity, the Kalpataru award winners tell the government to get things done when it comes to saving the planet.
Reflecting on the green heroes, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono perhaps does not need to complain about foreign countries that continue receiving illegal timber from Indonesia, but exercise his power to ensure the supply of the smuggled logs ceases to exist.
So, where’s the beef?
Australia’s decision to halt the export of live cattle to Indonesia seems way over the top considering that it is hurting its own highly-profitable cattle industry more than Indonesian meat eaters.
Indonesia, which has been the largest market for live Australian cattle, can easily switch to other suppliers. Indonesians are not big meat consumers anyway and cutting back on the red meat for those who do indulge reduces the risk of heart disease, which is fast becoming one of the major killer diseases in this country. East Java cattle farmers also would welcome the ban, as they have complained that Australian beef was undercutting their prices.
But where is the beef, as far as Australia is concerned?
The export ban came in response to public opinion in Australia which was outraged by a recent TV documentary that portrayed cruelty against Australian cattle at some (not all) slaughter houses in Indonesia. In response to the documentary, the Indonesian government has since identified 11 such slaughter houses and is looking at disciplining them and improving overall supervision.
The debate in Australia, however, has typically gone beyond looking at mistreatment and has started to question the methods of killing an animal. If the issue is now raised by the Australian government, this is where Indonesia has to draw the line.
For religious and health considerations, animals for consumption should be slaughtered by cutting their throat to make sure that all the blood flows out of their body. This has been the acceptable practice for hundreds of years throughout most of the world — even in the West. It was not until a few decades ago that the West started introducing a supposedly more humane, if not bloodless way, of slaughtering animals, first by hitting them on the head and now to use a stun bolt. However, any act of slaughter is by definition inhumane, no matter how you do it.
If the Australian public can stomach it, they should demand from their TV networks a documentary that looks at the way the cattle industry is run — how it treats animals, the crowded conditions where they are raised, the fattening process, the separation of the young from their mothers and the way a stun bolt is used to kill them.
Their next steak or burger will not taste the same.
Indonesia, which has been the largest market for live Australian cattle, can easily switch to other suppliers. Indonesians are not big meat consumers anyway and cutting back on the red meat for those who do indulge reduces the risk of heart disease, which is fast becoming one of the major killer diseases in this country. East Java cattle farmers also would welcome the ban, as they have complained that Australian beef was undercutting their prices.
But where is the beef, as far as Australia is concerned?
The export ban came in response to public opinion in Australia which was outraged by a recent TV documentary that portrayed cruelty against Australian cattle at some (not all) slaughter houses in Indonesia. In response to the documentary, the Indonesian government has since identified 11 such slaughter houses and is looking at disciplining them and improving overall supervision.
The debate in Australia, however, has typically gone beyond looking at mistreatment and has started to question the methods of killing an animal. If the issue is now raised by the Australian government, this is where Indonesia has to draw the line.
For religious and health considerations, animals for consumption should be slaughtered by cutting their throat to make sure that all the blood flows out of their body. This has been the acceptable practice for hundreds of years throughout most of the world — even in the West. It was not until a few decades ago that the West started introducing a supposedly more humane, if not bloodless way, of slaughtering animals, first by hitting them on the head and now to use a stun bolt. However, any act of slaughter is by definition inhumane, no matter how you do it.
If the Australian public can stomach it, they should demand from their TV networks a documentary that looks at the way the cattle industry is run — how it treats animals, the crowded conditions where they are raised, the fattening process, the separation of the young from their mothers and the way a stun bolt is used to kill them.
Their next steak or burger will not taste the same.
0 comments:
Post a Comment