Monkeying around with Peta won’t work

Maybe the controversy is not just about the monkey business and coconuts. Maybe reactions from Thai officials and some members of the public against monkey abuse allegations in the coconut business foretell how Thailand will fare in the new global economy dominated by data, analytical skills and innovation.

News broke last week that major Western retailers including Waitrose, Co-op and Boots have started to ban Thai coconut products.

In its report, the activist group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta) claimed that monkeys in Thailand are “kept chained and driven insane” as they are forced to pick coconuts that are used to make coconut milk, meat, flour, oil, and other products.

The monkeys are illegally taken from their families in the wild as babies. They are then fitted with rigid metal collars, kept chained and tethered for long periods, said Peta.

Peta also said the monkeys are kept in cages barely large enough for them to turn themselves around in. They are forced to collect up to 1,000 coconuts per day as if they were “coconut-picking machines”.

The first reaction from the Thai government and many social media users was denial.

Commerce Minister Jurin Laksanawisit gave a half-hearted rebuff saying Thailand does not use monkeys to harvest coconuts on an “industrial scale”.

There is a caveat of course. Mr Jurin admitted that individual farmers still train monkeys to collect coconuts both for commercial purposes and as a form of tourist attraction. He insisted that the monkeys are not mistreated.

Deputy Agriculture Minister Mananya Thaiset argued that monkey labour was almost non-existent.

There are about 200,000 coconut growers in the country. There wouldn’t be enough monkeys for them to use, Ms Mananya said.

The ministers apparently did not check Peta’s report, or they would have known Peta said it had visited eight farms, several monkey training facilities and a coconut picking contest where they recorded the so-called abuses.

This could be a case of Peta using some exceptions to paint the whole picture. The group did not give specific details about these farms either. But a mere denial without any supporting evidence or data won’t be enough to fight the allegations.

How could Ms Mananya convince international retailers and consumers that there is no monkey abuse in Thailand’s coconut business when Peta has a video showing young, visibly frustrated monkeys being chained and kept in cages as they were transported in the rain?

Another popular reaction was to argue that the use of monkeys to pick coconuts is a tradition that dates back over 100 years. How could the contention hold? Peta’s allegations are that Thai coconut producers perpetuate animal cruelty to earn millions of dollars from products sold around the world. And we replied by saying what they say is animal cruelty is part of our culture. How valid could that be?

Yet another common retort to the monkey abuse accusations is to point the finger and claim that other people are doing it as well.

Why did Peta take aim only at the coconutpicking monkey when milk-producing cows could be said to have suffered from maltreatment too? Why aren’t dairy products from Europe banned?

It should have been obvious that this line of thinking wouldn’t take us far.

In this age when social media can broadcast photos and videos showing young Thai monkeys climbing up on coconut trees with a metal chain around their neck, shifting the blame won’t help lift the boycott.

In this age when sustainability and animal welfare have become an integral part of doing business, paying lip service is not enough.

The first thing the government has to do is to verify if what Peta has shown is true.

If it is, the government has to show the world it will do everything it can to rectify it. If not, refute it with demonstrable information and evidence.

In its latest move, the commerce ministry and coconut industry representatives agreed to add a code on Thai coconut packages that can be traced back to their origin.

The traceability will allow consumers to check whether the products come from monkey-free plantations. The measure sounds more constructive although it still does not address the controversy at the roots.

In the end, the commerce ministry and farmers will have to face the truth that using monkeys to pick coconuts is no longer acceptable.

This is time for innovations. It could also be a prime marketing opportunity. Thailand is already the world’s top coconut milk producer. The ministry could have helped the country by declaring an end to the use of monkeys in the coconut and tourism businesses.

Sounds like a no brainer. The reality, however, is that we seem stuck in the monkey business.