Orangutan Outreach Website - Saving the Orangutan

A German-Indonesian radio project tries to make forest conservation more popular
By Anett Keller

Indonesia, the host of the climate summit in December, has a poor environmental record. An area of forest the size of five football fields is destroyed every minute in the country. The slashing and burning of its rainforests places the country among the world’s biggest carbon dioxide polluters.

The United Nations could not have found a more fitting place for the climate summit than Indonesia. In this land of more than 13,000 islands, tropical rainforest is disappearing faster than anywhere else on Earth. Indonesia has lost four million hectares of forest in the past 25 years – that is 60 percent of the country’s total.

The trees are used to make cheap plywood, weatherproof garden furniture, glossy magazines and toilet paper. Increasingly more of the land is converted into plantations to feed the growing hunger for bio-fuels made from palm oil. The slashing and burning of Indonesia’s jungles has dramatic consequences for the world climate: their layers of humus –many meters thick – bind carbon.

For Germany’s international broadcaster Deutsche Welle and its Indonesian language radio department, that was a good reason to raise awareness of the problem in the country itself. “The whole world is watching the big event in Bali,” said Hendra Pasuhuk, the program director. “But for many Indonesians, the destruction of the forests and the consequences for the environment are not the least bit important.”

Radio was the ideal medium with which to draw attention to the problem, as it is the most popular form of media in Indonesia. Along with the Indonesian partner station Radio KBR68H, and with support from the German Development Ministry, the forest conservation project went into action.

First, Indonesian radio journalists were called upon to work out an abstract on the subject of conservation. “It was important to us to get people who (themselves) came from the affected regions and were not reporting from the distant capital,” Pasuhuk said. Ten journalists from five provinces took part in a weeklong workshop in Jakarta at the end of October. They gained valuable input from environmentalists and forestry ministry officials. At the same time, they were supposed to turn their ideas into plans, which they could use as a basis for about 10 days of research in their regions – accompanied by a colleague from Deutsche Welle. The aim of the project was to make a feature series of 10-minute reports to broadcast on about 400 local radio stations during the climate summit.

For the journalists involved, it was a rare opportunity to do some solid on-the-spot research – something their limited resources usually don’t allow, says Ade Wahyudi, program manager at KBR68H. “In the provinces in particular, journalists don’t have the technical or the financial capacity for fact-finding trips,” he said, adding that the complex topic of forest conservation can best be communicated to listeners when presented in a lively way and told from the perspective of those affected.

The project yielded some interesting results. Some of the journalists went to the island of Kalimantan, looking for Sebuku elephants. Only a few dozen of them have survived the destruction of their habitat in the forests of East Kalimantan. In eastern Java, project members found a village where every single resident earns a living from illegal logging. Not even the police dare to go there.

Another team went to Poso and Palu in central Sulawesi, places famous for the black wood of the ebony tree. Officially, ebony is protected and the trees must not be felled. But the violent conflict in the region makes the rules hard to enforce and prevents reforestation programs.

The decades-long conflict in Papua between the local population and the central government with its huge army presence has also had an impact on the environment. The military, foreign companies, local officials – there are many different parties earning money in the timber trade.

Journalists dealing with the subject must navigate murky waters. “I received some phone calls where I felt threatened,” said Edith Koesoemawiria, a Deutsche Welle journalist. “And one time a man no one knew turned up and made it clear to me that I was not to report on logging.” She and her two local colleagues were investigating the situation in Papua. They reported on the problems in implementing reforestation programs. They visited villagers who cut down the huge
trees in their forests and sell the trunks to logging companies, just to feed their families – even though their area has been declared a nature reserve.

Although she was shocked by the degree of environmental destruction she found, Koesoemawiria is enthusiastic about the project. She says far too little is known in Indonesia about the long-term effects of cutting down the rainforests. “People do know that there are mudslides when the trees have been cut down,” she said. “But hardly anyone realizes that the destruction of the forests has a negative impact on the climate.” She admits it is difficult to bring about a sustained new awareness. But for that very reason, she says, you can’t report on the dangers of destroying the rainforest too often.

The reports have been airing since Nov. 26. Partner stations across Indonesia have been broadcasting them. And the reports are even going out beyond the national borders. The “Asia Calling” program on KBR68H is rebroadcast by many stations in other Asian countries, in English and the national languages.

Source: http://spreadthehopes.blogspot.com/2008/05/defending-nature-with-microphone-and.html

Activists of the Centre for Orangutan Protection dressed as injured orangutans take part in a demonstration in Jakarta to voice awareness to protect them. One of the biggest populations of wild orangutans on Borneo will be extinct in three years without drastic measures to stop the expansion of palm oil plantations, conservationists said. (AP)

JAKARTA, Indonesia: The world’s largest population of wild orangutans on Indonesia’s Borneo island faces extinction within three years due to rapidly expanding oil palm plantations, a conservationist group said Wednesday.

A report by the Center for Orangutan Protection says just 20,000 of the endangered primates remain in the tropical jungle of Central Kalimantan, down from 31,300 in 2004.

If the government does not protect wildlife from commercial exploitation, illegal logging and poachers, orangutans there could be extinct by 2011, said Hardi Baktiantoro, the group’s head.

He said more than 5,000 orangutans in the region have been lost every year since 2004, due largely to loss of habitat.

Adding to the problem is a plan by Indonesian authorities to open up 1.1 million acres (455,000 hectares) — an area larger than the U.S. state of Rhode Island — of protected land for palm oil growers, he said.

Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono announced a major initiative to save the nation’s orangutans at the Bali Climate Conference last year, but it appears the plan has not received sufficient political support.

Toni Suhartono, the Forestry Ministry’s top official for wildlife protection, said government programs to save the environment are hampered by a lack of funds and lack of knowledge about conservation.

Awareness “about the conservation of endangered species is very low. It is, therefore, not easy for us to propose budgets for conservation,” Suhartono said.

Watch the video at NationalGeographic.com:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/05/080508-orangutan-video-ap.html

Damned if You Do: Cause Efforts Become Ammo for the Critics
By Jack Neff

Greenpeace: Ads posted in London parody Dove’s ‘Campaign for Real Beauty.’

BATAVIA, Ohio (AdAge.com) — Greg Allgood, who directs Procter & Gamble Co.’s Children’s Safe Drinking Water program, recently has spent a lot of time demonstrating Pur’s purification packets for developing countries that turn disgusting, brown water crystal clear. On one TV appearance last week, he accidentally took a swig from the dirty “before” water instead of the treated water in a clip that made the rounds to “Countdown” on MSNBC.

It’s symbolic of the downside companies in the forefront of ethical marketing have faced in recent weeks: No good deed goes entirely unpunished; high-profile stances on social causes can have unintended consequences; and the water is getting pretty murky as “ethical marketing” encourages consumers and activists to delve into corporate policies in ever-greater detail.

P&G and Unilever in particular have become lightning rods of late in part because of the public stances they’ve taken on environmental and social issues. “Most activists of whatever persuasion on whatever issue tend to believe that they get most traction (and news coverage) by aiming at the biggest name rather than the biggest challenge,” said a Unilever spokeswoman in an e-mail. “In most instances, it seems that the biggest ‘name’ tends to be the one that has done the most to attack the … problem.”

Irony of the good oil

Case in point: Unilever has scored at the top of global ethical and sustainability indexes in the past year. Its reward was to be labeled by Greenpeace, along with its global Dove agency, Ogilvy & Mather, and some U.K. PR firms, as killers of Indonesian orangutans because it buys palm oil from former rain forests.

The irony is that palm oil was supposed to be the benign alternative. P&G has been substituting it for oil derivatives in laundry detergents and touted a big contract for Indonesian palm oil in 2006. Unilever has also been using palm oil to replace widely reviled trans fats in margarine and other foods. Both companies, and many more, have been using it as a cheaper alternative to grain-based products as the U.S. government drives up grain prices and fuels global food shortages by subsidizing ethanol to replace oil.

But it was Unilever that Greenpeace singled out for special attention, sending people in orangutan suits to scale the company’s London headquarters last month and unleashing sophisticated parodies of Dove’s “Campaign for Real Beauty” on the London Underground and YouTube.

The guerrilla poster campaign plastered ads with orangutans over Dove’s ads, and the YouTube entry, dubbed “Dove Onslaught[er],” rose to the top of results in searches for Dove at the site, racking up 250,000 views its first week.

It appears to have been very effective. On May 1, Unilever CEO Patrick Cescau backed Greenpeace’s call for a moratorium on deforestation in Indonesia by palm-oil producers and pledged to get the ingredient only from sustainable sources by 2015.

‘Greenwash’

Unilever wasn’t singled out just because of its high-profile environmental and social stances, a Greenpeace spokesman said, claiming the company is the world’s largest user of palm oil. The group had noted Unilever’s high-profile stances on environmental issues, including chairing an industry committee on sustainable palm-oil production that hasn’t done much since 2002. “So there was an element of greenwash there,” he said.

Greenpeace is considering ending its campaign against Unilever, but the spokesman said the group may turn next to P&G or Nestlé.

The company accounts for about 4% of Indonesian palm oil production, in line with its global market share, the Unilever spokeswoman said. It is moving toward sustainable palm oil now because there’s a new third-party certification program in place, she said. The company is building on more than a decade of similar sustainability moves regarding fish and tea.

“These pressure groups realize companies are using [environmental and social stances] for marketing,” said PR maven Howard Rubenstein. “So they’re hitting them where their mouth is.”

One result, he said, is a confluence of marketing and politics that shows no signs of abating, with marketers tracking online buzz and other measures of public opinion as doggedly as politicians track polls.

No turning back

Mr. Rubenstein said high-profile marketers are in the political arena to stay, whether they want to or not. Such decisions as P&G’s to pull ads from MSNBC’s Don Imus show last year after he hurled racial epithets at Rutgers women’s basketball players is one he said had to be made.

Such moves also have helped make P&G a darling of the Parents Television Council, which named it the most family-friendly advertiser in the U.S. last year for sponsoring so many shows the group likes and not sponsoring shows it hates.

Right up until April, that is, when the PTC, as part of the Enough Is Enough coalition, singled out P&G for criticism among several major sponsors of hip-hop shows on MTV and BET laced with profanity, glorification of crime and drug use, portrayals of black men as criminals and black women as sex objects. In the ensuing blog chatter, some called P&G hypocritical for supporting such shows while also using a marketing program — “My Black Is Beautiful” — to bolster women’s self-esteem.

Take any P&G cause-marketing initiative, and you’ll find some slice of consumers it provokes to criticize the company. Pur’s effort has prompted detailed blog analyses of P&G’s alleged negative impact on water quality — from making tampons to bleaching paper. Even Pampers’ program to vaccinate expectant mothers against tetanus in developing markets via UNICEF has raised calls for a boycott from some parents of autistic children who believe the vaccines could cause autism (the science behind that claim is the subject of considerable debate).

“First and foremost, as a company, we are committed to doing what is right, not for goodwill but for the good we can do as an organization,” a P&G spokeswoman said in an e-mail. On the media side, “We recognize consumer expectations for P&G to be a responsible advertiser are very high, and we take our responsibility as an advertiser very seriously,” she said. “We do not proactively seek out opportunities to raise our profile on these matters. Our actions, or the actions taken by others, generate attention in the press, which raises our profile.”

It’s impossible, she said, to know what net impact such controversies have on the business.

Source: http://adage.com/article?article_id=126853

Amsterdam, International — Greenpeace today welcomed Unilever’s call for a moratorium on rainforest destruction in Indonesia, that is wiping out orang-utans and devastating the climate.
Amsterdam - Greenpeace welcomed Unilever’s call for a moratorium on rainforest destruction in Indonesia, that is wiping out orang-utans and devastating the climate.

In a speech delivered in London today, CEO Patrick Cescau supported Greenpeace’s demand for a complete halt to the destruction of Indonesia’s rainforest and peatlands for palm oil. He also promised that all of Unilever’s palm oil would be sustainable by 2015. However, the environmental group warned that without a halt to deforestation, Unilever’s efforts to source sustainable palm oil would be doomed to fail.

This decision follows a new Greenpeace campaign exposing how Unilever’s suppliers are actively destroying orang-utan habitats and clearing Indonesia’s peatlands and rainforests. Destruction of Indonesia’s peatland rainforests contributes 4% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Greenpeace insisted that other big corporate palm oil users and members of the Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil (including Procter & Gamble, Kraft, and Nestle) now need to join forces with Unilever and insist that palm oil suppliers immediately agree to stop ongoing forest destruction.

Last week Greenpeace volunteers dressed as orang-utans breached security at Unilever’s headquarters across Europe to highlight the company’s role in rainforest destruction for palm oil.

Reacting to the news, Greenpeace International forest campaigner, Tim Birch said

“Unilever’s commitment to sourcing sustainable palm oil will be meaningless unless its suppliers stop trashing Indonesia’s rainforests - this is why the moratorium is so important. Every day Unilever keeps buying palm oil from these suppliers, orang-utans are being pushed closer to extinction and climate change continues unabated.

Other companies like Nestle and Procter&Gamble now need to join forces with Unilever to exert real pressure on the ground. Greenpeace will not stop its campaign until there is a complete halt to forest destruction in Indonesia.”

Amanda’s story is so inspiring… testament to the power of one individual! ~ Rich
By Amanda E
Source: The Sietch Blog

I was just a normal, everyday mother of three living a good life in Australia, minding my own business, when a public tragedy occurred that changed my perspective. The famous Crocodile Hunter and passionate conservationist, Steve Irwin, died suddenly in a stingray barb accident. Reeling from news of his death, I decided that more ‘little people’ like myself needed to take environmental action in order to fill his big shoes.

I decided to concentrate on orangutans because if we can’t prevent the extinction of the great apes, what hope do we have of saving any creature? I learned that the development of palm oil plantations is the single greatest threat to the survival of the wild orangutan. These plantations not only take over their homes, but orangutans are killed when they wander, displaced and starving, onto the plantations looking for food.

There is already much deforested and idle land in Indonesia where palm oil could be grown but companies choose to continue logging and reaping the immediate profits from the sale of the timber. These companies are usually owned by rich multi-nationals from Malaysia and China.

Incredible animals like the Sumatran tiger, Sumatran rhino, clouded leopard, Asian elephant, sun bear, gibbon and many species of primates live in these forests. They are not taken into care when their forest homes are logged and then burnt to the ground; they are killed and eaten or sold into the pet trade or used in Asian medicines.

I was shocked and outraged and determined not to purchase or consume any more palm oil. I went to my supermarket intent on reading labels and choosing alternative vegetable oils. And then I discovered that palm oil was labeled under the umbrella of “vegetable oil” and that there was no easy way of identifying this ingredient.

Frustrated, I decided to take the professional approach; I made a formal application to the Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) to label palm oil.

In March 2008, eighteen months later, the FSANZ Board met and reviewed my application. Their preliminary opinion, subject to my response, was to reject my application on the grounds that it did not fall within the scope of the FSANZ’s legislative capabilities. Using the domestic market to regulate international environmental affairs was not their job. Also, my application was not relevant to public health issues and this is the main domain of the FSANZ.

In my response to the FSANZ, I have pointed out that in 2000 they saw fit to label genetically modified food (GM food) while taking pains to reassure the public that there were no safety concerns. I have also argued that palm oil is high in saturated fat which is very unhealthy and that the public has a right to try to avoid it. I have argued that the nutritional information panel (NIP), which is mandatory for food in Australia and New Zealand, is inadequate for informing the public about their saturated fat intake because it requires them to add up every gram of fat in their diet. It would be much easier to simply avoid palm oil.

I am also writing letters to the Australian Federal government asking them to expand the FSANZ Act to include ethical and environmental concerns. With the reality of climate change upon us, I believe that every government needs to reform legislation to recognise environmental priorities and accomodate urgent environmental needs. There will be a need to label foods or products that contribute significantly to climate change to enable the public to take responsibility and affect supply through reduced demand.

I am a member of the Palm Oil Action Group (POAG), which is a coalition of non governmental organisations (NGO’s) in Australia who have banded together for a common aim, to find solutions to the palm oil issues. Every NGO in this group has written a letter to FSANZ in support of my application to label palm oil. The POAG’s website is: www.palmoilaction.org.au

I would encourage every concerned individual to write to their government and Food Standards Body and request that environmental laws be strengthened and palm oil be labeled. I would be especially grateful if Australian and New Zealand citizens wrote to FSANZ and governments asking for the labeling of palm oil.

With palm oil labeling, a level of transparency will be introduced to the market which will give consumers the opportunity to use their purchasing power to influence the practices of these multinational companies. It is my hope that the conscious consumer can play an integral part in finding a solution to the tragedy that is unfolding in South East Asia. We need to do everything we can to save the magic of our rainforest biodiversity, combat deforestation-driven climate change and save ourselves from ourselves.

Source: Greenpeace UK web site

Potentially good news for orang-utans - Unilever announced this morning that they’re now supporting our calls for a moratorium to protect Indonesia’s rainforests from destruction at the hands of the expanding palm oil industry.

When we sent in our own ‘orang-utans’ to Unilever HQ last week to tell them that they needed to do more to stop rainforest and peatlands being cleared to make way for palm oil plantations, company executives told us that they wouldn’t be forced into a quick decision on the matter.

But today they have started to change their tune, as chief executive Patrick Cesau made a speech supporting a moratorium, and promising that all Unilever’s palm oil would be sustainable by 2015. His decison followed the release of our latest report: How Unilever Palm Oil Suppliers Are Burning Up Borneo, which details how its suppliers are actively involved in rainforest destruction, pushing species like the endangered orang-utans to the brink of extinction and speeding up climate change. And, of course, all the photographs and emails you all sent to him parodying Dove’s ‘Campaign for real beauty’ marketing campaign. Check out the latest additions at Stop Dove destroying rainforests, and keep sending in contributions - this campaign is not over yet. And if you’ve not already seen it, watch our Dove Onslaugh(ter) video, which has racked up 254,000 YouTube views in just over a week.

As one of the world’s biggest users of palm oil in its Dove soap and Persil products, Unilever has a huge influence on how suppliers operate. It is essential that the company pushes for a moratorium, as Greenpeace UK director John Sauven pointed out this morning, “Unilever’s commitment to sourcing sustainable palm oil will be meaningless unless its suppliers stop trashing Indonesia’s rainforests - this is why the moratorium is so important. Every day that Unilever keeps buying palm oil from these suppliers, orang-utans are pushed closer to extinction.”

If Unilever is serious about halting rainforest destruction in Indonesia, it needs to use its position as Chair of Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) to encourage other member companies to follow suit. Unilever has held this infuential position for the past six years - yet during that period not a single drop of sustainable palm oil has actually been produced. This situation urgently needs to be rectified, and until they start to exert real pressure on the ground, we’ll be keeping up the pressure.

Read the original at Mongabay.com

Unilever, the world’s largest consumer good company, will start using palm oil from certified sustainable sources this year and aims to have all its palm oil certified by 2015, according to a speech delivered today by CEO Patrick Cescau.

Cescau also voiced support for a moratorium on rainforest destruction for oil palm plantations in Indonesia.

“Now we need to take the next step. Suppliers need to move to meet the criteria, by getting certified both the palm oil from their own plantations and the palm oil they buy from elsewhere,” Unilever Chief Executive Patrick Cescau said in a statement. “We also intend to support the call for an immediate moratorium on any further deforestation in Indonesia for palm oil.”

“We are committed to doing this because we believe it is the right thing to do for the people who use our products, for the environment and communities in and around which palm oil is grown and for our business and our brands,” he continued.

Unilever’s announcement comes shortly after a report from Greenpeace showed that the company’s suppliers were destroying orangutan habitat and carbon-rich peatlands in Indonesia for oil palm plantations. In the report, Greenpeace revealed that Unilever could not trace the origin of its palm oil and said the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) — the industry’s response to criticism on its environmental performance — was falling short of its stated goals of reducing the conversion of rainforest lands.

In addition to the call for a ban on forest clearing for oil palm, Unilever’s Cescau said that the company will aim to have all the palm oil it uses in Europe fully traceable by 2012.

Still Greenpeace says that Unilever’s efforts will have little impact unless other buyers join in and force suppliers abandon forest destruction.

“Unilever’s commitment to sourcing sustainable palm oil will be meaningless unless its suppliers stop trashing Indonesia’s rainforests - this is why the moratorium is so important,” Greenpeace International forest campaigner Tim Birch said. “Every day Unilever keeps buying palm oil from these suppliers, orangutans are being pushed closer to extinction and climate change continues unabated.”

Unilever is the world’s largest consumer of palm oil in the world, using 4% of total global production in its food and cosmetic products.

Environmentalists say the production of palm oil on forest lands results in the destruction of critical orangutan habitat and releases large amounts of greenhouse gases.

Indonesia presently ranks third in carbon emissions due to deforestation and degradation of peat swamps, according to Wetlands International.

Arico CEO Angela Ichwan was named the recipient of the Portland Business Journal’s coveted Orchid Award, the publication’s annual recognition of 25 women from the Portland business community who have demonstrated extraordinary leadership and accomplishment. Ichwan was honored for her achievements during a ceremony at The Women in Business Party and Expo, held last night at the Oregon Convention Center in Portland. Ichwan is profiled in today’s Portland Business Journal’s “Women in Business” issue …

“It’s a great honor to be recognized for this prestigious award,” said Ichwan, who was selected for the award from a pool of more than 250 nominees. The winners were chosen on the basis of their outstanding business and civic accomplishments.

Ichwan, a food scientist and former global food developer for Heinz and Kellogg, launched Arico Natural Foods with her husband Hermanto Hidajat in 2004. Their inspiration came from Ichwan’s 11-year-old autistic niece, Ella, whose quality of life significantly improved after adopting a diet free of gluten (the protein found in wheat) and casein (the protein found in dairy).

With an aim to promote “mindful snacking,” Arico introduced a line of whole-grain, gluten- and dairy-free cookie bars in 2005. The popular product quickly propelled Arico to the top; in 2006, the market research firm SPINS named Arico the fastest-growing gluten-free cookie maker in the country. The company has since launched a line of cookie packs and two more cookie flavors, as well as a line of all-natural cassava chips.

Ichwan is committed to raising awareness for autism and celiac disease (an auto-immune disease characterized by intolerance to gluten). Under Ichwan’s direction, Arico has reached out to autism and celiac disease support groups nationwide, participating in community events and fundraising walks, helping to support those who live gluten free.

Ichwan is also passionate about employing sustainable business practices. As part of its commitment to environmental responsibility, Arico invests in forest restoration projects through Green Mountain Energy Company to offset 100% of the carbon emissions produced by its business operations in Beaverton, OR. Arico also gives back to the environment by planting a tree for every store that carries its cassava chips. In 2007, Arico worked with American Forests to plant trees on the Indonesian island of Sumatra to help preserve the habitat of the endangered orangutan.

Source: http://www.godairyfree.org/200805012495/News/Nutrition-Headlines/Arico-Foods-CEO-Wins-Leadership-Award.html

Visit the Arico Foods website: http://www.aricofoods.com/

Greenpeace acusa a la empresa ‘Unilever’ de no controlar a sus proveedores

Las organizaciones ecologistas han denunciado la devastación de bosques tropicales, no ya para conseguir madera y convertirla en biodiesel, sino para la industria de la cosmética. Según los activistas ésta podría ser responsable de un grave proceso de deforestación en las selvas húmedas de Indonesia.

En Greenpeace aseguran que se está talando para plantar palma, destinada a la obtención de aceite para cosméticos y alimentos que consumimos todos los días.

Miguel Ángel Soto, uno de los miembros de Campaña de Bosques Greenpeace, afirma que la empresa Unilever se abastece de aceite de palma y la acusa de deforestar algunas zonas para suministrar de esta sustancia al mercado.

Aunque Unilever preside una mesa redonda para el cultivo sostenible de aceite de palma, los ecologistas calculan que de los cerca de 300 proveedores con los que cuenta la compañía Unilever, más de una veintena obtienen la materia prima de plantaciones donde previamente se ha arrasado masa forestal.

La empresa asegura que la demanda de aceite de palma se ha disparado y que no tiene medios para controlar dónde trabajan todos sus proveedores. Tampoco para garantizar que no estén dañando la selva tropical ni a quienes viven en ella.

PETA Press Release

Company Unmoved by Experts’ Warnings About Violent Training Methods and Other Abuses Suffered by Great Ape ‘Actors’

For Immediate Release:
April 28, 2008

Contact:
Kristie Phelps 757-622-7382

Columbus, Ga. — For using a live, young orangutan to portray the inferior nature of a competitor in a television commercial, insurance company Aflac, which is based in Columbus, Ga., has been nominated for a PETA Litterbox Award. PETA gives out Litterbox Awards once a year for ads that stink for animals.

Aflac has ignored evidence provided by PETA from the world’s foremost great-ape experts about the abuses of young orangutans and other nonhuman primates used in entertainment. Infant orangutans are taken from their mothers and often are beaten and electrically shocked behind the scenes to force them to pay attention and repeat what–to them–are senseless acts. PETA also provided Aflac with evidence from a primatologist who spent 14 months working undercover at a California facility that trains great apes for the television and film industries. The primatologist witnessed trainers kicking, punching, and beating the animals. At around 8 years of age, orangutans become too powerful to be safely handled and are often discarded in decrepit roadside zoos. A study recently published by primatologists in the journal Science concluded, “[T]he inappropriate portrayal of great apes in advertisements undermines the scientific, welfare, and conservation goals that we and many readers work hard to achieve.”

Nearly 3,500 people have complained to Aflac since PETA posted an action alert about the commercial on its popular Web site. PETA is urging Aflac to join Subaru, Honda, PUMA, and other companies that have made a commitment not to use great apes in future ads after receiving information from PETA. The group also gives out Glitterbox Awards to companies that depict animals in a positive manner and promote respect for animals in their ads.

“Aflac is damaging its own reputation by ignoring the public’s interest in the preservation and protection of great apes,” says PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk. “Aflac needs to send the right message by pulling this offensive ad and pledging never to use great apes again.”

PETA’s correspondence with Aflac is available upon request. For more information, please visit PETA’s Web site NoMoreMonkeyBusiness.com.