Nicky: << I just think that aid dollars would be far better spent on population control and sustainable agriculture, which, in these regions in particular, does not include "livestock". This is just far too simplistic. >>

With respect, I think that it is you who is being "far too simplistic" in this case. The areas targeted by this project have been home to pastoralist peoples for centuries, if not millennia. Groups like the Maasai and Samburu in Kenya and the Tutsi and Hima in Uganda and Rwanda have cultures that are intimately dependent upon cattle herding, so any claims of lactose intolerance among these people would have to be unfounded.

The problems in these areas emanate from postcolonial sedentization and industrialisation, and competition between ethnic groups who have latterly found themselves sharing the same bounded land and resources. Given that their former subsistence strategy of transhumant pastoralism is incompatible with modern notions of statehood and individually owned private property, the Heifer project seems to be a quite well-thought out effort to provide an economic basis for these pastoral people to adapt to life in 21st century Africa.

While I appreciate your concern for animal welfare, in this case I think you've picked the wrong target.

Nicky, I think you are being unrealistic. While no doubt your heart is in the right place, you need to engage a little closer with reality in order to get your message across.

>>Pericles, it is not a matter of overlooking human suffering; I just think that aid dollars would be far better spent on population control and sustainable agriculture, which, in these regions in particular, does not include "livestock". This is just far too simplistic.<<

You opened this thread by calling the Foundation's contribution to Heifer "ill-considered", but apart from your visceral objection to live cattle transport (which, by the way, has not yet been shown to be part of this particular programme), you have not explained how the money might be better directed.

If you think that aid dollars may be better spent on population control and sustainable agriculture, by all means explain to us how this might be brought about.

Incidentally, neither of the articles you cite provides any useful additional information.

The second piece is about goats.

The first piece looks at part of Kenya's north-east, while a quick look at the map shows that Heifer's activity concentrates on the west of that country.

Emotion is fine, but won't win an argument based on reality. Especially when you are arguing against the alleviation of starvation in Africa.

For those who may not have followed the links I posted yesterday the last of them was coverage of the work done from B&MG's donations to improve agriculture in the developing world. http://appablog.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/gates-africa-306-million-commitment-to-agricultural-development/

It's a press release for $306million in donations of which the Heifer project is a small part.

It includes soil improvement, use of high yield varieties of local crops, water infrastructure, supply chain etc.

Worth a read. It's publicity and is probably biased but still impressive.

R0bert

Bill Gates, world's greatest monopolist dressed up as a philanthropist.

The best thing he could do for under-developed countries and the Blunt household is lower the price of his software.

His African charity seems to be misplaced. Once people have been weaned they don't need to drink milk. Plus drinking the milk of another species doesn't do most people, particulaly infant children a great deal of good.

Just lower the price of the software Bill.

Interestingly, I had the rare privilege of being in a room with Bill several years ago and found him to be a genuinely intelligent and considerate bloke. However, I am doubtful, like most Billionaire's whether they have any idea how to direct Philanthropic funds in the most efficient and effective manner. Personally, I think there's no substitute for getting down to grass-root's level if you are going to be charitable, ie get out there and assess the problem first hand. If you're helping the homeless, dress down and actually listen to what they're saying and don't treat it like a 9-5 job. I've done it and I do it in my spare time, there's no substitute.

Dear Nicky,

I know that your heart's in the right place.
But, I too think that you've made a rather
rash judgement in this case.
What Pericles, Robert, CJ, and others, have to say makes
a lot of sense.

I don't think that Bill Gates has made a mistake.

East Africa can use all the help it can get.