Bukit Brown and Bidadari do not a Global Eco-city make

posted in: Conservation | 3

The opinion piece by Dr Ho Hua Chew in The Straits Times of 1st May 2013 LINK made some wild allegations that were rebutted in my letter published in the same daily of 8th May

Now that Dr Ho has replied to my rebuttal LINK, I am posting the controversy so that those interested can can read all three accounts.

Dr Ho’s reply highlights the fact that he did not dispute the following:
1. That his definition of forest is flawed.
2. That he has no basis to claim that the removal of our unprotected “forests” will lead to pollution, environmental degradation or increased release of carbon dioxide into the environment.
3. That his call for a nationwide wildlife corridor was made without taking into account the success of the current park connectors.

To quote Alan OwYong, Immediate Past-Chairman of the Nature Society’s Bird Group: “Little knowledge is dangerous” – though made in another context LINK, it applies perfectly to Dr Ho’s original article.

If anyone finds the lettering of the above letter difficult to read, please visit HERE or HERE.

The image below of a section of Bidadari by KC Tsang, cannot, even in one’s wildest imagination, be termed a forest!

Credit: YC Wee (text), KC Tsang (image)

3 Responses

  1. Long time read of BESG

    This is getting irritating. Every now and then there will be such posting and allegations. I am only keen on nature news and whatever it is between NSS or BESG, I am not interested at all!!

    Come on, there are also many young readers for this blog. Do you think they are interested to read all this? Or will they be polluted of such politics?
    Enough about talking who and who from which facebook or straits times whether good or bad….PLEASE!

    • BESG

      Hi Long Time… whoever you are. For your information, the website has now widened its coverage and not restricted to birds. We will be dealing more and more with habitats as well as flora and fauna. We will also deal with conservation issues, past as well as present. All these will be discussed so as we do not continue making the same mistakes we made in the past. This is the only way forward.

      If there are people writing nonsense, we need to correct them. If they disagree, debate the issues. Similarly if we post nonsense, by all means point them out and debate the issues.

      Unchallenged inaccuracies, if left alone, may confuse readers, especially those new to the nature scene. Sometimes such challenges cannot avoid the so-called ‘politics’ because the old-hands in this game are all from NSS. Young members need to know nature as well as what is/was going on in the background – past as well as present.

      Those who are disinterested in such postings, like yourself, are free not to access and read them. Simply skip such postings, not much of an effort after all. But the truth needs to be told…

      Would appreciate if you could declare your affiliation or lack of affiliation to the parties concerned. Thank you for your views.

      • Short time read

        I am sure Long Time Read is a plant. Not sure whether he was paid for the comment though.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.