A quick guide to the silence of the pandas documentary

The Silence of Pandas is a discredited German television documentary prepared with disregard of most of the basic norms and standards of journalism.  It is not factual and not representative of WWF nor the conservation work we carry out in more than 100 countries worldwide to help communities and nature thrive together.

The documentary was shown twice in Germany on the ARD network in June 2011, before its factual inaccuracies resulted in the cancellation of further scheduled showings and a takedown of the video from ARD online sites. 

The main faults are:

• Poor substantiation of assertions and allegations. Much of the programme is based on assertions taken at face value with little evidence of attempts at corroboration.
• Poor fact checking. Programme is replete with errors, many of which could have been easily checked with readily available material online or simple queries.
• Lack of balance. The programme set out to vilify WWF. Material that did not fit into this story line was avoided or ignored. 
• Distortions, possibly deliberate. Decisions made by governments were linked to WWF. WWF was held responsible for the practices of unassociated companies. Interviews in Indonesia were described in false contexts and grossly mistranslated into German and English. Descriptions of the film-makers approaches to WWF were false. The roles of WWF personnel were misrepresented.

Silence of the Pandas allegation

WWF raises money under false pretenses, collecting money for orang-utan projects in Borneo although it has no such projects

The reality

This was the feature of initial publicity for the documentary from the TV station. It was dropped from the publicity material and the programme amended to say “WWF raises money across the globe to save the orang-utan and it does in fact work to preserve existing national parks” – this covers some of the scope of WWF orang-utan projects in Borneo.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF collaborates with companies that destroy tropical forests.

The reality

Little actual evidence is offered in the film to support this sweeping assertion. WWF is committed to working towards a future in which people live in harmony with nature. It collaborates with some companies to improve the sustainability of their forest operations, is in dialogue with others about improving their operations and is prominent in exposing and opposing some companies that appear to have little interest in improving their operations. WWF initiatives have helped create markets for sustainably produced timber products and create legal barriers to trade in illegal timber.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF supports damaging “ecotourism” which brings in money for tigers but disturbs them.

The reality

WWF-India is seeking better regulated tourism and benefit sharing with local communities. In some cases eco-tourism does have a positive role to play in valuing tigers and providing income and employment to local communities but it is only part of the answer to protecting tigers. WWF-India has never worked in Kanhar, the reserve where this documentary footage was filmed.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

The context implies that WWF was involved in removal of Adavasi village from Kanhar Tiger Reserve, India.

The reality

WWF has not worked in Kanhar and played no role in relocations there (or anywhere else in India). WWF-India has played an active and prominent role in achieving better protections for the constitutional and legal rights of forest peoples in India.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

Millions from tiger campaign end up in camera traps – “a PR stunt” - so that tigers can be watched live on WWF website.

The reality

WWF uses camera traps for scientific purposes, in India working on tiger population estimates in some reserves (not including Kanhar) in company with the Wildlife Institute of India. This does not involve the expenditure of “millions”.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF’s Project Tiger is a failure.

The reality

Project Tiger was an Indian government not a WWF project. Tiger numbers have declined in some areas due to poaching and habitat pressures, but India has around half the world’s surviving tigers.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

Tiger related money only serves to make forestry officials and scientists very rich.

The reality

WWF has a zero tolerance policy on corruption. WWF tiger projects money is distributed on the basis of written contracts. Direct payments are not made to forestry officials. WWF accounts are subject to audit.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF wants to drive Adavasi out of Indian forests.

The reality

WWF opposes forced relocation or displacement and with other NGOs has worked to advocate for legal rights of forest peoples to be observed and to extend them. 

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF is involved in seeking the removal of “the tribe of honey collectors” in Nagarhole National Park.

The reality

WWF has not worked in Nagarhole National Park.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

Huismann was unable to talk to WWF International about its tiger policy.

The reality

Huismann approached WWF International regarding his intention to make a programme on WWF’s 50th anniversary. Specifics of WWF’s tiger policy or issues of forest people relocation in India were not mentioned at any point.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF has a consultation contract with (palm oil producer) Wilmar corporation on sustainability/WWF has a partnership with Wilmar/the partnership has improved Wilmar’s image but not its methods. 

The reality

WWF does not have a partnership with Wilmar. Wilmar is a member of the Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and has had some production units independently certified as producers of sustainable palm oil. WWF is a founder member of RSPO, and is involved in the initiative to help reduce the environmental and social impacts of palm oil production with other NGOs such as Oxfam. WWF-Indonesia has trained some employees of palm oil companies including Wilmar on dealing with High Conservation Value Forest. The training is covered by a Memorandum of Understanding with companies and does not involve payments to WWF. 

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF functionaries have joined forces with the industry lobby to propose that palm oil plantations be recognised as reforestation, to get emission credits as a profit bonus 

The reality

WWF does not know what is being referred to here. There is no mechanism or proposed mechanism for having palm oil plantations recognized as reforestation in order to receive emission credits. Crops and plantations would not generally meet tests of permanence or additionality under current Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) rules on sequestration of carbon. Most likely the programme is repeating a confused and unchecked reference to elements of the global discussion on Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD). 

Silence of the Panda's allegation

Farmers have been dispossessed of their land to make way for Wilmar’s palm oil plantations. 

The reality

WWF has no knowledge of these specific allegations RSPO rules require clear tenure and consultation on customary rights issues and provide avenues for dispute resolution which have seen customary rights recognized and disputes resolved in favour of communities. 

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF-Indonesia employee Amalia Prameswari is responsible for the palm oil partnership with Wilmar 

The reality

There is no partnership with Wilmar. Amalia Prameswari does not have such responsibilities. 

Silence of the Panda's allegation

With the green stamp of approval of the RSPO, Wilmar can cash in on European subsidies for regenerative energy. 

The reality

There are no European subsidies for regenerative energy.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF managed to protect only 80 hectares of a 14,500 palm oil plantation. Two orang-utans will die of starvation or be killed by plantation workers as a result. 

The reality

4961 hectares of the 13,970 hectare PT Rimba Harapan concession have been set aside for protection and analysis of recent satellite images show these areas remain forested. Clearing of primary forest would have rendered this plantation ineligible for independent certification under the RSPO standard. WWF’s only role here was to develop a concept for High Conservation Value forest which includes primary forest and secondary forest with significant biodiversity, importance for ecosystem functioning or of livelihood or cultural significance to local communities. WWF conducted a pre-examination of the area but the assessment was carried out by assessors independent of WWF or Wilmar. 

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF offers industry green certificates for tropical wood, corn, soybeans, fish, sugar cane and palm oil. 

The reality

WWF does not certify any commodities as green or sustainably produced. WWF has worked with stakeholders including industry and other NGOs to form bodies that independently set standards for environmentally and in many cases socially responsible production. Certification is a process of independent and audited assessment against such standards. WWF, like other stakeholders, can (and does) raise issues during the certification process or seek independent review of decisions.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF’s Dorte Bieler was “ambushed” at a conference with a question on whether WWF could call it a success if only 0.5 per cent of a plantation created “with the approval of WWF” was preserved and 99.5 percent destroyed. 

The reality

WWF does not approve plantations – land use planning is a matter for governments. There is no factual basis to the question – 36 per cent of the plantation referred to was set aside for protection. Bieler’s answers should be viewed in the context of her ambush on this completely fabricated premise.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

“The world’s largest bank provides financing for the palm oil industry and the WWF isn’t left empty handed.” 

The reality

HSBC has or is engaged with partnerships with WWF to achieve specific objectives on climate and water issues. Public reports are available on the outcomes of this partnership. WWF is not in any partnerships with HSBC in relation to palm oil. 

Silence of the Panda's allegation

Indigenous people are having awful problems with the penetration of petroleum companies, mining companies, biofuel companies and a number of companies give money to conservation groups and they tend to stay away from criticism of them. 

The reality

WWF in 1996 became the first major conservation organization to recognize the rights of indigenous peoples. In recognising the special plight of indigenous peoples WWF works to ensure their rights are respected, that their livelihoods are protected, that development on their lands proceeds only on the basis of their free, prior and informed consent and that they benefit from development. WWF’s statement of principles on indigenous peoples is a public document. WWF has criticized companies on the basis of their treatment of indigenous peoples. WWF does not accept donations from fossil fuel producers.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF funded armed anti-poaching commandoes in Zimbabwe.

The reality

WWF does not know what is being referred to here.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF “deployed” a mercenary unit to go to Southern Africa and find out who was poaching rhino horn and kill them. WWF financed this venture. 

The reality

What is presented are gross distortions of an anti-poaching intelligence operation, originally proposed by a private security company to some persons associated with WWF and financed privately by then WWF president Prince Bernhard. WWF was not advised of this venture, did not authorise it and did not finance it. WWF unreservedly accepts the findings of a comprehensive inquiry by Mr Justice Kumleben of South Africa who found the venture naive and misguided but that WWF involvement was limited. The producers had access to comprehensive research drawing on both WWF archives and the Kumleben inquiry but made no reference to this material. 

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF has collaborated with Monsanto “the secret ruler of Argentina” to make the Monsanto model of agriculture socially acceptable. 

The reality

WWF has no collaboration or partnership with Monsanto on any matter in Argentina or anywhere else. The producers were accurately advised of the non-relationship with Monsanto in an interview with WWF partner organization in Argentina, the Fundacion Vida Silvestre. Ignoring this, the programme used a former president Dr Hector Laurence – who does not speak for FVS – to represent the organisation’s views. 

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF is ensuring that Argentina and European public opinion accept Monsanto Genetically Modified Soy. 

The reality

WWF is not and never has been an advocate of GM soy.

WWF has long sought to reduce the environmental damage associated with soy cultivation. It was instrumental in developing the 2004 Basel Criteria for Responsible Soy Production and was a founder member of the Round Table on Responsible Soy (RTRS) envisaged in the Basel Criteria. The Basel Criteria excluded GM soy. Around 70 per cent of the overall production now uses GM seed material and the RTRS standard for environmentally and socially responsible produced soy does not discriminate between GM and non-GM soy. WWF has, however, been instrumental in having RTRS provide a certification module for non-GM soy so it can receive due recognition in markets.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF has “greenlighted” soy expansion in the Chacoregion of Argentina by deeming forests substandard and degraded by human occupation. 

The reality

Neither WWF nor FVS has any category of degraded forest or savannah. FVS is working with other partners to preserve important dry forest in the Gran Chaco by preparing detailed land use plans and advocating protected areas and working with local populations on the development of sustainable livelihoods. The producers were offered the opportunity to inspect this work during the interview with FVS but did not take it up.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

In an unprecedented fight for land, WWF has taken Monsanto’s side. The two sides came to an agreement at the RTRS in 2010 for Monsanto’s GM soy to bear the produced sustainably seal. 

The reality

WWF has made no agreements with Monsanto. RTRS is a multi-stakeholder body to promote economically viable, socially equitable and environmentally responsible soy production which operates independently of WWF. Monsanto and another biotechnology company were accepted as members by RTRS in 2004. Soy can be independently certified as responsible if it meets an RTRS standard which among other requirements protects forests and biodiversity, safeguards the rights of communities and traditional land users, uses water responsibly, observes safeguards on agricultural chemicals and observes fair labor conditions. The origin of seed stock is not a major factor in these dimensions of environmental and social responsibility – however WWF has been instrumental in having RTRS establish a certification module for non-GM soy.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF vice president Jason Clay is in charge of the (Monsanto) partnership. 

The reality

Dr Jason Clay is Senior Vice-President of Market Transformation for WWF-US. There is no partnership with Monsanto.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

An excerpt of a speech by Dr Clay to agribusiness lobby Global Harvest Initiative is presented as “a clear commitment to the brave new Monsanto world . .. Agribusiness is busy apportioning the planet earth with the WWF right by its side.” 

The reality

Dr Clay is recognized as a leading thinker on the challenges of feeding a world expected to reach a population of 9 billion by 2050 while safeguarding the natural resources and life support systems of the earth. The excerpt misrepresents his position which stresses eight strategies for increasing food availability in a responsible and sustainable way – genetics (in the main accelerating traditional plant breeding particularly for neglected tropical food crops), better farming practices, increasing returns on inputs particularly water, bringing degraded land back into production, slashing food waste, securing property rights for farmers, cutting overconsumption, increasing soil organic content and valuing the carbon stored in soils. WWF is not a member of the Global Harvest Institute.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

In Indonesian Papua, up to nine million hectares have been earmarked for oil palm plantations, according to (1) a contract which the industry has signed with WWF (German language documentary) (2) an agreement between WWF and the provincial government. (English language documentary) 

The reality

No such contract or agreement exists with either industry or government. Land use planning is not WWF’s power. The nine million hectare figure does not correlate to anything in WWF’s knowledge except perhaps speculative 2006 Indonesian government projections for oil palm expansion in Papua, Kalimantan and Sumatra with by far the largest area in Kalimantan. This Papuan portion of the documentary was largely lifted from another documentary shown on German television in 2007. 

Silence of the Panda's allegation

WWF mapped the tribal land itself and is helping to choose the sites for the plantations. 

The reality

WWF worked with nine tribes in the Merauke area of Papua to map sites of significance to them. WWF then worked on having this mapping incorporated in government land use planning concepts. This was part of a WWF project to reduce social and environmental impacts of a presidentially decreed integrated food and energy project and drew on WWF experience of a mega-rice project in Kalimantan. WWF is proud of its efforts working with indigenous peoples to help safeguard their interests.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

The voiceover relating to the nine million hectares accompanies imagery of a WWF employee pointing at a map. The employee appears to provide an answer to the question “Do they (local communities) know that 9 million hectares are going to be planted with oil palms?”. 

The reality

Because this was lifted from an earlier documentary, WWF has been able to note the actual context and what was really said by translating from Bahasa Indonesia not distorted by the voiceover. The WWF employee was pointing at a map of the area of a planned oil palm plantation in Eligobel and Muting in the Merauke area and answering the question “Who is the owner that area?” His answer is significantly mistranslated and the additional question relating to the nine million hectares has been inserted between elements of his response to the ownership question. 

Silence of the Panda's allegation

We visit one spot on the WWF map. One million hectares of oil palms will be planted here in the tribal homeland of the Kanume. They do not yet know that their time is up. 

The reality

The Kanume people did know about the development proposal for the region as they were one of the nine tribes participating in the mapping exercise with WWF. The Kanume are, however, secure in their traditional homes within the Wasure National Park.

Silence of the Panda's allegation

Interview with Chief Kasimurus Sangara of the Kanume, where his statements appear to relate to a context of resisting soldier and surveyor linked attempts to take land away. 

The reality

The interview is significantly mistranslated. Kasmirus Sangara talks generally of events and how he permits various uses of the forest. The references are to soldiers and a bishop, not surveyors. The “conflict” phrases “They cannot take our forest away” and “If I want, I can cast a spell on them” are not in the chief’s words.