Journey into the Wild with The Orangutan Conservation Project's Leif Cocks

Send us a text

In this episode, conservationist, author and founder of The Orangutan Project, Leif Cocks. 

Leif is a tireless conservationist who seems to be involved in innumerable conservation projects throughout Southeast Asia, but most notably The Orangutan Project, which he founded in 1998.

We talk about Leif’s path to conservation, which began early on with an interest in animals and nature and was formalized through his experiences in higher education and work in husbandry and small population biology at Perth Zoo. 

What really stands out in this conversation is Leif’s passion for and commitment to being a defender of the natural world and all the beings living in it. 

We get into orangutan conservation, including what he views as the pillars of successful orangutan reintroduction - physical health, mental health, social skills, and forest skills.

Leif describes how  The Orangutan Project operates, emphasizing the importance of collective action and going far beyond just orangutan conservation into preservation of entire ecosystems and supporting local human communities living therein.

He also deftly describes the real challenges involved in conserving the rainforest’s megafauna, from supporting the endearingly “bat shit crazy” folks who manage to translocate elephants to safe areas, to getting people emotionally connected to the species and ecosystems that need saving.

I really appreciated Leif’s ability to unpack the nitty gritty of running a successful conservation effort, and the efforts they’ve made to assess the progress of the various initiatives they’ve sponsored. 

We close out the conversation with some moral questions about personhood in nonhumans and the value of captivity for conservation at places like zoos.

Other topics we discuss:

• orangutans and conservation translocations
• animal culture
• ecotourism to connect people with nature
• Tinder meets Uber for elephant conservation!

Notable quotes from Leif:

• on orangutans - "they're self aware persons that don't belong in captivity"
• conservation needs "loving kindness and intelligent action"
• on conservation challenges - "For every complex problem in the world there’s a simple solution which is absolutely wrong”

If you want to find out more about Leif, his personal story and his work, you can find him at leifcocks.org or through The Orangutan Project website. He’s also the author of three books: Orangutans and their Battle for Survival, Orangutans: My Cousins, My Friends, and Finding Our Humanity. And check out episode #14 in season 1 of the Talking Apes podcast.

Check out his socials at

Support the show

The PrimateCast is hosted and produced by Andrew MacIntosh. Artwork by Chris Martin. Music by Andre Goncalves.

Here's what you can do to get in touch!

• Connect with us on Facebook, X, or Instagram
• Subscribe where you get your podcasts
• Email [e-mail] with thoughts and comments

If you value the show, leave ratings and reviews wherever it is that you listen, and consider donating by clicking the "Support the Show" link above.

Episode Transcript

Andrew (00:00):
After the tune an interview with conservationist
author and founder of theOrangutan Project Leif Cocks.
Hello everyone and welcome backfor another installment of the
PrimateCast.
I’m your host, Andrew MacIntoshof Kyoto University’s Wildlife
Research Center and the podcastis brought to you by the CICASP
at Kyoto University’s Center forthe Evolutionary Origins of
Human Behavior.
Inthis episode, I share my
conversation withconservationist, author and
founder of the OrangutanProject, Leif Cocks.
Thanks also to Audrey Love forthe suggestion and introductions
.
So,Leif is a tireless
conservationist who seems to beinvolved in innumerable
conservation projects throughoutSoutheast Asia, but most
notably The Orangutan Project,which he founded in 1998.
Wetalk about Leif’s path to
conservation, which began earlyon with an interest in animals
and nature and was formalizedthrough his experiences in
higher education and work inhusbandry and small population
biology at Perth Zoo.
Whatreally stands out in this
conversation is Leif’s passionfor and commitment to being a
defender of the natural worldand all the beings living in it.
Weget into orangutan
conservation, including what heviews as the pillars of
successful orangutanreintroduction - physical
health, mental health, socialskills, and forest skills.
Leifdescribes how The Orangutan
Project operates, emphasizingthe importance of collective
action and going far beyond justorangutan conservation into
preservation of entireecosystems and supporting local
human communities living therein.
Healso deftly describes the real
challenges involved inconserving the rainforest’s
megafauna, from supporting theendearingly “bat shit crazy”
folks who manage to translocateelephants to safe areas, to
getting people emotionallyconnected to the species and
ecosystems that need saving.
You might also notice howquotable he is! I
really appreciated Leif’sability to unpack the nitty
gritty of running a successfulconservation effort, and the
efforts they’ve made to assessthe progress of the various
initiatives they’ve sponsored.
Weclose out the conversation with
some moral questions aboutpersonhood in nonhumans and the
value of captivity forconservation at places like zoos
.
Ifyou want to find out more about
Leif, his personal story andhis work, you can find him at
leifcocks.
org or through The OrangutanProject website.
He’s also the author of threebooks: Orangutans and their
battle for survival, orangutansmy cousins my friends, and
finding our humanity.
And check out episode #14 inseason 1 of the Talking Apes
podcast.
Withall that said, here is my
conversation with Leif Cocks.

(00:32):
Thinking about your path tobecoming a conservationist.
What did that look like?
How did you first getinterested in the study or
protection of animals?

Leif (00:42):
I've already had a strong interest in working with or,
more importantly for, animalsfrom even early childhood.
Naturally, i went out touniversity and got my zoology
biology degree.
Then I started working at a zooand had the opportunity to work

(01:05):
with 15 orangutans anddiscovered that they're
self-aware persons that don'tbelong in captivity.
In many ways they're far morenoble form of humanity than
human beings, of course, veryquickly discovered that they
were being driven to extinctionin the most horrific ways that

(01:26):
we can imagine.
My postgraduate research hasbeen in primate behavior and
then my master's on orangutans.
Then, of course, my spare timewas going into their forest
learning about rescuing them.
Then, over time, my out of workhelping orangutans conserv ing

(01:54):
their forest became my full-timejob and working with and trying
to increase the welfare ofIrangatanks captivity became a
small proportion of my work.
Obviously, culminating in theend of my career is starting to
bring some of the Irangatanksthat I could from the zoo back

(02:15):
to the wild and we introducingthem back into an ecosystem that
we had already been funding theprotection of.

Andrew (02:23):
That last point.
It's something I definitelywant to come back to you as well
.
I think it's pretty rare casestill of this was a zoo housed
Irangatank that was eventuallyintroduced into the wild.
Was that specific orangutanborn in the wild?

Leif (02:38):
Well, three ultimately came from the zoo back to the
wild.
In fact, the first Irangatank,the zoo born Irangatank back to
the wild, was Tamara, and hergrandmother, puan, was well-born
.
She was basically the secondgeneration of zoo born

(03:01):
Irangatanks that eventually thenhad the opportunity to go back
to the wild.

Andrew (03:07):
It's incredible to think about Now, when you hear a lot
about reintroduction orintroduction projects.
it's pretty hard to find theright set of circumstances that
allow success for that to happen.
One of them, though, is prettyclear, is that if animals were
born in the wild and then laterbrought into a kind of
artificial setting, it's alittle easier to reintroduce

(03:29):
them.

Leif (03:32):
It's kind of a little bit of a misnomer, depending on what
animal you're talking about.
Let's go to the full end of thespectrum.
If you want to reintroduce acat, you don't have to do too
much.
They're like 90% instinct, 10%learn.
That's why cats just go felleverywhere around the world.
You don't have to be an expert.
Your average house owner lets acat have a reintroduction

(03:54):
project that's going to befairly successful.
Then, when we're talking about,let's say, on the other end of
the spectrum, intelligentanimals adapt primarily to the
environment through culture, notby natural selection.
They have long maternal periods,few offspring and vacant brains

(04:15):
, very long instinct.
At the end, through culture.
Let's say an orangutan is bornin the wild and six months of
age the mother was killed andeaten and is taken off to ride a
bicycle around the stage inThailand, then eventually gets

(04:35):
rescued and come back.
Is that more adapted or to theenvironment than, let's say, an
orangutan who was born incaptivity, natural raise and had
all the mental health andsupport from his mother?
He's critically importantmental health.
Then it's been given all thetraining and support and learn
about trees, learn aboutforaging and that sort of stuff.

(04:58):
If one can get more likely tosurvive than the other, i'd
suggest that just simply beingwild born, although that
certainly can be a factor, ifnot necessarily the be or end,
or when you're talking aboutintelligent animals that adapt
to the environment throughculture, not natural selection.

(05:19):
It's not the be or end or ofretraction.

Andrew (05:27):
You mentioned there were three that you were involved
with that were eventuallyreintroduced.
What were then the kinds ofthings that at the time in the
zoo, you and others working onthat project were trying to make
sure happened for thoseorangutans for their release or
reintroduction to eventually besuccessful?
You mentioned being raisedobviously naturally by a mother

(05:49):
is an important part of that.
What other things were?

Leif (05:53):
I think there's actually four pillars, four foundations
maybe a better way ofvisualizing of orangutan in the
industry.
First is physical health.
If the orangutan has got onearm missing and is sick or
contains some computer ordisease, it's not suitable for
reintroduction, for survival andsurvival of others.

(06:14):
The next building block ismental health.
You know orangutans, we havetheir mothers killed in front of
them, eaten and traumatized andtortured.
Their little brains aredestroyed.
We know with humans, mentalhealth is necessary for success.
Their little minds have to berepaired.
In the case of, let's say,tamara, the first zoo born

(06:38):
orangutan, she was mother,raised, suckled and then, at the
natural age of dispersion, shewent on a journey to mentally,
emotionally prepare.
The third building block issocial skills and social health.
Can you interact and know howto interact with orangutan,
other orangutans properly, getalong, learn from them, get

(07:01):
cultural cues and information?
That's also extremely important.
Tamara already had the firstthree building blocks.
The most key thing that shedidn't have is forest skills,
the last platform of orangutanreintroduction.
Before she even left the zoo,we enclosed a huge fig tree.

(07:24):
Fig trees are the number oneimportant tree and important for
orangutan survival becausethey're all year round food
source.
The density of fig trees isdirectly related to the density
that orangutan population can beat.
So she lived in a thick treeand we fed her in a thick tree
and we started speaking to herIndonesian and all the things

(07:47):
that we started to do, you know.
so the transition was evenstarting there.
And then when she went toBukitigapulu, where she
basically was part of a programto reestablish the population
there when the stints in the1930s, we kept an occasion in
jungle for two weeks, and so shecan get traumatized all the

(08:10):
sounds and see if things gowrong.
But what we did?
also, we went out every day andcollected all the different
food sources that she could findin the forest.
So she was already eating theforest fruits before she came
out, you know.
and then all you know, and thenyou know she already been
living in the tree.
So first, issue out, she madethe night nest at night and she
started foraging the food.

(08:31):
Obviously there were threeyears of following her and
helping her transition andsupporting her with food when
she couldn't find enough, untilshe became qualified to be
independent.
But you know, so it was anintense, say long, journey, with

(08:51):
summer rangotangs, for example,the ex-pets were finding are
too damaged to really have theability to survive in a while.
But even then, we're actuallyat the moment we're designing
and building in Sumatra andopening close to the rangotangs
to live in the rainforest.

(09:11):
but we feel and support themand their offspring will then
become wild.
And so they get the best welfareoutcome and also the genes are
not lost to the conservation ofthe species.
So I guess maybe I'm justhighlighting that last bit
because just highlight, it's along term process.
You know reintroduction, as Isaid, you know things like cats

(09:36):
aside, it's not a release thecage you see in a documentary,
then the animal runs off.
That is just the tip of theiceberg.
You've got to protect the area,you've got to secure the area,
you've got to make sure theanimals prepare and, most likely
with animals such as the rain,you've got to provide long term

(09:58):
ongoing support to transition tothe being independent in the
wild.

Andrew (10:05):
You know, one of my colleagues, formerly of Kyoto
University, now at Kyoto CityZoo, she Yuumi Aminashi,
conducted a study of bedbuilding by chimpanzees in
captivity.
This was at, I believe, at KyotoCity Zoo and found that so some
of the older chimpanzees hadbeen originally came from the

(10:26):
wild or had mothers that were inthe wild, and these chimpanzees
, even later in their age, arelater in their life, are
building beds, so as chimpanzeesdo.
But some of the kind ofchimpanzees that were born in
captivity and don't have anyexperience with a mother who,
you know, raised them and hadalso come from captivity or had

(10:46):
a mother that was in captivity.
So you see, the culturaltransmission of these behaviors
or the memories of thechimpanzees that came from the
wild that have them.
And I was just wondering inthat context, like bed building
is something that's quiteimportant for chimpanzees in the
wild in order to satisfy theirkind of naturalistic behaviors.
But what are maybe someexamples of things that you look

(11:07):
for in the orangutans in, the,say, pre-release phase?
like the things that maybe thatlooks like they're pretty ready
and things that maybe they needto pick up still, and then how
might you build a program toteach them those things?

Leif (11:20):
Yeah, no, it's all very interesting And there's lots of
factors into play.
First thing is to say cultureis just not this standalone
thing.
That culture is how we adapt tothe environment, for humans and
animals, and if you start totry to solidify a culture, it
becomes maladjusted to peoplewho want to hold a culture at

(11:44):
some time in the past.
You want things back in the1950s, you know, but it's a
different world, and so yourculture becomes dysfunctional
And you long for the 1950s whereyour culture that you're stuck
in was actually functional.
And so, similarly, chimpanzeesin captivity.

(12:07):
There's no use doing it.
They have no cultural relevance, and culture that doesn't have
relevance to the environmentmust be dropped and new cultures
must be taken up.
However, we don't haveunlimited plasticity in culture
development, if that makes sense, and also our brains are

(12:28):
certainly, especially in theearly years, are formed in ways
that meet the culturalrequirements.
That makes sense.
So you can if you.
For example, we couldreintroduce Tamara and the other
rangatang facts to wall,because we had a rangatang live
in a natural social system,ergonomic design and clothes

(12:49):
using that sort of stuff, but anorangutan came from another zoo
which was so far away, too faraway, from the wild environment.
That was not possible becauseeven their brains that makes
sense is triggered and developedto survive in a cage in
captivity.
So we see that with humans,humans, often, you know they're

(13:10):
living in a very high stressenvironment.
When they're young, they have,you know, epigenetic triggers in
their brain which makes themnervous and caught, you know,
and cause, you know, andfrightened, And you know, and,
and that goes on for lifetime,because it is a great adaptation
.
If you're living in a very, youknow, stressful, dangerous
environment, but then want thatdangerous removed, you're stuck,

(13:31):
you're stuck in thatenvironment.
So I guess what I'm saying is,yeah, there's, there's a whole
host of things that need to beapplied.
But with orangutans, one of thethings that certainly I've
discovered, i found quitesurprising, is, gee, they're
just damn smart And gee, they'rejust figure things out.
It's like you know.

(13:53):
I mean, you know, tomorrow madea nest.
The first night Everyone said,oh, you can never make a nest.
Well, she's, she's smart Andshe's got four hands and she's
seen other orangutans just thosetwo orangutans make this.
It wasn't like my God took me,like took like 10 years to learn
.
You know how to do that.
You've got four hands, you'rein a tree and you're seeing

(14:14):
someone else do it once.
There, i, i, you know, I wantto go to sleep on this nice
mattress, you know and one ofthe things.
And so and we're seeing it withmany other reintroduced
orangutans, you know, sometimesyou go no, no one's taught them
that.
They haven't learned enough.
Anybody you could, how couldthey?
but they just figured out.
And one of the things I wouldsay what's so remarkable about

(14:36):
and this is definitelychimpanzees.
Chimpanzees are more like me, iguess.
You know you give me some sortof electronic thing, i just keep
pressing the buttons until itworks, you know.
But you know, orangutans arethe ones that actually read the
user manual, and so orangutanhas been perceived as less smart
because they just sit there,run their commute simulations

(14:57):
and sleep, or cortex Don't doanything and then act once and
do it.
Extremely good at figure,seeing that and taking the time
to do that.
So that's one of the at leastfrom my perspective, one of the
most remarkable things.
You know, i've seen theorangutan in the reintroduction
project.
Yeah.

Andrew (15:18):
I've communicated with a number of people who work with
orangutans, whether it's incognitive studies or In zoos,
and pretty much everyone saysthe same thing They're very
deliberating animals that candefinitely surprise you almost
endlessly with what they'recapable of.

Leif (15:34):
Oh yeah, they're incredibly smart.
Of course, to be smart and havea big brain, to be smart for no
reason is very stupid becauseit's high calorie consuming
organ And if it's notcontributing to your survival,
it's not an asset at all, it's aliability.

(15:54):
So all animals, including us,are intelligent in ways which
suit us survival andreproduction, and so this is why
I would say rangatang is adancer in the classroom, but
Juni is in the rainforest Andfrom a rangatang perspective, we
idiots I'm sure they look at usand go why don't you have that
temple special map immediatelywhere every bit of food in the

(16:16):
overtime space is kept?
because you're an idiot.
They can't understand why we'reso stupid, because they're
intelligent in their way.
But we are arrogant and wealways compare And this is
culturally between humans aswell.
We compare by our own standards, and so, yeah, rangatang is
very much the geniuses of therainforest, so we should never

(16:38):
underestimate them in theirability to learn, thrive and
survive.

Andrew (16:45):
So, before getting into then the orangutan project and
all the conservation work you'vebeen doing, just to come back
to something I pinned earlier,which was the transition from
working in zoos doing graduatestudies, where was it that you
first worked in the zoo?

Leif (17:05):
In Perth West Australia.

Andrew (17:08):
It was in Perth?
So what was the transition froma zoo setting to?
did you go from there to doinggraduate study, or was it the
other way around?

Leif (17:17):
No, i mean I started.
I already had a degree inzoology, biology, you know, up
in university.
But you know my postgraduateresearch in other primates just
happened while I was workingwith them.
So I didn't have an ambition toget a postgraduate diploma or
get a master's.
Those vehicles are used todiscover, find out information I

(17:43):
needed to help those animals.
So it wasn't, you know, likethis parallel thing that had no
relationship with it, and alsostarting the rangatang project
in 1998.
Again, it's not.
was this?
I decided to start aconservation organisation.
It was about solving the well,solving a problem of a rangatang

(18:08):
survival of the species, butalso then dovetailed in my
ambition of the rangatangactually looking after going
back to the world.
And first of all we had tosupport wildlife protection
units.
We had the support and therangatang reintroduction site,
and so these things all had tohappen which wasn't going to be

(18:28):
funded by a zoo To allow, youknow, the welfare of the
rangatang to also be included.
So it's always been a holisticapproach.
Then you know, then included,and then the rangatang are
directly looking after.

Andrew (18:48):
So the orangutan project , so 1988, you say so it's, it's
, it's getting on there in termsof years and still looks like
it's going quite strong.
But in the beginning you saidit was just something that had
to happen in order to do thethings that you were working on.
But I think it also takes akind of person to make something
like that happen.
So how, how was it, from yourperspective, setting up this

(19:11):
conservation?
I mean, it's ultimately aconservation organization, but
was it something that you, youknow, spent?
obviously, you must have spenta lot of time building, but what
was the process like, from youwere at the zoo and building
this conservation project.

Leif (19:26):
I mean it gets a certain aspects to it.
One is you don't work if you'redoing what you love and what
you believe in.
So you know that's that'scertain aspects.
So how do you get the energy?
and well, it's.
It's what I believe in, is whatI love to do, you know, to help
others and and make this happen.

(19:48):
The second thing is as humanbeings, i firmly believe as
individuals, we're prettyuseless.
You know that's why you knowBritish petroleum envelops
develop the carbon footprint Oneof the hundred companies
destroying the planet.
You know.
You know you give 90 cents onclimate change.
Why they develop carbonfootprint?
because they want you to takein your your the problem.

(20:11):
You go home and work out yourcarbon credit and do your little
thing while we make a lot ofmoney.
You know destroying the rest ofthe planet.
And so you know those destroyingthe planet and those who want
to save it and save the rain forus and save rain tanks also
have to understand is asindividuals with pretty much
power.

(20:31):
And so my skill is incollectivisation.
You know get bringing otherpeople together, supporting
other people and collectivisingtogether.
And I, you know that's kind ofbeen how I always work, you know
, from when I was a zookeeper, iwas a shop steward, you know,

(20:51):
when I was a curator out on thespecies management program
committee.
So I've always been a very firmbeliever of collectivisation to
achieve things.
And so yeah, so 998, wecollectivise, you know people
that would help with differentskills, and then we moved and we
grow from there.

Andrew (21:13):
Yeah, so at the moment, what was the specific problems
you were hoping to solve whenyou started the Irangentan
project?
So you mentioned a site forintroductions.
What was the actual contextthere?

Leif (21:25):
Well, it's all kind of inclusive.
Now, the first thing is to sayfrom a strategic perspective is
Irangentan may be the centre ofmy love, but not the boundary of
, and I don't believe we cancreate a better world, even for
Irangentan, without constitutingall other living beings and

(21:47):
providing a wingless solutionfor the living beings, that's
all the other biodiversity, thetigers, the elephants which was.
Those projects were created aswell because they were falling
outside the umbrella ofIrangentan conservation And
we've got farce for peoplelooking after people, developing
agricultural systems for themto prosper under the rainforest
canopy.
And you know, saving rainforestis one of the most strategic

(22:10):
things and cost effective thingswe can do to help save the
planet, mitigate climate change,you know, and help the long
term economy of Indonesia as acountry.
So these are all win-winsolutions.
Doesn't make sense.
So it's always been.
The vision has always beenholistic.
Doesn't make sense.
Do what you're good at and dowhere your skills are at, but

(22:31):
hold the holistic vision ofsomething that's benefit to all
living beings.
How that manifests as aparticular strategy is our
strategy to save up to eightecosystems of right type, shape
and size of rainforests that alldifferent species, subspecies
and orangutans can survive theextinction crisis.
So it has to be the right type,shape and size, otherwise the

(22:54):
rainforest itself is notsustainable or collapsing on
itself, and certainly thepopulations of orangutans it can
hold the unsustainable collapsein itself.
Of course, the two animalswhich are falling outside of the
umbrella were the types andelephants, because even if we
save all the remainingecosystems, there's no sustained

(23:14):
population of tigers in ourfuture.
There's no sustainablepopulation of smart elephants.
They have to be secured insmall numbers in the ecosystem
and then managed overgenerations by transferring
genes and in particular, males,between the populations.
And that's, of course, becausemy last job at the zoo is a

(23:38):
small population biologistmanaging small zoo populations
and genetics.
And so that's where again itdovetails in the sense of for
some species going to have to beactively managed for several
generations until, hopefully,sometime in the future, we start
rewilding the planet to becomemore sustainable.

(23:58):
But in the meantime, while we'remanaging that, we do have the
opportunity to save the lastviable ecosystems for orangutans
and rainforests in the next 10years, which I call the most
important 10 years in humanhistory because it's intriguing
to climate change, becausedestruction of rainforest causes

(24:21):
climate change, but thefeedback loop is.
Climate change is causingdroughts, rising temperatures,
less productivity in therainforest, causing sea levels
of rising to inundate lowlandcoastal peace swamps, which is
primary rain tank habitat.
So these things are allinterlinked.
So we not only have to saverain tanks and rain for us, and

(24:41):
that helps climate change andthe long-term viability of
Indonesia as an economic system,but we also need the whole
world to get on board and savethe planet, and so the planet's
not providing massive feedbackloop which will destroy
everything that we're wishing tocreate.

Andrew (24:59):
Yeah, i mean, obviously that's quite the quagmire of
issues to kind of unpack forpeople, but you mentioned
umbrellas, so orangutans.
I wanted to ask this questionof you.
So in conservation, obviouslythere are a few key concepts,
like umbrella species being oneof them, where if you kind of
target one species, it may andits protection, then obviously

(25:22):
you can protect any species thatfall within, for example, the
habitat it lives in.
Then there's also otherconcepts like flagship species,
and I think orangutan qualifiesas a flagship species as well as
something we can all get behind.
It's a charismatic animal.
So you started preface that bysaying it's not only about

(25:43):
orangutans, but obviously youhave a passion for orangutans
and they're incredible animals.
But what do you see as themajor in terms of orangutans, as
umbrellas and perhaps asflagship species as well?
what are the advantages offocusing on orangutans?

Leif (26:02):
Well, because orangutans are a large body, large brain
animal and a widely distributedin the rainforest living
semi-sorrier lifestyles, youhave to have very large areas to
support them.
But let's say you've gotmonkeys and gibbons and

(26:22):
squirrels.
If you can save a viablepopulation of orangutan, there
is a viable population of them.
Because they live in suchgreater numbers, because they're
small size within therainforest, you don't have to,
in a sense, worry too much aboutthem because they'll come along
for a free ride.
If you're protecting thehabitat and the viable ecosystem

(26:43):
, they're going to be okay.
It's a megafauna which you'regoing to go first And of course,
as I described, isunfortunately today and for the
foreseeable future, with animalswhich even need even greater
area, and the two ones we canhighlight are tigers and
elephants.

(27:04):
It's already too late for themto have viable populations in
one area.
But we do have a plan and we'redoing it now where we're saving
herds of 120, 150 elephants inthese ecosystems And when the
males disperse and they leavetrying to find the next herd,
they get killed And they have acoastal pest or, for the tusk,

(27:29):
what we're doing is we're payingand employing people to put
them on trucks and drive them tothe next ecosystem.
So I call it.
It's a cross between tinder anduber, but for elephants, to
make sure they're safe and theyget to the next ecosystem, and
this has been done successfully.
But we know the system works?

Andrew (27:51):
How many people do you need to employ in order to move
a single elephant, for example?

Leif (27:57):
A dozen And you all have to ba t shit crazy.
Big, dangerous animals trying toget it on the truck I'm a bit
flippant there, but the realterm, of course, is brave And
you all know what they're doing,and luckily we do.

(28:19):
In our network have vets andrangers and our field manager,
alex Mocombecker, theinternational ranking field
manager.
It was an immense experienceAnd so, with everything, we've
got the plan and, within ournetwork of collectivization of
people, we have the skills.

(28:41):
Unfortunately, at the moment,the rate determining step which
is holding us back is fundinghaving enough money to be able
to achieve the vision in time.

Andrew (28:57):
So if I look on the website of the Arangutan project
, i pulled up an infographicthat people listening won't be
able to see, but I think it wasfocusing on, maybe the kind of
successes that you've had overthe years, and one thing it also
includes is different kinds ofareas of conservation that
you're working on.
So you have forest protection,then you have the release

(29:19):
projects and monitoring, and youhave also rescue,
rehabilitation and release Andyou have outreach as well to
educate and empower people forconservation and wildlife.
So maybe if you could justsummarize the kind of structure
of the Arangutan project and howyou kind of engage in all of
those different activitiescollectivizing seems to be a key

(29:41):
term here,

Leif (29:46):
Collectivize, if you want to start your own organization.
Compete against the other guysand this guy's.
I don't want this guy to be Mr,i want to be Mr Orangutan.
So this is how it goes, and somost the energy and emotional
energy is going into fightingthe other organizations and

(30:07):
people , and so what we wantto do is go beyond human nature
to a loving beyond that.
So we cooperate and we workwith all others.
The first thing is to say whythat's on the website is because
that's what I care about And weare what you measure.

(30:28):
That makes sense.
Okay, how much money were youraised and how much publicity we
get, and that sort of stuff.
I care about.
How many orangutans were saved,how much forest we're
protecting, how many elephantswere protecting?
Those are the things thatreally matter.
Those are the things I want tomeasure, to understand our
progress, and we have a range ofactivities to do them.

(30:48):
But I'm not going to, in a sense, purport which activities good
or bad, or better or worse,because that will give you the
misunderstanding information Andthis is why a lot of money is
wasted, like we get a lot.
For example, if the trend isplanted tree and you get in a
day by people who want to planta tree, you go well, actually I

(31:09):
don't need that And actuallysometimes it's not very
efficient And it's not the rightthing.
And planting a tree is just onesmall part of a whole step.
And so I always say for everycomplex problem in the world,
there's a simple solution, whichis absolutely wrong.
It's great for getting electedbuild a wall, Brexit or

(31:31):
something, But it's really badfor achieving good in the world.
So what we do?
we look at every ecosystemwe're working at and we diagnose
the disease And then we put theright medicine and the right
dosage.
Some that is land acquisition,leasing or land purchase, some
that is ranges going on And somethat, for example, in the

(31:53):
population ranked tank, it'sextinct.
So we need to reintroduce thatpopulation, So it reintroduces
into it.
Sometimes it's refrostation.
Most of the time it alsoinvolves some community work,
working with a local communityto make sure they're prosperous
and happy and connected to therainforest.
And so which action we do andto what level depends on the

(32:18):
disease of the patient, thedisease of the patient of the
ecosystem.
And so that graph gives peoplethe general idea of where money
is to go, But it's not until weactually focus on an individual
ecosystem that we can reallydetermine what is the right
percentage of expenditure forthe right activity.

Andrew (32:40):
So you mentioned maybe one popular thing for potential
donors or funders would bereally interested in this
planting trees, which may or maynot be the appropriate course
of action.
But how do you then decide atany given moment which is going
to be the focus?
Or if you have potential donorsthat are really interested in
one thing but maybe you don'tthink that's the way forward at

(33:02):
the moment, how do you managethose kind of interactions with
people and help them form thebetter expectations or more
appropriate ones?

Leif (33:13):
Yeah, i guess there's two aspects of fundraising.
One is a small, large number offundraising.
So you have a large number ofsmall donors who they can't save
the world, but they cancontribute something to the
project, and that's really aboutjust connecting to them, which

(33:34):
suddenly connects to their heart, and so, in fact, actually, the
more you talk about the stuffwe're talking about, the more
you turn them off.
You get the brain working andthe endorphins go away and I'll
go sit down.
It's about connecting.
This is the beautiful littleorangutan.
It deserves living a while as asentient person like you.

(33:57):
Can you give to help it, andwhether your money may just
achieve only that, but that'sworth a lifetime of work, that
that little rain tank and liveits entire life and free.
And that's really the message.
Now, the other side of the twois some donors.
They have the potential in someway to save the whole ecosystem

(34:19):
, and so my job, then, is totake them on that journey,
because most charity money atleast from my perspective it
wasted.
It might be a flushed down tool, and you're probably aware of
all aware of plenty of examplesof that indiscriminate charity
caused more problems thansolving, and so, but, of course,

(34:40):
if you don't have a knowledgein the area, you don't know the
major donor You don't know.
Well, seems good, it seems likea good idea.
Well, the brochure looksfantastic.
So my job is to communicate, iscommunicate and take them on a
journey which often involvestaking people on ecotourism and
then taking the major donors tothe project and seeing for the

(35:02):
real life And they gain thefeedback of genuine on the
ground outcomes.
And so and that's that, that'sa highly, much more detailed
level of communication, becauseI can take them on the journey
from confusion, overload withinformation, to hope and vision

(35:24):
about what can be achieved.
And unfortunately that can't bedone in mass media, Unless I
have the time, like I do withyou today, you know, just sit
for an hour and talk about it.
Normally, you know, it's justgoing to be the punch line to
get connection.

Andrew (35:44):
I really wanted to ask you about the guiding and the
ecotourism.
Obviously, ecotourism is a isbecome a huge part of what a lot
of people push for conservation.
But the guiding part I don'tknow if too many people.
I know one of my colleagues hastaken some, some folks from the
public into to Africa to theirstudy site, whether it's in

(36:07):
Uganda or the DR Congo.
But how did you start guidingand having and actually on the
website?
if anyone's interested, i meanyou can be hired.

Leif (36:17):
Yeah, i'm not gonna hire you.
You can certainly come on oneof my echo tours.

Andrew (36:21):
Okay.

Leif (36:22):
But yeah, well, what I mean to hire if, look, you've
got a million dollars, savewhole ecosystem, yeah, yeah.
You know, like you know, youknow if that yeah, yeah, Will I
cost you myself.
Well, it's really just a matterof price.
You know, How big ecosystem areyou willing to save?
Mm-hmm, But no jokes aside,ecotourism, if part of it, but I

(36:46):
don't see it as the savior thatoften people think it is.
The reason is mass ecotourism,if we can make a lot of money
from, normally destroys theenvironment for which it is
operating.
On you.
We've seen so many cases ofthat in Indonesia and Malaysia,
as just two examples.
Butic small ecotourism, youknow which you've done.

(37:08):
If I feel sensitive, yes, itdoes work and it can work, but
it's not gonna generate incometo support the community and
save the environment.
It's just probably a smallportion.
Now then, of course, thequestion is well, why do I do it
?
One is my system is the ecotourcompany pays for my AFM, my

(37:28):
accommodation, So I do anecotour and then suddenly I'm in
Indonesia doing all my meetingsand doing all my project
reporting and reviews andinspections, And it's all free.
I say hey, for majority free iswhat we are after.
The second thing is each donorlet's say in these normal
ecotourists donates $1,000 tohave me come along and give them

(37:52):
to.
So 10 people, that $10,000 thatwe didn't have to save
conservation, hey, that's wortha week.
And lastly, is they get toenjoy me giving talks every
night by the campfire in therainforest And a few of them end

(38:13):
up to be major donors becausethey're genuinely connected with
the project, the animals andthe people, seeing the real
works, seeing the real people onthe ground, and they go on to
make really significant outcomesin the future for conservation.
So, like everything is like anecosystem of strategy to save

(38:35):
money and ultimately save theforest, But the actual ecotour
itself it's only a small part ofthe strategy.

Andrew (38:46):
Yeah, but it's so important for the idea of
connecting people with whatyou're maybe using as the device
for trying to get the donationsAnd I wonder if, oh, please go
ahead.

Leif (38:58):
Yeah, no, it is important because I remember talking to a
you know a fundraiser for amajor hospital in America And he
said to the last person like hesaid, anyone who donates this
hospital is saying my mother gotthis disease, my daughter, my
sister.
It's some personal connection.
Unless it affects thempersonally, they don't care.

(39:19):
But luckily, people arepersonally affected by the
disease this hospital treats andtherefore they will only give
money.
The problem I have is I'm tryingto help indigenous communities
in Indonesia that no one hadeven heard of and no one has
connection to.
I'm trying to save elephantsand tigers and orangutans that

(39:41):
people really haven't had aconnection to, and therefore,
how do I inspire them?
It's so important for theirsurvival because the money is in
the West And this is probablyin a little bit of a different
way and true of a larger scale.
The money is concentrated inone area, but the low hanging

(40:02):
fruit and the ability to makereal, meaningful change is in
poor, developed countries, andso connecting those two is a
challenge that, for example, youknow, the hospital fundraiser
doesn't have, and so therefore,ecotourism comes a important
tool in my toolbox as a way ofconnecting people to the cause.

Andrew (40:29):
So where I was gonna go with that question too and your
introduction is perfect is maybeI wanted to ask a kind of
trivial question, which is whatpeople kind of get wrong about
orangutans before they go withyou on these ecotourism and in
what ways they kind of have achanged kind of perspective.
But maybe, based on what youjust introduced, you could

(40:51):
follow that up by answering alsowhat are your major activities
then through the orangutanproject for supporting the local
communities as well?
So I mean, obviously byprotecting habitat then you
protect a lot of the servicesthat people are using.
But is there other ways toothat you're trying to make it

(41:12):
win-win, not just for thewildlife but also for the people
?

Leif (41:15):
It always has to be win-win.
If you're doing a win-losesituation, you're part of the
problem.
it's always been win-win Andit's not wildlife versus people,
it's not environment versuseconomy, it's about women's
solutions.
those are false paradigms.
I'll ask the first questionfirst.
what most people get wrong ishow magnificent they are,

(41:37):
because an orangutan which isadapted to the environment over
millions of years.
they're intelligent in the bodySeen in the zoo is an ugly
character which you are themagnificence they are, and when
you see them in the wild, theyfinally go oh, wow, that's

(41:58):
impressive.
If not, something I waslaughing at putting a sack on
his head had to do the zoo.
Now I'll ask you a secondquestion.
Yes, we care about people.

Andrew (42:07):
It's not like because the people who don't like what
we're doing because we'reaffecting their business plan.

Leif (42:14):
You know and say, oh, they care about animals more than
people.
You know, they're kind of apeculiar, odd person.
You know?
No, not true.
You know, we care about peoplejust as much.
We care about all living beings.
As an example, the Talatmalacommunity in Bukit Tikapulu,
where tomorrow the firstorangutan will produce.
We are paid for midwife to livethere And we are feeding the

(42:40):
school children every day twomeals a day, and we're educating
them and providing money fornot only the primary school
education by scholarships, highschool and university.

Andrew (42:49):
And as an example.

Leif (42:51):
Now the Talatmala community didn't name their
children just six years oldbefore they started this,
because they probably would havedied.
Not worth getting attached tothose little suckers.
Now they name them at birth Andwe're working with them to the
agricultural system underrainforest canopy that they will
prosper.
Affluence I'm not telling themthat just being poor and

(43:12):
surviving.
I'm talking about well educatedpeople.
Affluence that's a vision thatwe have.
Now the problem is, this is thechallenge.
This is the challenge we create.
There's actually two indigenouscommunities here the orangutan
member, which is Hunter Gathamus, and the Talatmala, which is
the Slashon-Bernagal culture.
Both systems of survival havebeen sustainable,

(43:37):
environmentally sustainable,over centuries.
But the big multinationals havetaken all their land away, just
like they've taken land fromthe orangutans and tigers.
So their systems of survival nolonger are sustainable and
their children are becomingmalnourished because they can't
find enough food.
They can't, and they keep doing.
Slashon-bernagal culture.
They'll destroy the landbecause they can't regenerate in

(43:59):
time.
So, no fault of their own.
We have to try to work withthem to develop agricultural
systems under rainforest canopythat will allow it to become
sustainable again.
Now, as I mentioned before, weadapt as people to the
environment by culture, andthese indigenous communities
have done the same.
And if the environment changesand the culture remains the same

(44:23):
, the people become maladjustedto the environment.
Yeah, and the trouble is and wesee that, we see that with
indigenous communities all overthe world, including America and
Australia if you change theenvironment rapidly, the culture
becomes dysfunctional And theycan't function in a new society
and they can't even function inthe old society because the

(44:43):
environment for that culture wasadapted to is no longer there.
And you see generations ofdysfunctionality because they
can't culturally adapt quickenough and people I guess try to
do good, say hold on to theculture.
You know doesn't make sense,but that's not what culture is.
Culture is how we adapt to theenvironment.
It's not some nice thing,doesn't make sense, and so the

(45:07):
challenge is in a way whichsupports them and empowers
people it's a slowly insensitiveeconomic and environment system
in a sympathetic way and givingthem support in that process So
they can come along at a ratethat doesn't make sense.
That is palatable.

(45:29):
We're not very good at rapidchanges as human beings, and so
they can want survival andprosper, and so it's certainly
not easy.
Community work is the hardest,you know.
Human beings are the hardestanimal to conserve, you know,
and the ones causing most of theproblem.
But we have to do it because welove those people and we care

(45:51):
about them, you know, and theworld we want to create is where
these ecosystems are not onlyenvironmentally self-sustainable
for future generations buteconomically self-sustainable.
The indigenous communities theyare prosperous, you know, and
there's enough money generatedto protection and the
infrastructure to look after theecosystem.
So my vision is when I finallyleave the world and leave these

(46:16):
conservation projects behind.
They're not onlyenvironmentally but economically
self-sustainable, and we canonly do that by supporting and
caring for the indigenouscommunities.

Andrew (46:28):
Yeah, so probably this is.
I'm a little bit naive.
I don't know what the situationis like in Indonesia, but you
mentioned it's not just there,but in other parts of the world
where indigenous communities arevery much marginalized and have
a fair amount of trouble withconflict between the maybe
dominating government orindustry or whatever.

(46:48):
But is it also true then withoil, oil Palm would be the
leading industry?
then that causes the mostconcern for I mean climate
change aside most concern fororangutans and other animals in
the forest.
But what is the relationshipthen between the oil palm
industry and these indigenouscommunities?
So is it like I imagine, thewealthy landowners, industries
come in, maybe take that awayfrom local communities, or is

(47:12):
there a lot?
Is there also some?
what I was trying to get at, isthere also some demand from the
local communities to beintegrated partly into that
system for their own economicgain?

Leif (47:23):
Of course there's pushback and you know if you look at the
maps.
if you go look at a map ofconcessions forest concessions
or land concessions given awayyou don't see the area.
This is their traditional triballand And no it's like if they
did that, they could never knockthe forest down in the first
place, because the forest wasn'tempty.

(47:44):
The forest hasn't empty.
It's not like no one was livingin the forest.
So, you know, human beings havebeen making a living and
sustain themselves in thisforest for centuries, and so the
only way you can actually, youknow, in a sense, divide up the
land and give it to bigmultinationals to make billions
of dollars on short term profitis to ignore the fact that the

(48:04):
indigenous communities there Andof course you know they push
back as much as they can, butthey're powerless.
They're not, you know.
They don't have the education,the power, the money to fight
back.
So they certainly do, andcertainly more and more you're
seeing around the world,including the need for more and
more recognition of indigenousrights.
So there is progress, if itdoesn't make sense, but it's

(48:27):
slow and it certainly hasn'tbeen there in nothing to pass to
not just eliminate the vastmajority of their land.
So they're really kind of inthe sense.
Yeah, You know I was.
You know, the image is that allorangutans and the innocent
tiger, the indigenouscommunities, are stuck in a

(48:50):
small patch of forest, you know,and then the rest is all gone.
Yeah, oh, can you hear me,andrew?

Andrew (49:01):
Yeah, you're still there .

Leif (49:03):
Yeah, it's funny, my screen's just gone off.

Andrew (49:05):
I noticed you kind of went in the dark and now your
screen is frozen.
Is that thing there?
No, I can still hear you fine.

Leif (49:15):
Okay, i'll continue talking.
Sure, yeah And yeah.
So yeah, you have these.
You know orangutans, elephanttigers and people you know in
these last pockets of mainfrostsworking on where to survive.
You know, and of course youknow, in particular, the

(49:35):
elephants and people are in hugeconflict with each other
because they're both intelligentpersons who are trying to
survive in the limited resourcesin the last remaining ecosystem
, and the big thing we have todo is deal with a managed in
this case, human elephantconflict.

Andrew (49:53):
So this might take us in a slightly different direction,
just to kind of close out theinterview here, but I've noticed
you a couple of times in thisinterview refer to orangutans,
and now most recently elephants,as persons with personhood, and
this kind of gets into, i guess, what some people would think
of as an interesting kind ofphilosophical question about the

(50:17):
place of non-human species andsomething that I'm very
interested in, following groupslike the non-human rights
project, for example, and I kindof wonder.
I assume you do thatdeliberately and I'm kind of
wondering what the reception isor when you refer to orangutans

(50:40):
or elephants that way or whatyou mean.
maybe I should start by askingyou, like how, what you mean
when you refer to them aspersons or with personhood.

Leif (50:48):
Yeah, cool.
It's very hard for a lot ofpeople to, you know, think about
orangutans, elephants as twoexamples of persons, because
they seem to already define aperson as a human being with
homo sapiens.
They're the mental blockagainst that, just as there was

(51:08):
the mental block when thefounders of America wrote is
self-evident that all men arecreated equal.
Self-evident meaning theydidn't explain it, but it wasn't
self-evident that your skin wasblack, that you were equal,
that you kept slaves, and itwasn't self-evident that the
persons who shared the bed andraised their children were equal
, because women didn't get tovote in America until the 1920s.

(51:32):
And so we do have these mentalcultural blocks over time.
My proposition by any objectivestandard, orangutans and
elephants, just as two exampleswe're talking about now, the
self-aware persons.
They have individual identityof themselves, they project
themselves into the past andinto the future, have anxiety

(51:55):
about the past and worries aboutthe future And therefore, you
know, are and should becategorized as persons with the
same rights as humans, althoughthey don't share our species.

Andrew (52:10):
Yeah, it's really fascinating with especially
recent cognitive science, theextent to which we were
completely wrong in, andcontinue to be wrong in many
ways when we figure out ways toactually examine those questions
the capabilities of otherspecies And it's.
I'm certainly definitely behindthe process of trying to get

(52:35):
people to reconsider our whatsome might call human
exceptionalism or another one.
We recently had Franz Deval onthe podcast and he talks about
anthropodenial, so the idea thatwe should be more careful about
not allowing the possibilitythat other species have minds
that are capable of things likeours, rather than the reverse,

(52:56):
which is don't anthropomorphize.
So it's quite interesting Yeah.

Leif (53:00):
Yeah, and I think it's in general, what we, you know from
a, from a real practicalperspective our inability to
extend our compassion and loveand concern outside of all
traditional tribal circles ofnation and race, as two examples
it's going to kill us.
You know we're living in aninterconnected world now.

(53:24):
If we don't care about peopleand developed countries and
what's happening to them, thatcomes back and bites us of
climate change and politicalarrests and a myriad of other
things.
You know one sort of climatechange is caused from.
You know, the maltreatment ofanimals in the meat industry.
You know our lack of compassion.

(53:47):
Our living beings are comingback to kill us.
So the future that we have tohave if we're going to survive
on the planet is to have a widerconcern, not only for all
humanity but all livingcreatures on the planet.
Without that, we unfortunatelyhave the technology, the ability

(54:09):
and the reach to even destroyour own futures.

Andrew (54:14):
So, if you're up for it, i just want to ask two more
questions.
I know we've come to kind ofthe end of the hour here and we
should probably get wrappingthings up, but we've talked in
and out about the role of zooshere and your involvement in
zoos in conservation And I kindof wonder if you could just
comment on where you see nowzoos kind of succeeding in one

(54:36):
of their major missions thatthey have, which is for
conservation, and maybe whereyou see they need to maybe do a
little bit better, because thisis obviously another issue
that's become almost mainstreamin the you know whether zoos are
kind of net positive or netnegative for conservation, and
just in general, Zoos aren't, atthis stage, conservation

(54:59):
organizations, becauseconservation you measure the
outcomes in saving habitat andspecies in the wild And you
can't say you know there's somestrategic programs, you know,
like the California Condor orthe West Australian number,

(55:19):
where you can bring animals andcaptivity you have a strategic
program and reduce the use backto the bar.

Leif (55:25):
So there is notable exceptions.
You know where zoos can dogenuine conservation work, but
by and large, zoo populations ofmegafauna such as tigers,
elephants and orangutans are allunsustainable And they can't
save themselves.
They need to save the wildpopulation.
And so, and there's very littleevidence that displaying

(55:50):
animals and zoos have a directconservation outcome.
I think it's just you seem toconvenient thing to make that
connection but there's noevidence for it.
So, even so, if even if zooscontribute a little bit to
conservation, it's obviously avery inefficient conservation.

(56:11):
You know, when you spendmillions of dollars on a zoo and
a few thousand go toconservation, it's obviously
it's not a conservationorganization.
It's a animal displayorganization which may
contribute a little bit toconservation.
But, of course, as I mentioned,there's notable examples, of

(56:32):
course, with intelligent personssuch as orangutans and
chimpanzees and elephants,there's actually ethical reasons
why we don't want to keep themcaptivity, because persons don't
do well in captivity, just aspersons don't do well in refugee
camps.
Dispel all the loving care thatthey get.
Persons need to be free and beable to control who and when and

(56:53):
how often they interact withother species.
Otherwise they can't have themental health for prosperity.
So when I was at the zoo I wascertainly trying to encourage
the zoo as much as I could toinvolve from a zoo to a
conservation organization And,for example, the strategy was

(57:16):
for, i say, orangutans was thatsome orangutans are, because of
their injuries or diseases, canlive the best life possible in a
really good western zoo and getall the loving care from expo
keepers.
But some orangutans in a zoocould live their lives in
rainforest sanctuaries inrainforest, free, but just have

(57:41):
to be supported, allowed tobreed naturally, and the
offspring become part of areintroduction program, the
ultimate reintroductioncandidates that will help their
species And some have theability to become fully wild and
independent and leave the mostdignified for selling life on
the orangutan And therefore thezoo can be a shop front for

(58:03):
orangutans which have beendetermined because of their
physical or mental injuries,have the best possible life to
live there, but their job is tobe ambassadors and tell the
story of, and raise the funds tosupport the sanctuaries and the
wild orangutans, to support thespecies, and then so, in other

(58:27):
words, the zoo becomes a genuineshop front for genuine work.
And then, of course, my visionwas that the staff, if you're
working looking after theorangutans at a zoo, would also
be part of the reintroductionprogram, would also be part of
the sanctuary, and so the peoplewill be actually talking to
people who genuinely work in thefield, who are generally out
there making a meaningful changeto save the environment and the

(58:48):
species, and that becomes themost powerful advocate for
visitors and turn zoos into theshop fronts for genuine
conservation work, rather thanthe tenuous explanation for the
rationale for survival whichmany zoos talk about today.

Andrew (59:10):
Yeah, So okay.
Last question I think a goodfollow up to that is zoos you
mentioned could be this placethat well, zoos also think of
themselves as places that allowfor this meeting of humans and
nonhumans, And I think I'veheard some zoo professionals

(59:31):
call this like it's a placewhere people can get inspired
and really be shown a sense ofawe at what nature can be like,
And you yourself have done, Ithink, a lot in that regard in
trying to connect to people inthe general public.
You've written a few booksabout your own stories of the

(59:51):
wrong attends and theirconservation, And I kind of
wonder if you could maybe closeby just talking about how did
the ideas for books come out?
How did you maybe this wassomething that you're natural at
, or how did you kind of get theidea that you wanted to be able
to communicate with people inthat medium as well, And how
does that kind of fit into thegeneral roles that you have for

(01:00:13):
yourself in conservation?

Leif (01:00:17):
It's all about communication and connecting
with people.
So all through my books they'rebasically autobiographical, you
know.
They're telling the journeythat I'm having with orangutans
and other species and humanity.
But the other thing is it's awin-win situation.
The books are written toprovide value and make the

(01:00:40):
person's radiant life better,more insightful and more
prosperous, and so there'salways a win-win situation and
everything is going to beeffective.
So I believe people read mybooks and enjoy it and actually
get something genuinely out ofit.
And then you know, if theybenefit from it and you know
from it, from entertainmentlevel to the knowledge level,

(01:01:03):
then they're more likely to havethe compassion and love to give
to causes such as, you know,the conservation of orangutans
as an example.
So there's always that win-winsituation And so basically, the
books are written because youknow I have ideas, you know that
I want to get out there andconnect with people as well as

(01:01:28):
podcasts, books and lectures andother tours are ways of doing
that And so in many ways, farmore powerful than a zoo, you
know, because there's threereasons why I would argue that
the zoo is not as powerful asthey think with connection.

(01:01:49):
One is I mentioned beforeorangutans an example of ugly
caricatures of the magnificenceof the environment.
You're not seeing the animalsthat truly magnificent.
The last second one is you know, kids know more about dinosaurs
than any other animal whenthey're never seen.
I have, yes, my kids are noexception And people care more

(01:02:12):
probably about saving whalesthan probably most other species
, but they've never seen one ina zoo.
I'm not saying you know someonecan't go to zoo and get a
connection, but you know for thecost of running a zoo and the
potential loss of welfare that'sgiven to so many animals in the
zoo, and I'm not saying there'ssome animals that can't be kept

(01:02:32):
adequately in good welfare inaddition to but there's
certainly a big proportion oftheir current collections can't
Then the cost benefits simplyare there.
So I'd rather stick to books,podcasts and echo tours as a
more ethical and effective wayof connecting with people.

Andrew (01:02:52):
Great Well, thanks so much for sharing And maybe we
can just close by.
I can ask you to share, like,if people want to learn more
about the orangutan project orother things that you're working
on or that you're doing, howcan people find you and learn
more and hopefully contribute?

Leif (01:03:08):
Yeah, I mean, if you go to the orangutanprojectorg and you
see all that projects and howto help them, you can download
all our annual pause and impactstatements to find out exactly
what we're doing, and that'swonderful.
If you want to know more aboutmy books and my podcasts and my

(01:03:29):
YouTube talks, you can go tolathecox.
or one word leis, c-o-c-k-s,dot, o-i-g.
And, yeah, you can get thelinks to there.
And, of course, ultimately,yeah, if anyone wants to come on
echo tour and spend a few daysin the jungle, i'd love to see
you there.

Andrew (01:03:48):
All right, well, liv Cox , thanks so much for joining me
on the primate cast.
It's been a pleasure.

Leif (01:03:52):
You're most welcome.
It's been great.
No-transcript.