When is the cow worthy of protection? When should cow protection be rejected?

Cow is worthy of protection only in as much this serves humanitarian and national interests.
Animals such as the buffalo, cow and trees which include banyan and pepal are useful to man. This is why we are fond of them. To that end we might even consider them worthy of worship. Their protection, sustenance and well-being is our duty. In that sense alone it is also our dharma! Does it not follow then that when under certain circumstances, that animal or tree becomes a source of trouble to mankind. It ceases to be worthy of sustenance or protection and as such its destruction is in humanitarian or national interests and becomes a human or national dharma? 

from Portraits of Society and Stories of Savarkar.

The concept of sacred grooves is worthy of mention here. A area of a forest is marked out and animal grazing and farming is prohibited on that land. This not only maintains the ecological balance of that village but also replenishes water table and prevents soil erosion. Such is the foresight and wisdom of our ancient rshis!

When humanitarian interests are not served and in fact harmed by the cow and when humanism is shamed, self-defeating extreme cow protection should be rejected.

A substance is edible to the extent that it is beneficial to man. Attributing religious qualities to it gives it a Godly status. Such a superstitious mindset destroys the nation’s intellect.

Should cow be a symbol of the Hindu nation?

The cow is but a drought animal and so a milch symbol of the Hindu nation. By no means should it be considered its emblem. The object of worship should be greater than its worshiper. Likewise, a national-emblem should evoke the nation’s exemplary-valor, brilliance, aspirations and make its people aspire to be super-humans. The cow is exploited and eaten at will, is an appropriate symbol of our present-day weakness. But at least the Hindu nation of tomorrow should not have such a pitiable symbol.

 X-Rays

This is why when the committee was deciding on the national flag, Savarkar sent his suggestions to them. In that letter he wrote that, the wheel or chakra of the charkha which is used to hand-spin cloth signified weakness. Instead, it should be replaced with the Ashoka Chakra. The Ashoka's Chakra is a modification of the Dharma Chakra which signifies the change in duality of nature-- calamity and prosperity.

The symbol of Hindutva is not the cow but the man-lion.*
The qualities of god permeate into his worshiper. Whilst considering the cow to be divine and worshiping her, the entire Hindu nation became docile like the cow. It started eating grass. If we are to now found our nation on the basis of an animal, let that animal be the lion. Using its sharp claws in one leap, the lion fatally knocks and wounds the heads of wild mammoths. We need to worship such a Nrsinha. That and not the cow’s hooves, is the mark of Hindutva.

* Nrsinha, sometimes also spelled as Narsimha, He is the fourth incarnation of Lord Vishnu. He is a able-bodied man with the handsome face of a lion. 

Non-Hindus should discard their hatred for the cow and do genuine cow protection

The religious character that Hindus have given to cow protection howsoever naive is not symptomatic of cruelty. This is because protecting animals such as cows and buffaloes that are extremely useful to man have an objective of safeguarding human interests. But the religious fanaticism of those non-Hindus whose religion itself is based on hatred for the cow is not only naive but also cruel. They have no right whatsoever to mock at the Hindus.
There is an overdose of gratitude, compassion, notion of all living beings being one in the cow worship of Hindus. But the cow slaughter indulged in by non-Hindus has an excess of cruelty, ungratefulness and asurik (demonic) taking of life. It is not religious madness but irreligious wickedness. For this reason, these non-Hindus should discard their ‘religious’ cow hatred and consider cow protection done for economic reasons to be their duty.

X-Rays

Gratitude to the cow is consistent with the Hindu trait of compassion towards all living beings

…That we should look upon that extremely useful animal (cow) with the same affection as for a family member is no doubt in keeping with humanism. To protect and sustain the cow is our personal and familial duty. At least in the case of Hindusthan, it is also our national duty.
…To have a feeling of gratitude towards an animal that is so useful to us is particularly consistent with the Hindu trait of compassion towards all living beings. 

Vidnyan Nishtha Nibandha (Pro-Science Essays)
Samagra Savarkar vangmaya (Entire Savarkar Prose)
Vol. 3, p.340, 1936.

Protect the cow also, do not simply just worship it

I criticized the false notions involved in cow worship with the aim of removing the chaff and preserving the essence so that cow protection may be better achieved. A worshipful attitude is necessary for protection. But it is improper to forget the duty of cow protection and indulging only in worship. The word ‘only’ used here is important. First protect the cow and then worship it if you so desire.

Svatantryaveer Savarkar: Phase of the Hindu Mahasabha

How to do genuine cow protection?

To do genuine cow protection, it should be done without spreading religious superstition. Let the movement for cow protection be based and popularized on clear-cut and experimental economic and scientific principles. Then alone shall we achieve genuine cow protection like the Americans.

Entire Savarkar Prose, Volume 3, page 171, 1934

Unless the moment of cow protection is based on solid economic principles, it will not gain traction. This is because it will not be popular among farmers who are the true cow protectorate. The economic viability of cow protection is paramount for it to be a grassroots movement in which people take part voluntarily.

Are you a Hindu?

आसिंधु सिंधुपर्यंता यस्य भारतभूमिका |

पितृभूः पुण्यभूश्चैव स वै हिंदुरितिस्मृतः ||

AsindhusindhuparyantA yasya bhAratbhumika

Pitrubhuhupunyabhushaiva sa vai hinduritismrutah

From the Sindhu (Indus river) to the seas-- Those who considers this, the land of Bharat, as his Fatherland and Holyland, that person is alone known as a Hindu.

This is the Hindutva definition of a Hindu. This is a geographical and territorial definition.

By this definition a Christian in India cannot be a Hindu because, although his forefathers were Hindu and hence India is his Fatherland, his Holyland is Bethlehem and Jerusalem, so his Holyland is not a place in India.

By this definition a Muslim in India cannot be a Hindu because, although his forefathers were Hindu and hence India is his Fatherland, his Holyland is Mecca and Medina, so his Holyland is not a place in India.

By this definition a Sikh, a Jain or a Buddhist anywhere in the world of Indian-origin can call himself as a Hindu, with Sikhism, Jainism or Buddhism being his panth because his Fatherland is India and his Holyland is a place in India.