Animal Protection >
Practical Issues >
Animals for Entertainment
Animals Used for Entertainment
The sort of man who likes to spend his time watching a cage
of monkeys chase one another, or a lion gnaw its tail, or a lizard
catch flies, is precisely the sort of man whose mental weakness
should be combated at the public expense, and not fostered. -- H.L. Mencken, 1918.
The wild, cruel animal is not behind the bars of a cage. He is
in front of it. Axel Munthe, Swedish Writer and Physician, 1857-1949.
#69 Don't zoos contribute to the saving of species from
#70 Don't animals live longer in zoos than they would in the wild?
#71 How will people see wild animals and learn about them without zoos?
#72 What is wrong with circuses and rodeos?
#73 But isn't it true that animals are well cared for and wouldn't
perform if they weren't happy?
#74 What about horse or greyhound racing?
Additional topics: My
friends are going to the circus
#69 Don't zoos
contribute to the saving of species from extinction?
Zoos often claim that
they are "arks", which can preserve species whose habitat has been destroyed, or
which were wiped out in the wild for other reasons (such as hunting). They suggest that
they can maintain the species in captivity until the cause of the creature's extirpation
is remedied, and then successfully reintroduce the animals to the wild, resulting in a
healthy, self-sustaining population. Zoos often defend their existence against challenges
from the AR movement on these grounds. There are several problems with this argument, however. First, the
number of animals required to maintain a viable gene pool can be quite high, and is never
known for certain. If the captive gene pool is too small, then inbreeding can result in
increased susceptibility to disease, birth defects, and mutations; the species can be so
weakened that it would never be viable in the wild.
Some species are extremely difficult to breed in captivity: marine
mammals, many bird species, and so on. Pandas, which have been the sustained focus of
captive breeding efforts for several decades in zoos around the world, are notoriously
difficult to breed in captivity. With such species, the zoos, by taking animals from the
wild to supply their breeding programs, constitute a net drain on wild populations.
The whole concept of habitat restoration is mired in serious
difficulties. Animals threatened by poaching (elephants, rhinos, pandas, bears and more)
will never be safe in the wild as long as firearms, material needs, and a willingness to
consume animal parts coincide. Species threatened by chemical contamination (such as bird
species vulnerable to pesticides and lead shot) will not be candidates for release until
we stop using the offending substances, and enough time has passed for the toxins to be
processed out of the environment. Since heavy metals and some pesticides are both
persistent and bioaccumulative, this could mean decades or centuries before it is safe to
reintroduce the animals.
Even if these problems can be overcome, there are still difficulties
with the process of reintroduction. Problems such as human imprinting, the need to teach
animals to fly, hunt, build dens, and raise their young are serious obstacles, and must be
solved individually for each species.
There is a small limit to the number of species the global network of
zoos can preserve under even the most optimistic assumptions. Profound constraints are
imposed by the lack of space in zoos, their limited financial resources, and the
requirement that viable gene pools of each species be preserved. Few zoos, for instance,
ever keep more than two individuals of large mammal species. The need to preserve scores
or hundreds of a particular species would be beyond the resources of even the largest
zoos, and even the whole world zoo community would be hard-pressed to preserve even a few
dozen species in this manner.
Contrast this with the efficiency of large habitat preserves, which can
maintain viable populations of whole complexes of species with minimal human intervention.
Large preserves maintain every species in the ecosystem in a predominantly self-sufficient
manner, while keeping the creatures in the natural habitat unmolested. If the financial
resources (both government and charitable), and the biological expertise currently
consumed by zoos, were redirected to habitat preservation and management, we would have
far fewer worries about habitat restoration or preserving species whose habitat is gone.
Choosing zoos as a means for species preservation, in addition to being
expensive and of dubious effectiveness, has serious ethical problems. Keeping animals in
zoos harms them, by denying them freedom of movement and association, which is important
to social animals, and frustrates many of their natural behavioral patterns, leaving them
at least bored, and at worst seriously neurotic. While humans may feel there is some
justifying benefit to their captivity (that the species is being preserved, and may
someday be reintroduced into the wild), this is no compensating benefit to the individual
animals. Attempts to preserve species by means of captivity have been described as
sacrificing the individual gorilla to the abstract Gorilla (i.e., to the abstract
conception of the gorilla). --JE
#70 Don't animals
live longer in zoos than they would in the wild?
In some cases, this is
true. But it is irrelevant. Suppose a zoo decides to exhibit human beings. They snatch a
peasant from a less-developed country and put her on display. Due to the regular feedings
and health care that the zoo provides, the peasant will live longer in captivity. Is this
A tradeoff of quantity of life versus quality of life is not always
decided in favor of quantity. --DG
Humans and other animals have instincts
to be with and to protect their own families, and to have free will.
Sometimes we under-estimate the importance of these desires:
What All Beings Want.
#71 How will people see wild animals
and learn about them without zoos?
Zoo elephants have no educational value, expert says.
To gain true
and complete knowledge of wild animals, one must observe them in their natural habitats.
The conditions under which animals are kept in zoos typically distorts their behavior
significantly. There are several practical alternatives to zoos for educational purposes.
There are many nature documentaries shown regularly on television as well as available on
video cassettes. Specials on public television networks, as well as several cable
channels, such as The Discovery Channel, provide accurate information on animals in their
natural habitats. Magazines such as National Geographic provide superb illustrated
articles, as well. And, of course, public libraries are a gold-mine of information.
Zoos often mistreat animals, keeping them in small pens or cages. This
is unfair and cruel. The natural instincts and behavior of these animals are suppressed by
force. How can anyone observe wild animals under such circumstances and believe that one
has been educated? --JLS
"All good things are wild, and free."
David Thoreau (essayist and poet)
SEE ALSO: #69-#70
#72 What is wrong
with circuses and rodeos?
for the use of physical punishment by, and fear of, their oppressors,
animals would never be a part of a circus. -- Richard Pryor, American
Actor and Comedian.
To treat animals as objects
for our amusement is to treat them without the respect they deserve. When we degrade the
most intelligent fellow mammals in this way, we act as our ancestors acted in former
centuries. They knew nothing about the animals' intelligence, sensitivities, emotions, and
social needs; they saw only brute beasts. To continue such ancient traditions, even if no
cruelty were involved, means that we insist on remaining ignorant and insensitive.
But the cruelty does exist and is inherent in these spectacles. In
rodeos, there is no show unless the animal is frightened or in pain. In circuses, animals
suffer most before and after the show. They endure punishment during training and are
subjected to physical and emotional hardships during transportation. They are forced to
travel tens of thousands of miles each year, often in extreme heat or cold, with tigers
living in cramped cages and elephants chained in filthy railroad cars. To the
entrepreneurs, animals are merely stock in trade, to be replaced when they are used up.
David Cowles-Hamar writes about circuses as follows in his "The
Manual of Animal Rights": Not surprisingly, a considerable amount of
"persuasion" is required to achieve these performances, and to this end,
circuses employ various techniques. These include deprivation of food, deprivation of
company, intimidation, muzzling, drugs, punishment and reward systems, shackling, whips,
electronic goads, sticks, and the noise of guns...Circus animals suffer similar mental and
physical problems to zoo animals, displaying stereotypical behavior...Physical symptoms
include shackle sores, herpes, liver failure, kidney disease, and sometimes death...Many
of the animals become both physically and mentally ill. --DG
The American rodeo consists of roping, bucking, and steer wrestling
events. While the public witnesses only the 8 seconds or so that the animals perform,
there are hundreds of hours of unsupervised practice sessions. Also, the stress of
constant travel, often in improperly ventilated vehicles, and poor enforcement of proper
unloading, feeding, and watering of animals during travel contribute to a life of misery
for these animals.
As half a rider's score is based on the performance of the bucking
horse or bull, riders encourage a wild ride by tugging on a bucking strap that is squeezed
tightly around the animal's loins. Electric prods and raking spurs are also used to
stimulate wild behavior. Injuries range from bruises and broken bones to paralysis,
severed tracheas, and death. Spinal cords of calves can be severed when forced to an
abrupt stop while traveling at 30 mph. The practice of slamming these animals to the
ground during these events has caused the rupture of internal organs, leading to a slow,
Dr. C. G. Haber, a veterinarian with thirty years experience as a meat
inspector for the USDA, says: "The rodeo folks send their animals to the packing
houses where...I have seen cattle so extensively bruised that the only areas in which the
skin was attached was the head, neck, legs, and belly. I have seen animals with six to
eight ribs broken from the spine and at times puncturing the lungs. I have seen as much as
two and three gallons of free blood accumulated under the detached skin."
#73 But isn't it
true that animals are well cared for and wouldn't perform if they weren't happy?
Refer to questions #72 and
#74 to see that entertainment animals are generally not well cared for.
For centuries people have known that punishment can induce animals to
perform. The criminal justice system is based on the human rationality in connecting the
act of a crime or wrongdoing with a punishment. Many religions are also based, among other
aspects, on a fear of punishment. Fear leads most of us to act correctly, on the whole.
The same is true for other animals. Many years of unnecessary and
repetitive psychology experiments with Skinner boxes (among other gadgets) have
demonstrated that animals will learn to do things, or act in certain ways (that is, be
conditioned) to avoid electric shocks or other punishment.
Animals do need to have their basic food requirements met, otherwise
they sicken and die, but they don't need to be "happy" to perform certain acts;
fear or desire for a reward (such as food) will make them do it. --JK
#14, #51, #72, #74
#74 What about
horse or greyhound racing?
Link: Facts Animal
Racing is an example of human abuse of animals merely for
entertainment and pleasure, regardless of the needs or condition of the animals. The
pleasure derives primarily from gambling on the outcome of the race. While some punters
express an interest in the animal side of the equation, most people interested in racing
are not interested in the animals but in betting; attendance at race meetings has fallen
dramatically as off-course betting options became available.
While some of the top dogs and horses may be kept in good conditions,
for the majority of animals, this is not the case. While minimum living standards have to
be met, other factors are introduced to gain the best performances (or in some cases to
fix a race by ensuring a loss): drugs, electrical stimuli, whips, etc. While many of these
practices are outlawed (including dog blooding), there are regular reports of various
illegal techniques being used. Logic would suggest that where the volume of money being
moved around is as large as it is in racing, there are huge temptations to massage the
For horses, especially, the track itself poses dangers; falls and
fractures are common in both flat and jump races. Often, lame horses are doped to allow
them to continue to race, with the risk of serious injury.
And at the end of it all, if the animal is not a success, or does not
perform as brilliantly as hoped, it is disposed of. Horses are lucky in that they
occasionally go to a home where they are well treated and respected, but the knackery is a
common option (a knackery is a purveyor of products derived from worn-out and old
livestock). (Recently, a new practice has come to light: owners of race horses sometimes
murder horses that do not reach their "potential", or which are past their
"prime", and then file fraudulent insurance claims.) The likely homes for a
greyhound are few and far between. --JK
"Race horses are prone to a disease called exercise-induced
pulmonary hemorrhage (EIPH). It is characterized by the presence of blood in the lungs and
windpipe of the horse following intense exercise. An Australian study found 42 percent of
1,180 horses to be suffering from EIPH.
"A large percentage of race horses suffer from lameness. Fractures
of the knee are common, as are ligament sprain, joint sprain, and shin soreness.
"Steeple chasing is designed to make the horses fall which
sometimes results in the death of the horse either though a broken neck or an
"incurable" injury for which the horse is killed by a veterinarian."
SEE ALSO: #72-#73