Scottish Circus Animal Ban: Questionable Ethics?

For those who do not know yet, the Scottish Parliament have published a bill to ban the use of wild animals in travelling circuses. With all the pressing matters arising from the impending Brexit; a debate over a second referendum on Scottish independence; recent acts of terrorism occurring in Britain*; immigration issues; foreign policy debates; concerns of educational cuts; problems with the National Health Service; and the inherent challenges met by an ageing population; it’s nice to know that our politicians want to tackle such an urgent matter as the banning of a minority animal enterprise that has regularly met its English regulatory standards.

The Review of the Welfare of Wild Animals in Circuses – Far from Impartial? Part 1

A review of the welfare of wild animals in circuses, which was commissioned by the Welsh Assembly, has finally been published.  It will come as no surprise to many, including Rouster, that the whole exercise was going to be a “greenwash” in favour of the animal-rights lobby. 

See: Is Welsh Assembly trying to 'fix' a circus animals ban?

First, the lead scientist, Professor Stephen Harris, chosen to undertake this review has co-authored a paper in 2009 condemning the use of wild animals in circuses; a situation that should have at least challenged his scientific neutrality on this issue.  He also has a reputation for involvement with various animal-rights lobby groups including The League Against Cruel Sports (LACS).  This association and his long-term friendship with a leading member this organization caused a court case in 2015 to be dismissed and brought into judgment his objectivity is an independent witness.

Circus Mania: Animal Welfare or Animal Rights - the big difference

"I understand why people often harbour an instinctive belief that keeping animals in circuses is cruel or distasteful. I was brought up with that belief. When I began writing a book about the circus, it was the daredevilry of the human performers that I wanted to celebrate. I quickly realised, however, that I would have to visit some of the last remaining circuses with animals because that was where I could get a glimpse into the history of the art form. I went along as a sceptic. Indeed, I went looking for signs of cruelty. But I was determined, too, to speak to the trainers and find out the truth."

Douglas McPherson has written an excellent piece on the distinction between animal welfare and animal rights, using animal circuses as a prime example. Despite articles in The Huffington Post, The Guardian and several books and websites dedicated to this education, the distinction between animal rights and animal welfare is often blurred. McPherson joins other journalists who have noticed how circus is the thin end of the wedge in the argument. Read his very interesting new article here.

Don't even ask me about Azaleas!

I have worked with animals for longer than I care to admit in public.  Yet, during all those years I have discovered only one universal truth about animal training: that there is only one thing two animal trainers are likely to agree on, and that’s the fact that a third animal trainer is dead wrong.

No two animal training experts agree on all subjects.  There are countless schools of thoughts about how animals should best be trained, that’s true, and the most commonly accepted methods have changed over the years.  Generally speaking, the tendency in the Western world has been to shift towards “gentler” methods.  Just as our society in general has become less accepting of violence in the home, oppression in the work place and so on, we demand a kinder treatment for animals.  This is also possibly a reflection of the fact that for most of us, animals are a luxury, an addition to our life, rather than a necessity.  Not so long ago, when we relied on animals to perform tasks for us, people tended to have a less lenient view of their misbehaviour, and take sterner steps to control it.  Times move on, life changes and so do our ethics.  Our legislation, as legislation does, has followed suit, and the Animal Welfare Act of 2006 places serious responsibilities on all people who care for animals.

A Commons Circus of Animals and Clowns by Dominic Lawson

Image via Wikipedia

Celebrated writer Dominic Lawson saw what many failed (or feared) to when back bench politicians decided to have a game of "political football" with the animal circus issue on 23rd June. His observations, comparable with views expressed in an article written on 27th June by The Herald's Andrew McKie, cut straight to the absurdity of the whole issue and exposes the serious lack of research and information provided by the anti-wild-animals-in-circus MPs. 

A Commons Circus of Animals and Clowns
Dominic Lawson - dominic.lawson@sunday-times.co.uk
Copyright: The Sunday Times. 26 June 2011 page 23

Some might say it is a cruel, if traditional, spectacle; at times little more than the baiting of enclosed creatures performing under huge stress for the gratuitous amusement of the watching public. Even so, I would not endorse the outright banning of House of Commons debates.

The Commons, however, has called for the complete banning of all wild animals in circuses, to take effect by July 1, 2012. This was the outcome of a debate of furious intensity, yet with an almost complete lack of opposing voices. Member upon member jumped up last Thursday to demand that the deputy Speaker give him or her more minutes to expatiate on the presumed suffering of wild animals in our circuses. There are now only 39 remaining: that is, only 39 such ani­mals in the entire country.

Questions awaiting answers (A.K.A. If Not, Why Not?) by David Konyot

Image via WikipediaDavid Konyot takes a proactive stance in his approach to the opposition UK animal circuses face. David has formulated a set of questions derived from the ethics that underpin Britain's attitude towards the law and democracy. Outside of this we can look at it from the way a rational argument is decided. The burden is always on the shoulders of the claimant. It is down to them to produce empirical and testable evidence to support their claim. There have been two separate major scientific investigations into UK animal circuses. The first, in 1990, was commissioned by long-time and current circus opponent, the RSPCA, and returned with conclusions that did not support the concept of abolishing any animal usage in circus. It did say that improvements were needed, but achievable, and noted that circuses were often viewed with a degree of prejudice when