Circus Wild Animal Trainer Helps the SPCA?

No, you didn't read that wrong. It seems that a kind-hearted member of our circus community has put differences to one side - perhaps in the spirit of this festive season - and come to the aid of one its staunchest opponents. However, fear not. This is not some naive soul won over by "soft" animal rights dogma, as we have seen happen to often in the zoo fraternity. Casey, our man in South Africa, recognized that by donating animal food to this "non-profit" organization he had some say over where his hard-earned money would go.

SPCA International are a global organization that go under the guise of being "animal welfare" orientated rather than rights, but much like the similarly named RSPCA in the UK, the group is heavily involved in political activities and oppose certain legal animal professions such as animal circuses. Unlike various other legitimate animal welfare charities, such as SSPCA, PDSA, The Blue

The RSPCA tries to censor criticism on Facebook

And The Moonbeams Kissed The Sea: The RSPCA tries to censor criticism on Facebook: The Royal Society for the Protection of Animals (RSPCA) is not doing too well at the moment, according to a number of press reports in p...

More things in common...

RSPCA official charity logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Rouster is not usually one to push a story by the Daily Mail. This tabloid rag that masquerades as middle-brow journalism has been responsible for many unfair and unbalanced reports on animals in entertainment, and often shows shocking examples of its own double-standards within short spaces of time. However, this weekend's story reveals something that Rouster has known and been trying to put across for a very long time. 

The RSPCA has never been Rouster's favourite "Animal Welfare" charity. Unlike many other very reputable non-profit animal welfare charities, the organization's stance has been far too political for our tastes. Their unwavering position against wild animals in circuses - despite numerous inspectors finding nothing wrong with travelling circuses, their own commissioned investigation coming out in favour of animals in circuses and in opposition to the overwhelming evidence contradicting their own self proclaimed "scientific" opinion -  obviously pits them directly against our own philosophy. However, they are generally considered to be the lesser of our threats. Unlike, PETA, ADI, HSUS, CAPS and so on, the RSPCA can still just about be seen as an Animal Welfare group, rather than Animal Rights. We believe that, on the whole, they don't muddy the water and a lot of their principles make good sense. They advocate good animal care as opposed to the AR stance of eventual abolition of the human/non-human animal bond. They don't want the world to turn vegan, pet ownership to cease and they are not voicing any opposition to animals in entertainment generally - just the bizarre anti-circus stance.

Terrorism begins at home.

I get incredibly irritated by the anti-piracy ads at the front of DVDs.  “Movie piracy funds the drug trade, terrorism and every horrible thing that goes on in the streets.”  Come on, give me a break.  If you can’t make money out of trafficking drugs and weapons, you are clearly a moron and selling a few grainy copies of “Twilight” isn’t going to save you.

However, many of us, if not most of us, are directly or indirectly funding terrorism.  Yes, you too, probably.  I’m not joking.  Do you care about animals?  Do you get sad at Christmastime and fall for those television ads with the sad donkeys staring straight into your soul, the kittens in the rain, and so on?  Do you feel compelled to put a pound in a tin, buy a calendar or cards, set up a direct debit, or do your bit in some way?  Then you may well be sponsoring terrorism, at home and abroad.

It is now a well-known fact that some so-called animal charities do not match the picture that most of us have in our head.  For me, an animal charity should concern itself with stopping animal abuse and neglect; it should encourage the spread of information on proper animal care; it should help raise the bar for animal welfare standards; and, when necessary, it should help the courts with the fair prosecution of those people who mistreat animals. 

Britain's got Talented Liars

circus (Photo credit: fsse8info)

Our country is known worldwide for its love of animals.  In fact, we can be proud of the fact that the world’s first animal welfare charity, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which later on became the RSPCA, was established in this country in 1824.  The love and respect for animals and their needs is a quintessential part of our culture and is reflected both in our animal welfare legislation and in the way people interact with animals on a daily basis.

I have been working with dogs for years, and still people take me by surprise with their extreme kindness towards their pets.  I have several elderly customers, not in the best of health, who take their equally elderly dogs out on strollers so they can enjoy a nice walk without overexerting themselves.  I know plenty of ladies who perm and dye their own hair at home but fork out every month for their dogs to have “a proper groom”, because they “deserve it”.  In fact, I’m willing to bet that a good proportion of my doggy customers eat better than their owners, and definitely better than me.  Let’s face it; most of us are animal-mad here.  We treat our animals well, and expect other people to maintain the same high standards with their animals.

How Long Will Britain’s Have Talent?

The final of the television talent show “Britain’s Got Talent” announced its winner “via popular public vote” and it was the human-animal duo of Ashleigh and Pudsey the dog who won.  Thus demonstrating very clearly that, despite the claims of the highly vocal animal-rights groups, the British public still has a clear affection for performing animal acts. Although the most disturbing thing about this is that if Ashleigh and Pudsey’s performance had taken place within the context of a circus it is possible that the reaction would not have been as supportive.

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.

The Mystery of the Muddy Feet: Expose exposed! by Gail Wilmot

Image via WikipediaI only have to look at the Zemanta suggestions for related articles or tag words to see how little a presence positive circus news has on the internet. It is very easy for a politician or a lay person to believe that the majority do, in fact, back a ban on the use of animals in circuses. And yet animal circuses are frequently packed and the very existence of the animal circus in the UK, a country that has perhaps the longest history of opposition to the very business and culture they spawned, proves to a rational person that this is not correct. Unfortunately the shrill and aggressive voice of the minority paints a different picture. As can be seen with the recent "debates" in Parliament, opponents of animal circuses hit out at their target with little fear of repercussion. Circus people are rarely critical thinkers, which is a shame given their cultural heritage including such tricksters as P.T. Barnum and the great grandfather of sceptical activists Harry Houdini. This is why the average circus person or supporter rarely investigating their attackers. If they had have done then perhaps they might have been able to stem the tide of academic pseudo-philosophy, profiteering by so-called charitable organizations and grass-roots fanaticism and terrorism their descendants face today. Gail Wilmot is a critical thinker and just the sort the circus community needs fighting their corner if it is survive. In this small episode that exposes both the blasé way an average opponent of animal circus feels they can attack the business and culture, and how a little research and a lot of patience can turn up the truth... 

Circus Krone Challenges Performing Animal Ban in Austria

Image via Wikipedia

This is the European Circus Association's press release proving the ongoing legal battle in Austria regarding the banning of animals in circuses. This case is cited by the British Conservative Party as the reason why they cannot impose a ban in the UK and it is likely to be illegal. Opponents of animals circuses have tried to dismiss this very real and serious case...

Circus Krone Challenges Performing Animal Ban in Austria  Brussels, Belgium 15 June 2011 - The European Circus Association (ECA) today announced the filing of a legal action against Austria to challenge its ban on animals in the circus. ECA President Urs Pilz said. “The right to present well-cared for animals under good welfare conditions in the classical circus in Europe must be established once and for all.”