The Welfare of Wild Animals in Travelling Circuses
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The welfare of wild animals in travelling circuses Jo Dorning Stephen Harris and Heather Pickett The welfare of wild animals in travelling circuses member states. In 19 of the 23 countries for which information was available, animal welfare/ Executive protection was the sole or one of the reasons for banning the use of wild animals in circuses. ◆ There are also local bans in various semi- autonomous regions/counties/ municipalities Summary in a number of countries, including Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Norway, Poland, Republic of Ireland, Spain, UK and USA. More than 200 local authorities in the UK, including nearly half of the local authorities in Wales, ◆ We were asked to provide the Welsh Government already have a ban on animals in circuses; of with an impartial literature review and an these, more than two thirds ban all animals, analysis of the scientific evidence available as while the remainder ban wild animals. to whether captive wild animals in travelling circuses and other animal shows achieve their ◆ There is a lack of clarity as to what constitutes optimal welfare requirements as set out under a domesticated animal, a wild species, a travelling the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and any other circus, a mobile zoo, and performance. This relevant legislation. leads to inconsistencies in which pieces of legislation apply to which species and in ◆ The Animal Welfare Act 2006 makes it a which circumstances. criminal offence for any person responsible for an animal to fail to provide for the animal’s ◆ In England, in 2015 only 19 wild animals (seven welfare. Under the Act, the person responsible reindeer, three snakes, three zebras, three camels, for an animal must take all reasonable steps one ankole, one fox and one raccoon) were to ensure the needs of the animal are met. covered by licences issued to two circuses These needs include - under the Welfare of Animals in Travelling Circuses (England) Regulations 2012. (a) its need for a suitable environment, Substantially more individuals and a much (b) its need for a suitable diet, greater range of species of wild animals (c) its need to be able to exhibit normal are used in European circuses. behaviour patterns, ◆ In the UK, many more wild animals are used (d) any need it has to be housed with, in a variety of other mobile entertainments or apart from, other animals, and (collectively referred to as “mobile zoos” for this report). A survey in 2016 found that there (e) its need to be protected from pain, were around 188 mobile zoos, plus 7 mobile suffering, injury and disease. ‘farms’, with around 3570 wild animals between However, there is considerable debate about them. These are minimum estimates. The animals the welfare of wild animals in travelling circuses, are used for a variety of purposes, including and views are polarised as to whether the display, handling and performing tricks at a specific conditions provided by circuses and wide range of venues. The number of calls to other travelling shows that use wild animals the RSPCA’s Cruelty and Advice Line in 2015 can meet the welfare needs of wild animals. suggests that there is public concern about these shows. ◆ For this review, we considered the collective effect of all aspects of management and the ◆ While the use of wild animals in interactive environment on the welfare of wild animals in shows is likely to have greater impact than travelling circuses and mobile zoos since, while simple displays, the education and conservation one aspect of management may be interpreted role of travelling circuses and mobile zoos as promoting good welfare, the others may is likely to be marginal, and any potential not, and so the cumulative effect may be poor educational and conservation benefits are welfare overall. likely to be outweighed by the negative impression generated by using wild animals ◆ We reviewed Welsh, UK and EU legislation for entertainment. affecting animals in circuses and provided an overview of countries that have banned the ◆ We contacted 658 experts and organisations use of some or all wild animals in circuses. We around the world to seek their views on the identified 33 countries that have nationwide key welfare issues for wild animals in travelling bans on the use or import/export of some or circuses and mobile zoos. These experts were all wild animals in circuses, including 18 EU identified through scientific publications, 2 The welfare of wild animals in travelling circuses internet research and recommendations from ◆ The main areas where experts disagreed were other experts. They included 138 animal trainers the influence of different aspects of captive and circuses, 206 lawyers and veterinarians animal management on the welfare of wild with expertise in wild animal welfare, 107 people animals in travelling circuses and mobile zoos, working for relevant NGOs, 144 scientists such the potential impacts of handling and training as biologists, researchers, behavioural and on their welfare, and the impacts of transport species experts, and 58 zoo and wild animal and travel on their welfare. Having identified sanctuary staff. Other contacts included the main areas of disagreement between the relevant government officials and wildlife different groups of experts, we looked for experts. scientific evidence that would help assess the ◆ For the first questionnaire, we asked 613 rationale for these differences of opinion. experts to list up to ten indicators of good ◆ To identify relevant literature, we developed and bad welfare and up to ten factors that search terms based on the results of the first could contribute to good and bad welfare of questionnaire survey. Of the 1430 sources of wild animals in circuses and the other travelling information we located from the database animal shows. We also asked them to list any searches, 666 (46.6%) were published up to issues they believed apply specifically to non- and including 2006, and 764 (53.4%) were domesticated animals used in circuses and published from 2007 onwards. We also other travelling animal shows. We received identified 270 other records from other 97 completed questionnaires, a response sources: of these 153 (56.7%) were published rate of 15.8%. up to and including 2006, and 117 (43.3%) ◆ For the second questionnaire, we used the 10 from 2007 onwards. Thus there has been largest response categories for each question a substantial increase in the amount of in the first questionnaire to form 42 statements information available since the last review about the welfare of wild animals in circuses of the welfare of wild animals in travelling and other travelling shows and asked 623 circuses. experts to indicate the extent to which they ◆ All sources of information were then assessed agreed with each statement, on a scale from to decide whether they met the criteria for 0% to 100% using a slider. We received 98 inclusion in a scientific review. It was impossible responses, a response rate of 15.7%. to define which species are used in circuses ◆ We analysed the answers to identify the and mobile zoos, especially since the search significant areas of agreement and disagreement for novelty and changing attitudes have led between different groups of experts. The to a rapid expansion of the number of mobile greatest difference was between animal train- zoos and of the species used in wild animal ers and circuses and NGOs and the three entertainment generally. So we did not exclude groups of experts (lawyers and veterinarians, any species of wild animal from the literature scientists, and zoo and wild animal sanctuary review. Since very little research has been done staff) that were considered to be impartial on animals in travelling circuses and mobile (i.e. were not directly involved with the issue). zoos per se, we used studies on how wild Animal trainers and circuses disagreed with animals respond to changes in environment, the three groups of impartial experts on 11/42 husbandry and/or transport in other captive questions (26%), and NGOs disagreed with situations to identify key indicators of good the impartial experts on 8/42 questions (19%), welfare, how particular experiences affect whereas the impartial groups of experts only welfare, and whether travelling circuses disagreed with each other on two questions and mobile zoos can fulfil the welfare (5%) each. So there was substantial agreement requirements of wild animals. on welfare issues associated with wild animals in travelling circuses and other forms of animal entertainment between lawyers and veterinarians, scientists, and zoo and wild animal sanctuary staff. In the literature review, we discuss where the scientific evidence supports the views expressed by different groups of experts. 3 The welfare of wild animals in travelling circuses ◆ We were asked to consider “What evidence ◆ We were asked “What evidence exists to is there that the welfare, both physical and demonstrate that travelling environments mental, of wild and/or non-domesticated might induce behaviours that are not normally animals is sub-optimal in travelling and non- consistent for wild animals?” Travelling travelling circuses?” Compared with static environments are associated with restriction zoos, enclosures for animals in circuses and of normal behaviour patterns and high levels travelling animal shows are generally much of stereotypical behaviour in captive wild smaller and less complex and the provision animals and are unable to meet the specific of environmental enrichment is likely to be climatic and environment needs of many extremely limited or non-existent due to the species, thereby adversely affecting their need to maintain portability, ease of handling behaviour. of the animals and compliance during training ◆ We were asked “Does the evidence currently sessions. Limitations of space and facilities mean available support a ban on the use of such that animals are often kept in inappropriate animals in travelling environments?” We took social conditions, such as isolation of social into account the collective and cumulative species, grouping of solitary species and/or effects of all aspects of management and the proximity of incompatible species.