The Issue of Animal Abuse in Circuses

The issue of using animals for entertainment

The issue of using animals for entertainment is an issue that has always caused a huge debate and made many feel uneasy. It is apparent that despite the fact that people enjoy seeing animals in circuses, there is an ongoing argument of whether animas in circuses are treated ethically. An examination into the history of animal abuse traces back to over 200 years indicating that if it a problem, then is has been in existent for over two decades (Bradshaw et al. 807). Examples of such circuses include The Ringling Bros and Barnum & Bailey Circus that often attract multitudes who turn up to cheer their favorite animals as they perform on stage. It is thus quite unlikely that one would imagine that the treatment of animals in such a manner could be perceived as a controversy considering the length of time that it has been practiced. The issue of elephant abuse in circuses is a social problem that has attracted varied viewpoints and remains a problematic issue because it has led to the mistreatment of animals for decades.

Background on Animal Abuse

The UK-based National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS) founded by Ms. Frances P. Cobbe in 1875 became the world’s first NGO that was destined to oppose the process of experimentation on animals (Hanft 3). Those who believe that animals are worth being used for research purposes have proven that animals can be used for medical purposes. It is acknowledged that the human life is treasured and it may be tempting to sacrifice the lives of other animals just to save the human species. The approach is worth considering, but it must be remembered that while humans could be self-centered, animals also have rights and display emotions about how they feel. Putting an end to the use of animals in circus will benefit not only animals, but it will also enable the human species to realize animal use for entertainment is not only flawed but are also less significant to human happiness.

The Mistreatment Issue

The key challenge that is associated with the presentation of elephants in circuses is that it is associated with an inhumane and ill treatment of the creatures. In Derby, it is reported that the Performing Animal Welfare Society (PAWS), operates three sanctuaries that are thought to be using the non-dominance technique (Hart). It is supposed to be a new model for handlers of elephants in the county but the reality is that it does not work for elephants in circuses. It thus implies that the elephants are subject to ill treatment as they are in most cases subject to force though bullying. The giant creatures often have to be forced to climb on trucks and are mishandled in the process. It is the only strategy that handlers use to have the animals perform on cue in many cases, and it presents a worrying trend considering the need for a humane treatment of animals (Hart).

The other key problem

The other key problem is that following the cruel handling that animals are often subjected to, they also have to be taken through long journeys that do not constitute their normal life. The primary challenge that has been highlighted regarding the circus debate is that the idea of placing animals in circus only separates them from their natural life. In many cases, there is a process of constant traveling that subjects the creatures to mental and physical trauma and that could be detrimental to the animals’ wellbeing. It is common to find that the elephants are transported from one city to another in railroad cars and trucks using semitrailers. The trips often last hours and in some cases several days and the isolation proceeds even once the journey ends. Concerned parties report that when the elephants are released, they do not have the chance to enjoy freedom in the circus community as they would in the wild (Jadhav and Barua 1357). They are thus denied the opportunity to lead a quality life. It is contrary to what the elephants experience in the wild because in the forests, the animals have the chance to wander and they live in highly intelligent well-structured social groups. The circus issue is, therefore, quite a challenge because it means that there is no opportunity to bond with other animals as the elephants would do in the forests. The chance that these relationships could worsen is notable in the event that the animals are traded or sold to another party. It follows that the problem could proceed to another party when the animals ae sold to a different party who presents a different ways of handling from the previous owner (Hart).

Behavioral Justification

The proof of mistreatment of animals has been developed following the establishment that elephants in circuses often exhibit different behaviors. A professor at Texas A&M University did a variety of studies on the behavioral patterns exhibited by the animals. The research that was done at the institution’s department of Animal Science was intended to examine the effects of transportation of the animals’ behavior (Hart). The study involved a time-lapsed video that was used for recording the elephants’ behavior as they were transported on the railroads cars and semi-trailers. The animals that were studied were owned by four different circus operators that included Carson & Barnes, Clyde Beatty, Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey, and the Hawthorn Corporation (Hart). The observation focused on the behavior depicted as weaving that involved the shifting of weight in the process of transport from one side to another. As they weaved, the animals were found to eat while throwing their hay on their backs and they would frequently look at the window.

The indication from the experiment

The indication from the experiment that was done in 2001 stated that the level of mistreatment was not as bad as it was supposed previously (Hart). It was reported that the act of weaving was not suggestive of poor welfare as the animals appeared to be engaged in other activities and they were not focused on the process of transportation. A top researcher in the facility concluded that as opposed to the perceived notion, the behavior could not be used to suggest that the animals were stressed or psychotic in any way. It has also been noted that there is increased weaving when the elephants were given hay or before they were taken to perform. It thus indicates that contrary to popular belief, the subject of using elephants in circus is not as traumatizing as it was thought. Nevertheless, it remains an issue that has raised a heated debate.

Recommendation

It is also worth underscoring the importance of reducing the cruelty to elephants in the circus because just as humans, they also have rights that should not be ignored. It is a controversial issue to state that animals also have rights considering they do not engage in marriage, do not require to vote, neither do they have any form of civilization. However, the most significant effect that should be apprehended is that the concept of Darwinism should be enough proof that even though humans are regarded as higher compared to other animals, they are also close biologically to the other species that they oppress (Mur 17). The most significant example, in this case, is the consideration of the apes who are regarded by Darwin to be of a proximate ancestry as the humans. It is apprehended that even anatomically, many higher apes bear resemblance to the humans only that the human population is perceived to be a little higher. It means that people need to realize that by denying animals and especially elephants the right to human treatment in as much as they are not close to humans is oppressive. In fact, it is likely that the animals are aware that they are used for entertainment, and perceive the treatment they receive to be cruel. It means, therefore that even those who think that animals cannot engage in human activities realize that such issues are less basic to life compared to the right to life that both humans and other animals share.

Furthermore, the use of elephants in circus should be banned

Furthermore, the use of elephants in circus should be banned because it will enable the entertainers to realize that animal use fun is not essential to improving human lives. It appears that the world has been made to believe that the advances in the field of entertainment are attributed to the games that are conducted on the animals. To true effect, however, is that other aspects of health have been more reliable compared to animal research. t is an extrapolation of the use of animals in research. For example, Mur (2017) notes that the link of heart diseases to cholesterol was not established through animal research but rather, because of epidemiological studies (Philips and Lockwood 39). It is just one of the many discoveries that have enabled humans to live better and appreciate their health risk factors without the need to sacrifice animals. There is a wide range of advancements including chemotherapy, or entertainment and social fun among others activities that have been effected without the need to sacrifice animals (Johnsingh and Williams 211).

Conclusion

The debate regarding the use of elephants in circus has attracted varied views and it remains a controversial issue as it has led to the compromise of animals rights. Thus, it is worth emphasizing that the primary basis for arguing against the idea of oppressing animals is the realization that humans can live better without the researches done on the animals. For example, it has been proven that many of the results from animal experiments fail at the human stage. It is also noted that a majority of the advances in the entertainment industry have not included animals. Finally, it is affirmed that elephant cruelty in circus should be banned because elephants could be aware that they are used for fun purposes, and it is unethical to deny them the right to life.

Works Cited

Bradshaw, G. A. et al. “Elephant Breakdown.” Nature 2005: 807. Web.

Hanft, Steven L. ”‘The Animal Testing Ban – What Is Next?’” Regulation and legislation (2014): n. pag. Web.

Hart, Paul. ”Elephant Abuse Charges Add Fuel to Circus Debate.” National Geographic News (2017): n. pag. Web.

Jadhav, Sushrut, and Maan Barua. ”The Elephant Vanishes: Impact of Human–elephant Conflict on People’s Wellbeing.” Health & Place 18.6 (2012): 1356–1365. Web.

Johnsingh, A. J T, and A. Christy Williams. ”Elephant Corridors in India: Lessons for Other Elephant Range Countries.” ORYX

33.3 (1999): 210–214. Web.

Mur, Cindy. Animal Experimentation. Farmington Hills: Greenhaven Press, 2004. Print.

Philips, Allie, and Randall Lockwood. ”Investigating and Prosecuting Animal Abuse.” National District Attorneys Association

(2013): n. pag. Web.