Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The ICF has mainly put is reliance on the study titled "Animals in circuses and zoos. Chiron's World" by Dr. Marthekiley Worthington, said to be an animal behaviour expert, which was commissioned by RSPCA to carry out an independent, scientific study of circus animals in comparison with animals in Zoos and other husbandry systems and in the wild. The results of the investigations are summarised in this book and the observations are mainly out of visits to circuses and zoos located in western countries and that too mostly in U. K. No. circus/zoo in India appear to have been visited by Dr. Kiley. However, the RSPCA has categorically stated that they have not endorsed the conclusions made by the author and the views expressed in the book can at best be considered as the view of an individual and not as views of RSPCA. The "People for Animals" has provided a copy of the critical analysis of the Kiley Worthington Report, "Animals in Circuses" commissioned by the Bellerive Foundation and Care for the Wild Written and researched by William Johnson (Annex-ure-XII). The analysis has highlighted various omissions and contradictions. It has been brought out that show-business and education are Inherently Incompatible, particularly since circuses are unlikely to give objective accounts of their animal keeping and training techniques, their involvement in animal dealing etc. Dr. Kiley has dealt in the book at length about the unimpeachable credentials of the circus community in ensuring proper upkeep and maintenance of the animals under their charge. However, as has been rightly pointed out by RSPCA, it has failed to appreciate that upkeep and maintenance are not confined merely to timely provision of adequate quantity and quality of appropriate food and water to the animals but also involves appropriate housing which provides the animals enough space for movement and exercise and also to meet their biological requirements and social interactions.
The report throughout its length has tried to keep the zoos at par with circus but it has failed to appreciate the total changes in the zoo ethics of late. Zoos play an important role in ex situ preservation of species particularly conservation of rare and endangered species. Contrasting differences in the case of zoos and circuses are that the latter have capture, transportation, training, rehearsal and performance, whereas the former have capture/seizure & translation......... Also in case of circuses. the animals are constantly transported from one place to another in varying climatic and other factors, which have an adverse impact on the, animals on display mostly in unnatural environment.
It was noted in the report that the Government of India have already decided to close the zoos that are not congenial to the health of animals and a number of ill-planned zoos (at least 25%) have been derecognised as the cages are dingy and lack enough space for movement of animals to meet their biological requirements. It was also noted that the mobile zoos have been refused permission keeping in view the stress that animals were subjected to during the transportation and the size of enclosures in which the animals have to be confined. At this stage, it will be convenient to refer to the relevant extracts of the material which was placed before it:--1. RSPCA'S CONCLUSIONS FROM THE REPORT "Accommodation for the animals is clearly shown to be grossly inadequate, providing extremely cramped space and a highly impoverished environment. Despite the Introduction of new codes of practice by the Association of Circus Proprietors early in the period of study, which require the provision of exercise areas, the data show that big cats are still confined to their transport wagons for over 90% of the time, where they have between 0.17 and 0.45 cubic metres of space per animal -- a frightening small figure. Elephants are shown to be leg-shackled fore and hind on boards for over 60% of the time, where "they are able to lie down with difficulty".

6. That takes us to the third contentions. viz. the impugned notification is discriminatory in so far as it is intended to ban exhibition and training of animals In circus only without bringing the zoos within its ken. The. endeavour of the petitioners appears to be to equate circuses with zoos. According to them, If zoos can keep animals, why not circuses ? In our considered opinion, the comparison sought to be made out Is unrealistic and Inexpedient. Whereas the sole motto of circus is monetary gain for the owner of circus company in the name of entertainment, the zoos on the other hand are meant for conservation and education purpose. This need is of more priority than the greed of the circus companies. Among the two conservation techniques - ex situ and in situ, zoos are excellent places for captive breeding. Captive breeding helps animals to proliferate their species in protection, which is not the case in circus. Zoos play an important role and also they are only hope in preserving the species, when under rare circumstances animals are infected in Wild (Sanctuaries & National Parks) due to some factors. Thus zoos help in preventing the extinction of the said species. Another contrasting difference in the case of zoos and circus is that the latter has the following stages namely capture, transportation, training, rehearsal and performance, whereas the former has only capture seizure and translocation. Also in case of circus, the animals are constantly transported from one place to another (climatic factors and any other factor not being taken into consideration which will have adverse Impact on the animals) and displayed in the most unnatural environment, but whereas in zoos efforts are made by the Government to put the animals in as much as possible an environment that will not have any adverse Impact on the animal. Also the concept of open enclosures in zoos is gaining good momentum. This can be very much understood in terms of space provided to animals in zoos and in circus. Wild animals are territory conscious and would like to settle down at one place; but circus animals are constantly on the move. Wild animals dislike being stared at. Sometimes if they are well fed and rested, they can be Indifferent to the staring humans or they will retreat into the rear portion of the enclosures in the zoos but circus animals have nowhere to retreat. Not only are they exposed to the gazing eyes, but three or four times a day before a shrieking and clamouring audience, under hot dazzling lights, with noisy bands blaring and drums beating, they must perform the tricks they have been taught. Hence it cannot be gainsaid that circus animals are better off than zoo animals. All good zoos have realised and recognised the need for wild animals to live in open enclosures with caves or shady trees, under which they can rest or retreat. In this age. when there is so much concern for the preservation of wildlife, setting up of enclosures, open zoos, safari parks and sanctuaries, where wild animals can live In conditions closely approximating to their wild existence as humanly as possible, circuses using wild animals have become an anachronism, (c.f. advice received by the Government from the Animal Welfare Board of India.) The inevitable conclusion, therefore, is that animals in zoos cannot be equated with animals in circuses and the contention to the contrary raised by the petitioners is devoid of merit and is accordingly rejected.