« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES TO THE CONSULTATION DOCUMENT 'PROPOSALS TO REVISE EXISTING ANIMAL WELFARE LEGISLATION'
(5) Animals in circuses/performing animals
Paragraph 15 of the consultation document stated: Currently all performing animal acts should be registered under the Performing Animals (Regulation) Act 1925 but the legislation is regarded as being outdated and of little value as animal welfare legislation. (5.1) We are interested to hear your views on whether regulations should be extended to require that all performing animal acts be licensed and subject to a regular inspection by a local authority. (5.2) Additionally we seek your views on whether restrictions should be placed on the species of animals allowed to participate in performing animal acts. (5.3) If so which animals could be allowed to perform?
Overview
87 responses were received on this subject. Responders included 18 local authorities and their representative organisation LACORS; 2 police forces and their representative organisation ACPOS; 3 organisations that work with performing animals; 4 veterinary organisations; 9 canine organisations (and 2 businesses); 13 animal welfare organisations and sanctuaries; and 22 individuals.
Current use of animals in performances
Responders noted the current perceptions and attitudes towards performing animals and the range of activities that they were engaged in:
The practice is anachronistic. (individual)
Touring of the country with animals, particularly non-domesticated species, has little value in society today. (Angus Council)
There are currently 12 circuses with animals in the United Kingdom. These tour the country. (Born Free Foundation)
The number of animal circuses in Scotland has declined dramatically in the past decade and the number of all human shows have become increasingly popular. (Grampian Animal Defence League)
There has been a marked decrease in the number of animal circuses visiting Scotland in recent years. Although a growing number of local authorities and private landowners have already banned circuses containing animal acts for their land. (The Captive Animals' Protection Society)
Many successful circuses use no animals and no circus has its base in Scotland. (West Lothian Animal Rights and Veggies)
To our knowledge, there are no Scottish-based circuses that use animals, merely one that visits Scotland from England occasionally. (Advocates for Animals)
There are a few travelling circuses in Scotland these days. However, where they do appear, minimum standards of care both on and off season and high welfare arrangements for the transport of animals should be enforced. (British Horse Society)
Animals in circuses/performing animals cause major concerns for a growing number of animal rights supporters. Local authorities are under increasing pressure to defend the use of circus animals, their unnatural lifestyle and the training methods used. Whilst this authority can offer no criticism in respect, it is often difficult to address these issues when a circus is on tour and not United Kingdom based. (City of Edinburgh Council)
An increasing number of local authorities who choose not to permit animals in performances means that animals with travelling shows or circuses spend much of their time caged. (Animal Concern)
A number of local authorities in Scotland have banned animal circuses from their land. They do not have the power to prevent them from appearing on private land. (Grampian Animal Defence League)
This authority, like many others in Scotland, permit cameo roles for animals in stage performances having first being satisfied that their welfare is protected. These animals come from specialist stage companies or they simply can be family pets. (Edinburgh City Council)
Currently this council has adopted a policy through public entertainments licensing that only domesticated animals (dogs, horses etc) are allowed to perform and this seems to work. It would be desirable that this becomes a national standard with the performing animals licensed and subjected to regular welfare inspections. (East Lothian Council)
Circuses are licensed as places of public entertainment in terms of civic government legislation. Reasonable conditions are imposed. Conditions stipulate that the animals must be examined at the expense of the licence holder, by a vet; and the certification of registration in terms of performing animals legislation must be produced. The latter does not provide an adequate degree of comfort in that the certificate has no expiry date etc. In practical terms, this only relates to private property as the council has decided that circuses will not be permitted to occupy parks and other recreational grounds in its ownership. (Midlothian Council)
There is a great range of performing animals, from circus (where the species definitely need to be controlled) to animals used in film and television. (The Federation of Zoological Gardens of Great Britain and Ireland)
Work undertaken is mainly for the camera. It takes much less time and is done in a studio or on a 'location' from which the public is either excluded or held at a distance. The breadth of species which I am able to handle is important, especially in Scotland. In London colleagues can specialise in areas of work. Dogs and horses comprise the bulk of the business, with the rest being other domestic, agricultural or every day animals and birds and an occasional exotic. Agents need to be able to draw on a wide variety of people. Work with falconers, farmers, equestrians, dog owners and knowledgeable enthusiasts, as and when required. I hope that this will continue. Animals are important to the media. There is a healthy film industry in Scotland, but the industry will suffer if conditions become too onerous. (individual)
In the United Kingdom there are approximately 300 active animal suppliers to the media industry; however, there are roughly 150 sharp end practitioners whose only source of income is from this work. Very few animal suppliers keep their own animals. Everyone has a dog or a cat or a bird but very few have a varied species collection. Every client with a campaign featuring an animal wants something different, an animal which no other campaign features. Therefore the chances of having exactly the correct species, colour, size or sex available at the right time are infinitesimal. Also, film projects such as '101 Dalmatians' feature many animals of the same species and breed which need to be sourced from many breeders as no one breeder has that many puppies at the right age at the right time. Consequently, animal suppliers and trainers have a database containing a wide and varied species list. Fortunately throughout the United Kingdom there are thousands of small collections varying from a single dog owner to dog and cat breeders, a one lizard person or a nutty, hundred python lady, up through all species. Many zoos, private exotic animal collectors, rare breed farms, children's petting zoos, animal sanctuaries, bird exhibits, including bird of prey collections and ordinary everyday farmers are all willing to make some extra cash by allowing their animals to be used in the media. Most of the horses used in the media are supplied by the stunt fraternity. It is only very rarely that other suppliers or trainers are asked to supply a horse and then it is because the horse is featured or is a 'hero' horse and needs special training. The sharp end practitioners vary considerably in their experience and their working practice. They tend to fall into different groups. For instance, commercial advertisement animal suppliers rarely get asked to work on a movie and vice versa. People who supply background animals on TV never get asked to do commercials. Some only work with fish or rats, some with exotics, some with cats, some with dogs, some do animal action or stunt work. However there are some who do everything and have trained and had husbandry experience with all species although their numbers are probably less than ten in all. There are only a very few circus suppliers involved in the media industry supplying for a film, TV, stage or stills work for magazines etc. The circus trainers tend to train for circus, not necessarily showing in the United Kingdom but train in the United Kingdom for European circus. (PAWSI)
Comments on the effectiveness of the Performing Animals (Regulation) Act 1925
Responders commented on the current effectiveness of the Performing Animals (Regulation) Act 1925. Their comments overwhelmingly suggested that it should be revised. They also suggested ways in which the legislation was deficient and how it could be brought up to date:
This is anachronistic legislation which needs to be updated. (British Horse Society)
Recognise that the Performing Animals Act requires updating. (NFU Scotland, Aberdeenshire Council)
Consider that current safeguards are inadequate and wish to see them reviewed. (Dogs Trust)
Media providers are always looking for ways to ensure that their production is correct and keep within the law and the animal input has always been far behind other legislation or codes. (PAWSI)
The category 'performing animals' needs updating. It was designed to protect animals trained to perform repeatedly in front of the public. (individual)
Certain aspects of animals in entertainment fall outside current legislation and need to be integrated into new regulations in entertainment under any proposed new Animal Welfare Bill. (PAWSI)
The 1925 Act is generally accepted to be totally ineffective. Activity should be subject to more meaningful regulation, including either licensing or regulation, together with more detailed provisions relating to welfare. (individual)
The Performing Animals (Regulation) Act 1925 is unduly limited in its scope in that it requires only the registration of exhibitors and trainers of performing animals. Where the courts find that the training or exhibition of a performing animal has been accompanied by cruelty, they may prohibit the person concerned from continuing to train or exhibit and the local authority register helps to enforce such orders. The licensing authority has, however, no discretion to satisfy itself that the animals will be properly housed or cared for before registering a trainer or exhibitor. (RCVS)
This requires to be tightened. There is a need for ongoing approval as with a licensing system rather than a one-off registration. (Stirling Council)
Comments on the proposals
Question 5.1. The licensing of performing animal acts
Responders had four different viewpoints on the proposals to licence performing animal acts. These were: (1) agreement that performing animal acts should be licensed, (2) performing animal acts should be regulated, (3) performing acts should be covered by other forms of regulation, (4) performing acts should not be licensed. Each will be discussed in turn:
(1) Agree that performing acts should be licensed and subject to a regular inspection by a local authority:
28 organisations. (East Ayrshire Council, East Lothian Council, City of Edinburgh Council, North Ayrshire Council, North Lanarkshire Council, Fife Council, South Ayrshire Council, Perth and Kinross Council, Aberdeenshire Council, LACORS, Central Scotland Police, Skye Environment Centre, Kirkwall Dog Training Club, Scottish Kennel Club, Avon (Lanarkshire) Dog Agility Club, Canine Concern Scotland Trust, Cat Action Trust 1977, Lothian Cat Rescue, The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors in Scotland, The Federation of Zoological Gardens of Great Britain and Ireland, ACTA, PAWSI, PDSA, Vetwork UK, South of Scotland Wildlife Hospital, Scottish SPCA, Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Sciences, The Vegetarian Society)
2 business. (Minches Hovawarts, Scotlean Pigs)
3 individuals.
Comments on the proposal to require licensing and regular inspection of performing acts
A number of the above responders commented on the proposal. They generally welcomed the proposals. A number of them also noted the advantage which the proposal would have in ensuring the welfare of the performing animals:
Welcome the proposal to extend to all performing animals. (Perth and Kinross Council)
Totally agree with the proposed update. (Skye Environment Centre)
Do not object to the proposals. (Kirkwall Dog Training Club)
Regulation of animals in circuses and performing animals needs to be tightened and any measure which introduces licensing with regular inspections by a body such as the local authority must be welcomed. (Central Scotland Police, LACORS)
An excellent idea to bring this under umbrella legislation. (The Federation of Zoological Gardens of Great Britain and Ireland)
All performing animal acts should be licensed. (Lothian Cat Rescue, individual)
The current registration system under the Performing Animals (Regulation) Act 1925 should be scraped and replaced by a licensing system. (PAWSI)
Support universal registration in principle. (North Ayrshire Council)
Agree and welcome any licence or restrictions for unlicensed animals and suppliers. (ACTA)
If all aspects of the animal's welfare are satisfactory then performance licensing is acceptable. (Perth and Kinross Council)
Would clearly be a practical safeguard to ensure animal welfare is not compromised. This is based directly on this authority's experience of previously having to deal with welfare problems associated with travelling circuses from the continent. For instance, we would support restrictions on certain groups of animals allowed to perform and in what type of arena. However it must be borne in mind that some species of animal actually enjoy performing in suitable surroundings e.g. sea lions in marine parks. (City of Edinburgh Council)
The professional training of all performing animals has to continue to be licensed and closely regulated by local authorities to safeguard animal welfare and ensure training methods are suitable and those who provide such training are fit and proper persons to do so. (Edinburgh City Council)
Licensing of individual animals will not work as there are thousands of animals available for work to each sharp end practitioner every single day. Licensing all owners will not work for the same reasons - most animal owners allow their animals to be trained by the sharp end practitioners who are then responsible for taking that animal on to a film set and working it. All licensed animal trainers to the audio visual industries (including circus) must be monitored and regularly inspected. RR ecent consultation between PAWSI, trainers and clients indicate that they would like to see every trainer licensed. (PAWSI)
An individual animal performer (such as on a TV show, stage presentation) inspected by a local authority could be time consuming. (PDSA)
The licences must be linked to qualifications and also species. They will stop the broad practice of a person saying they know all about camels, for instance, but have only had experience with cats. At this time it is the person in charge of the job, the person who is paid for the job who is responsible even if they subcontract to another company for the animal. So the person responsible will do all the paperwork including legal and health and safety risk assessments. At the moment companies wishing to keep their own information confidential, give clients the wrong information with regards to health and safety and so therefore the crew on a film shoot are at risk. (PAWSI)
(2) Performing acts should be regulated
One organisation, Dumfries and Galloway Council, noted that performing animal acts should be required to be regulated. It believed that 'such animals should fall within the proposed welfare legislation'.
(3) Performing acts should be regulated in other ways
Two organisations believed that alternative approaches should be used to licensing:
Circuses and all other facilities where animals are housed or worked in any aspect of the entertainment or leisure industry, must be brought under legislation equivalent to the Zoo Licensing Act. (IFAW)
A system of registration and inspection with local authorities is preferable to licensing, which implies cost and bureaucracy. (NFU Scotland)
(4) Disagree that performing acts should be licensed and subject to a regular inspection by a local authority
One animal welfare organisation, The Captive Animals' Protection Society, was 'strongly opposed to any form of licensing system for animal circuses as … this would do little to benefit animals, but would instead legitimise their use in circuses'.
The licensing system and the performing animals licence
The character of the licensing system
Responders noted the character which the licensing system should have. This included the character of the authority that should grant a licence, and inspection of activities:
The licensing authority
Responders considered the jurisdiction of the licence and the licence granting authority:
As circuses and other performing animal acts travel around the country, it is not clear whether the intention is that a licence is granted by one local authority where the circus etc is based, will be all that is required for travelling round Scotland. Consideration will have to be given as to how the Scottish Animal Welfare Act will link in with the Performing Animals (Regulation) Act 1925 which will still apply in England. If such circuses or other performing animal act comes north from England, will they require to be licensed for performance in each local authority area in Scotland and subject to inspection while travelling around Scotland or will the Act make provision for any registration in England to authorise performance in Scotland? (Faculty of Advocates)
By their very nature animal acts tend to travel around the country and therefore, unless a single national authority or agency inspects them, it may be difficult to regulate any shortcomings. A national licence for such activities may be more useful than regulation by independent local authorities. (ACPOS)
Difficulty in respect of travelling performers - where do they get licensed - each area or once nationally? A single national licence would be simpler to administer and provide greater consistency, but could prevent local authorities regulating such acts in their own area other than via public entertainment licences. (North Ayrshire Council)
Should be licensed by the home authority. (East Lothian Council)
A home authority type principal should be adopted. The base authority would issue the licence. The authority in whose area the act is performing could contact the base authority to agree whether a full inspection or a partial audit of a particular aspect is required. This would reduce the duplicity of effort by local authorities. (South Ayrshire Council)
This licence should form a register available to clients. (PAWSI)
Inspections
A number of comments were made about the way the activities should be monitored under the licensing system, through a licensing regime. Responders suggested that this could be undertaken by a number of types of inspectors, though not all were considered to have sufficient experience to undertake the work. They also noted the aspects of conditions which should be examined during an inspection:
All licensed animal trainers to the audio visual industries (including circus) must be monitored and regularly inspected. (PAWSI)
Circuses and winter quarters should both be subject to regular veterinary inspection, and the provisions should also extend to performing animals in the entertainment industry in circumstances where the public are not admitted, e.g. in filming. (RCVS)
Should be inspected on a regular basis to ensure their health and wellbeing. (individual)
Should be subject to regular inspections especially if more exotic animals are used. (North Lanarkshire Council)
At least an annual inspection visit. (East Ayrshire Council)
Agree with a regular (every 2 years?) inspection, depending on cost. (Mr Bug Ltd)
Should be subject to a regular inspection by a local authority. (Catflap, Cats Protection, Inverclyde Dog Training Club, The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors in Scotland, Scottish Kennel Club, Scottish SPCA, South of Scotland Wildlife Hospital, Vetwork UK)
Should be subject to regular inspection by a local, or other, authority. (Cat Action Trust 1977)
Should be subject to regular and random inspections by local authorities. (Catflap)
Provision for unannounced spot checks would also be desirable. (Central Scotland Police)
Should be regularly inspected by a local authority and also a vet to check on the medical condition of the animals. (Skye Environment Centre)
There should be regular inspection undertaken by appropriately trained veterinary surgeons. (Glasgow City Council)
Such inspection should involve a person who is qualified to assess the health and welfare of the species of animal involved and, if no local authority employee is available with such expertise, the local authority should be empowered to call on the services of a specialist such as a vet, Scottish SPCA Inspector or independent commercial consultant. (Scottish SPCA)
During consultation with Defra and local authorities it became obvious that the local authorities do not want nor could they cope with these inspections. It was suggested that the inspections could be carried out by the Zoo Licensing Expectorate - however - they also said that they did not want nor would they understand the unique and diverse industry, zoo culture being entirely different from media culture. To train Zoo Inspectorate personnel up to the standard required would take a long time and is unnecessary as there are plenty of experienced film vets who understand the industry as they work in it every day. Screen craft is an important aspect of monitoring animals in the media and few vets outside the industry understand this culture or the diversity of animal training and knowledge needed in order to maintain a high standard of welfare to the animals concerned when they are working. PAWSI conducted a survey throughout the animal trainers, producers and clients who regularly train and/or use animals in their film, TV, skills, advertisements etc and the general consensus agreed that Zoo Vet Inspectorate is inappropriate for this work. Most expressed a view that we use the media vets to produce a regime modelled on Zoo Licensing and the industry specific PAWSI monitoring system. This should be Government run and funded. This will ensure good animal husbandry and best practice and give production the all important logo for their end credits. (PAWSI)
The industry must have its own monitoring system both on the film set and at the compound. This must be carried out by industry vets knowledgeable in all aspects of filming with animals. We would like this to be an inspectorate approved by the government, similar to the Zoo Inspectorate - they could also be responsible for issuing the licences as well if necessary. Most local councils do not want to know and say their work load is too much as it stands; also they do not have sufficient knowledge of the industry to be able to police it. With the above in place it is a win-win situation for all concerned, the clients will get animals trained and worked by experts. It also provides a clear career pathway for newcomers into the industry. Most importantly the welfare conditions for the animals will be transparent and all animal welfare issues, presently scattered throughout various legislation and ignored by most, will be tied up together in one neat bundle. (PAWSI)
Inspection should ensure that training, performing and transporting methods are not detrimental to the animals (their employees); the owner/handlers are complying with the obligations of an owner/keeper for the animals in their care, including the physiological and behavioural needs; the animals are obtained from certified sources and not taken unsympathetically from the wild or conserved stocks. (Avon (Lanarkshire) Dog Agility Club)
General conditions in the licence
Responders suggested a range of conditions that should be attached to the licence. These included the need to have regard to the welfare of the animals, the need to provide regulation before, during and after a performance, transportation, training and training equipment, and guidance.
Conditions
Should ensure the welfare of all performing animals. (Falkirk Council)
Care must be taken to provide best practice welfare conditions and companionship which should be monitored and checked on a regular basis. (PAWSI)
A veterinary surgeon should be available [at a performance] when potential risk to animal welfare is identified. Pets such as rabbits may become hyperthermic under the very intense lighting used, for example, in TV shows and this can often be missed by the lay person. (PDSA)
All such licences should require welfare conditions to be stipulated which would include the transport and housing of such animals when performing away from their permanent quarters. (Central Scotland Police, Aberdeenshire Council)
Welfare provisions must apply both when animals are performing and also when kept at so called 'winter quarters'. (North Lanarkshire Council, LACORS, IFAW)
For circuses, control is required for the conditions that the animals are kept in when off season - sometimes called winter quarters. (The Federation of Zoological Gardens of Great Britain and Ireland)
There should be statutory monitoring of the winter quarters by a regulating authority. (Central Scotland Police)
It is important for those monitoring performing animals to realise that animals away from their home or compound do not need such large enclosures as they do at home or on their compound. Animals working on location - and we include circus animals - do not require such large exercise areas as they would do at home because they obtain their enrichment and exercise from the work that they do. (PASWI)
Specific controls require to be in place regarding travel. (Stirling Council)
Current animal transport legislation disregards performing animals. This needs to be rectified and legislated which will lead to better conditions for performing animals. If circuses are not to be banned then legislation needs to be in place to ensure the welfare of circus animals that are housed in the transporters when not used (e.g. when on grounds of local authorities which do not allow such performing animals). (Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Sciences)
There should be control over the way dogs are kept between performances. (Dogs Trust)
It may well be that any new legislation offers a definition of performance based on the length of time an animal is actually in performance. (The Kennel Club)
There should be a limit to the amount of time that an individual animal is used as a photographic prop. The conditions in which they are kept should be inspected, ensuring the animals are fed, watered and have an opportunity to get away from the public during the working day. (Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Sciences)
Training methods must conform to strict welfare standards. (Canine Concern Scotland Trust)
Methods of training certain animals should be stopped as many of the methods are cruel. (Perthshire Canine Club)
The animals should not be subject to threatening or harsh treatment in order to train them or compel them to perform. (Avon (Lanarkshire) Dog Agility Club)
Need for control over the way dogs are trained for performances. (Dogs Trust)
Need to ban electric prods. (Minches Hovawarts)
There should be statutory monitoring of training practices by a regulating authority. (Central Scotland Police)
Although most responders listed a number of licence conditions, only one of them, IFAW, provided a comprehensive set of conditions:
Conditions for exhibitions, displays, shows and competitions involving animals for the duration of an exhibition, display, show or competition animals:
Have an adequate supply of fresh water, feed and where appropriate, bedding;
Are not exposed to extremes of temperature;
Are secure from escape and where they are kept confined over night that they are kept in a secure place;
Which are injured or fall ill receive immediate veterinary attention;
Are not pestered or tormented by the public;
Are not caged or otherwise confined for a period exceeding 'x' hours (as agreed on a species specific basis, by appropriate parties when standards are developed);
Are allowed sufficient space to stand in a normal position, lie down, turn around and reach food and water and provides adequate ventilation;
Are not confined in cages or areas, which are over-crowded;
That are socially gregarious should be placed with con-specifics, whilst those species not benefiting from social interaction must be kept isolated. Animals should not be caged in close physical or visual proximity with predator species, or species likely to result in high levels of stress;
On display should have free access to privacy;
Are not forced physically or psychologically, into performing activities;
Seen to be excessively stressed must be removed from display or performance;
No person should knowingly enter, or knowingly allow an animal to be entered in an exhibition, display, show or competition where that animal is likely to give birth during the exhibition, display, show or competition;
The owner or keeper should immediately remove any animal and dependant young animals where such an animal gives birth during an exhibition, display, show or competition. (IFAW)
Training and guidance for performing animals
Responders from the performing animals' industry and from other sectors acknowledged that trainers should have proper experience and training which should be reflected in the licence and the proposed legislation. They cited the existence of current codes (and the development of further ones) which applied to specific sectors of the performing animal industry or throughout it, which could be adopted under the new legislation:
All licences must be linked to a qualification or to experience via Grandfather rights. (see PAWSI Code,
Guidelines and Minimum Standards for the Welfare of Animals in the Audio, Visual Industries). (PAWSI)
Should include the qualifications and training of the animal trainers themselves. (The Federation of Zoological Gardens of Great Britain and Ireland)
Trainers must have appropriate skills and facilities to keep and display animals. (South of Scotland Wildlife Hospital)
PAWSI has completed levels 2 and 3 NVQs, and is now working with Lantra on level 4 which is hoped will be available next year. These are enormous ground breaking achievements by the media industry and full use of these qualifications should be incorporated into any new legislation. (PAWSI)
A SNVQ is close to being published, it would seem sensible to base standards on it. (Dogs Trust)
PAWSI Code,
Guidelines and Minimum Standards for the Welfare of Animals in the Audio, Visual Industries, applies to the use of animals whether for commercial gain or not in the production of films for cinema, television, home video, recreational or educational purposes, including features, documentaries, series, serials, videos, still photography and theatre. It also applies to all public or private shows and displays using animals whether trained or using natural behavioural patterns as the basis for educational talks. The purpose of these proposals is to ensure the humane use of animals in the entertainment industry. Its aims are to: ensure that the welfare of animals is always given the highest priority; emphasise the responsibilities of the personnel providing the animals; emphasise the responsibilities of the producer; develop, promote and sustain an acceptable animal welfare working practice. The Code is intended to apply to all productions made in the United Kingdom/EEC and shown within the United Kingdom/EEC or internationally. It is intended that the standards herein will be promulgated on a worldwide basis by PAWSI as the definitive standards for the use of animals in entertainment. The Code covers all species specified as non-human, whether they be vertebrates or invertebrates. Certain elements of this code have been adopted by the RSPCA and by ACTA (Animal Consultants and Trainers Association). ACTA have included parts of this code in their guidelines for animals in entertainment. (PAWSI)
The Association of Circus Proprietors of Great Britain's
Standards for the Care and Welfare of Circus Animals on Tour is being updated. The new English standards used information from German, Swiss and Australian circus animal recommendations along with the existing ACP (Association of Circus Proprietors) British Standards. (individual)
Other comments on licensing
Further comments were made about the licensing arrangements. These covered the impact of the proposals and their enforcement:
Hope that the proposals will increase the professionalism amongst bonâ fide animal agents and thus the lives of the animals they work with. I hope that they will not restrict the way in which I work. (individual)
Urge the Executive to consider how any new legislation might impinge on the activities of animal agents and avoid restrictions which might affect the continued growth of the media industries in Scotland. (Scottish Screen)
There may be some difficulty in determining a degree of equality of approach from one local authority to another. (Ayrshire Council)
Proposals to strengthen the current legislation relating to the regulation, licensing and inspection of animals in circuses/performing animals will have staff training implications. (West Lothian Council)
If there is not a ban on circuses or performing acts, then clear guidance should be provided to assist in consistent levels of enforcement. (Glasgow City Council)
In the horse world there are official bodies making sure high welfare standards in sport and exhibition are maintained e.g. British Eventing or the Sports Horse Breeding of Great Britain Show Regulations. It is important that those responsible for animal welfare work in partnership with these bodies encourage the use of codes and guidelines as far as possible. (British Horse Society)
The extent of the scope of the proposals
The extent of the scope of the proposals was considered through: (1) the definition of the term 'performing animals', and (2) the different types of performing activities and their suitability for inclusion into the proposals. Each of these areas will be considered in turn:
(1) The definition of the term 'performing animals'
Responders believed that it was important that the term 'performing animals' should be defined. Eight organisations specifically pointed out that the term should be defined. (Fife Council, Highland Council, Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary, PDSA, Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Sciences, Scottish Kennel Club, The Kennel Club, and The Scottish Hawk Board) Fife Council believed that 'it will need to be clearly defined' and North Lanarkshire Council asserted that 'it is important that we have a clear definition of performing'. Within some sectors, this definition was regarded to be fraught with a number of difficulties. These were especially noted in the area of dog performance. WAG noted that 'it is difficult to define what is performing in the world of dogs. Many dogs participate in obedience, agility, fly ball and "dancing with dogs" competitions and displays. The dogs involved actively enjoy such events and this can be seen by their eagerness to participate. This is a healthy activity for dogs, as they need to be 'working' in many cases for their own enjoyment and well-being'.
However, responders made few attempts to define 'performing animal'. The Kennel Club suggested that 'a possible definition of "performance" within the legislation could take into account any "commercial gain" made by owners of animals in performance. It would certainly not help the development of agility, obedience or heelwork to music in Scotland, if owners and their dogs were embraced in legislation more suitably applied to circus animals or animals trained for television performances'.
(2) Different types of performing activities
Responders were aware that a wide range of activities could be brought together under the proposals. They also acknowledged that not all of these should be considered in the same way as they had different welfare implications for the animals that were performing these. To an extent the species of animals was closely related to the character and nature of the performing activities:
This would include circuses, visiting circuses on tour and animals used for film, television or commercial photography (such as primates used in advertising. (IFAW)
We draw a clear distinction between circus-type entertainments and events such as sheepdog trails, dog agility displays, show jumping and gymkhanas etc and the training of animals such as guide dogs to assist humans. We do not have evidence that they involve the same welfare problems inherent in circuses and we do not ask you to include them in the performing animal ban. (The Captive Animals' Protection Society, Grampian Animal Defence League)
Do not like circuses, travelling and stage shows. Film work is perhaps more acceptable, as the animals live at home with their owners. The work is more varied. The animal cannot choose its career. (individual)
The issue of dogs and horses in entertainment is less clear cut; these species are domesticated and can be trained using humane methods, and arguably, many of the tricks they perform are developed out of natural behaviour. The Society nonetheless opposes the use of dogs and horses in circuses as this exposes them to forced training, confinement and frequent transportation. Other types of entertainment or display can also cause welfare concerns. Protection should be extended to any animal or bird that is exhibited or displayed outwith a licensed zoo collection, or which performs to the general public (whether in a public place or not) for commercial gain. This should apply to any commercial operation even when it is giving a free performance. (Scottish SPCA)
Canine activities such as agility tests are regulated and licensed by the Kennel Club with codes of conduct and penalties for breaches thereof. They are normally undertaken in the presence only of the judge and other competitors and so in the absence of a specific statutory definition of 'performance' and 'audience' would not fall within the normal usage. The Tattoo with its demonstrations by military dogs is a paid event and the dogs are performing as are horses at ticketed equestrian meetings, races, sheepdog trials, police dog displays etc. This raises the question of how such events should be defined. (Edelhof Kennels)
There is no definition of what is intended to be treated as a performing animal. Concerned that if undefined, agility, dancing, fly-ball and obedience with dogs could all fall into the category of 'performing animals'. When these activities take place in competition, they are licensed by the Kennel Club and are regulated by the rules of that body. Displays and demonstrations are regularly given in these activities. It is here that the label 'performing animal' could be attached. 'Performing animal' should be defined carefully so as to exclude such displays and demonstrations. (Scottish Kennel Club)
There is certainly a case for creating some form of legislation to cover farm animals in farm parks. Children are often encouraged to 'cuddle' lambs and this can cause stress both to the ewe and the lamb. Safety and hygiene implications also arise for children who come into contact with farm animals. (individual)
We will have a number of members who, through the likes of sheepdog demonstrations (often involving sheep, ducks and geese), falconry displays, farm animal centres, etc ably demonstrate to the public a wide range of rural skills, husbandry and livestock. As well as generating much needed rural income, the preservation and demonstration of such skills to the general public should not be jeopardised by additional cost and paperwork. (NFU Scotland)
Need to consider whether performances such as a falconry displays, sheep dog trials and animals used as photographic props (such as owls in the recent 'Harry Potter' craze) should be included. (Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Sciences)
There is some concern from various authorities in relation to birds of prey being displayed in town centres (not performing and could be argued not exhibited) by so called 'charities' to attract donations. (North Lanarkshire Council, LACORS, Central Scotland Police)
Concerned at the use of 'rescued birds/animals' for display purposes, i.e. the parading of rescued birds of prey both diurnal and nocturnal around supermarket car parks and town centres. These practices should cease and more imaginative ways of fund raising should be sought. (individual)
After considering the breadth of performing animal activities that are currently undertaken, a number of responders suggested some activities that should be included and excluded from any future proposals:
Activities that should be covered by the proposals
Responders noted a wide range of activities that should be covered by the proposals:
Performing acts could include any animal rides and cart rides. People who train animals for films and TV should be licensed and film/TV performances should be inspected to ensure good welfare. (Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Sciences)
Falconry and bird of prey centres should be incorporated. (City of Edinburgh Council)
Animals in zoo collections and other animal attractions should be covered by the Performing Animals Act 1925. (Born Free Foundation)
PAWSI has a policy of not objecting to animals in entertainment as long as all legal and welfare issues are in place, whether the animals are at the compound/home, at work and when travelling:
Animals in theatrical shows - both amateur and professional;
'Rescue Group' - these seem to be popping up all over and usually consist of a single operator or a husband/wife (or partners) team. They usually operate from a small van and take animals for money to charity events/schools/shows etc;
Falconry displays at shows. Personnel not from zoos or registered establishments who display for profit. Usually private owners;
Wolves at shows - as above;
Snakes on beach fronts - the python seems to have taken over as beach/photographers props. Operated mostly by private owners;
Private owners - with animals, mostly reptiles, who go to schools and do a 'show and tell' for profit;
Horses in movies - historically films made in Eastern Europe have no controls or fall under any United Kingdom legislation. (PAWSI)
This legislation needs to be updated to cover the licensing by local authorities of:
Circus animals, i.e. animals permanently kept for the sole purpose performing, and
For animals that are kept for other purposes, but used occasionally for performances e.g. ponies and other animals used on stage.
There should also be an additional 'exhibition' clause for animals which are exhibited, e.g. birds of prey and reindeer in shopping centres and Sunday Markets where the public can approach and have photographs etc taken.
'Exhibition' licence may be more appropriate in some premises rather than the zoo licence. Such premises may include bird of prey centres, marine aquariums, city farms etc. (Aberdeenshire Council, LACORS, Central Scotland Police)
Activities could include sheepdog trials and demonstration, police dog demonstrations and animal racing. (Fife Council)
Activities that should not be included in the proposals
Responders also noted a list of activities that should not be covered by the proposals. Some of these are also noted in the above heading:
Exemptions should be allowed for dog obedience competitions, agility competitions and gun dog trials, show jumping etc. (Angus Council)
It is possible that a change in the law on performing animals could affect some aspects of the Kennel Club's activities, such as heelwork to music. It would be regretful if the Scottish Executive found it within them to encompass the type of activity - which is regularly on display at Crufts and other events - in the new legislation. (The Kennel Club)
Dog agility, flyball, heelwork to music (which are licensed by the Kennel Club) may come under the heading of performing animals and this is something we strongly oppose. Dogs who are worked in agility, flyball and heelwork to music may seem to some to be 'performing animals', but we can assure you that this is far from the case. Dogs enjoy these sports. (Perthshire Canine Club, Scottish Utility Breeds Club)
The licensing of non-business sports clubs where members train and handle their pets such as Avon Dog Agility Club are excluded from this clause, as they do not function as a business. Club members would be liable for animal welfare under the rules for owners/keepers. (Avon (Lanarkshire) Dog Agility Club)
A display of police dog training should be exempt. (individual)
Could be an exception for dogs who perform tricks. (The Vegetarian Society)
Activities or performances that should be restricted or banned
Responders also believed that there should be a restriction or a ban placed on certain activities or performances that were currently undertaken. Four responders suggested the type of restrictions that should be placed on animals used in performances. Two responders, Angus Council and Skye Environment Centre, noted that there 'should only be performing acts which do not threaten their well-being - walking on hind legs for prolonged periods is seriously detrimental to 4-legged animals'. Catflap believed that 'restrictions should be placed on the
nature of performance, so that no animal is forced to do anything which may cause physical or psychological distress'. A further organisation, Avon (Lanarkshire) Dog Agility Club, considered that the focus for the performing activity should be on the animal itself: 'an animal must display an aptitude and desire to perform'.
A number of organisations recorded their dislike of the use of animals in performances in general or in specific ones, notably circuses. The Vegetarian Society considered that these were 'demeaning' to the animals. The Grampian Animal Welfare League and an individual were opposed to the use of animals in circuses and similar performances. (see also views below)
Restrictions on or the banning of animals in activities or performances
Responders suggested a number of options to restrict or ban the performance of animals. There were: (1) there should be a complete ban on animals in performances; (2) the use of performing animals in entertainment should be phased out, (3) circuses should not be permitted/should be banned. Each of these will be discussed in turn:
(1) There should be a complete ban of animals in performances
8 organisations. (Angus Council, Glasgow City Council, Animal Concern, CARROT, Munlochy Animal Aid, The Captive Animals Protection Society, Lothian Cat Rescue, Cats Protection)
3 individuals.
Comments on the need to ban animals in performances
Responders suggested the extent of the ban that should be placed on animals in performances and the circumstances under which they could or should be engaged in that activity:
There is a case for a complete ban on the use of animals in performances. (Angus Council)
A ban should be on performing animals, both exotic and domestic. (individual)
No animals should be allowed to perform unless it has been proven that they actually enjoy performing and are willing participants. (CARROT)
Would prefer that no animals were allowed to perform especially in circuses where there may have been cruelty involved in 'training' the animals to perform. (Lothian Cat Rescue)
(2) The use of performing animals should be phased out
This view affected animals in two areas of performing activities. The first was animals in entertainment. IFAW suggested that 'the use of performing animals in entertainment should be phased out, with no new animals brought into the industry. All performing animals must be immediately provided with adequate legislative protection to ensure that suffering is minimised, until a time when animals will no longer be exploited in this manner'. The second was animals in circuses (see also below). The Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Sciences suggested that 'circuses using performing wild animals should be phased out with this legislation'.
(3) Circuses should not be permitted/should be banned
11 organisations. (Angus Council, Advocates for Animals, Grampian Animal Defence League, The Captive Animals' Protection Society, Grampian Animal Defence League, West Lothian Animal Rights and Veggies, WAG, Born Free Foundation, Munlochy Animal Aid, Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Sciences, Vetwork UK)
9 individuals.
Reasons for the need to ban circuses
Responders gave wide ranging views on why they believed that circuses should be banned. They considered that they were an outdated practice, 'cheap' entertainment and cruel, affected the welfare of the performing animals, including their training methods, transportation, and living conditions when the animals were on the road and in their winter quarters. A small number of responders did not think that a ban on circuses would have a significant detrimental impact on circus businesses in Scotland:
All animals in circuses and travelling shows should be prohibited. (individual)
Would like a ban preventing any circus/travelling show including animal acts from entering, performing in or maintaining winter quarters in Scotland. (Grampian Animal Defence League)
Use of animals in circuses and travelling equestrian shows should be prohibited. (2 individuals)
Prohibition of performing of all animals in circuses and travelling shows is a long awaited and much needed decision. (individual)
It is not legal to have circuses of performing children. The same protection must be given to animals. (individual)
The more civilised countries in the world no longer permit this by law, yet have suffered no loss of interest in circuses. Scandinavian countries are renowned for their circuses. (Munlochy Animal Aid)
Many local authorities have already banned animal circuses on their land. It is now time to ban this cruel trade in animal misery and deprivation nation wide. (individual)
Majority of the public is opposed to the degrading and poor conditions many performing animals are kept and trained in and many boycott such performances. (West Lothian Animal Rights and Veggies)
Do not consider it acceptable for
any species to perform in circuses/travelling shows. (Grampian Animal Defence League)
Animals, especially wild animals, should not be trained to perform in circuses, zoos or other animal attractions. (Born Free Foundation)
As a minimum the Scottish Executive should prohibit the use of wild animals in circuses and animal performances in zoos, on the grounds that the needs of the animal can never be provided for within the circus environment. (Born Free Foundation)
Want to see a ban on any circus, travelling menagerie or show containing performing animals from entering, performing in or travelling through Scotland or from maintaining animal holding quarters or training facilities in Scotland. The prohibition should apply whether the company is called a 'circus' or uses another name such as 'theatre', 'show' etc. (The Captive Animals Protection Society)
Consideration should be given to a national ban on the use of animals in circus type acts or alternatively restricting 'animal act' to domesticated animals i.e. dogs, horses etc. This permission, however, would need to override individual bans on animal acts otherwise the situation of animals being taken on tour for a few performances would remain. (Angus Council)
Use of all animals (both wild and domestic) in circuses should be prohibited. The public regards their use as outmoded and unnecessary. Circus animals have to endure long periods of confinement for hours, are restricted in their movements, show stereotypical behaviours and trained by questionable methods. (Advocates for Animals)
Do not believe that circuses (including equestrian shows such as 'Spirit of the Horse') provide a suitable environment for any animal and should be prohibited throughout Scotland. (West Lothian Animal Rights and Veggies)
Circuses do not provide for the welfare of the animals they use in accordance with best management practice and scientific knowledge, and therefore should not use them. Rarely will it be able to except perhaps for a few domestic species. (Vetwork UK)
All animals suffer in circuses - due to training, performing, living conditions. (2 individuals)
Brutal techniques force animals into performing unnatural acts as well as poor housing. (individual)
Many of these animals see very little exercise, daylight or even human kindness (WAG)
Welfare problems of circuses include: transportation - animals can spend long hours being transported and when the show is being set up; living conditions - circuses cannot provide wild animals with anything like their natural living conditions; animals tethered for long periods; training and performance - training takes place behind closed doors and can include a range of tools such as whips, spikes concealed in sticks and electric shock devices. In the ring animals perform unnatural tricks such as balancing on their hind legs and are often made to appear foolish. (Grampian Animal Defence League)
Circus animals, whether wild or domestic, suffer from the trauma of lengthy confinement in cramped conditions, stressful travelling over many miles and questionable training methods in order to perform degrading tricks for the 'entertainment' of humans. A number of bodies have discouraged the performing of animals at circuses, including the RSPCA, Scottish SPCA, many local councils throughout the United Kingdom, National Association of Head Teachers, Education Institute for Scotland and the British Veterinary Association. A ban should be placed on performing animals, both exotic and domestic. I would very much like to see Scotland lead the way with this ban, as it did with the ban against hunting with dogs. (individual)
Animals in circuses suffer very confined and unnatural living conditions, boredom and isolation and other physical cruelty during training - especially large wild animals such as elephants, big cats, bears and marine mammals. Elephants in circuses - animals of very high intelligence and sensitivity - may be chained over 23 hours a day. Performing animal displays are animal slavery, of no educational value and do not encourage any respect for animals. They have no place in a humane society. (individual)
Have witnessed a troupe of large dogs go from the Big Top in a central Scottish town into individual cages in a windowless box van between performances. Elephants changed by the leg in a tent in a car park in Glasgow for 23.5 hours a day and given, according to their owner, a one-hour walk in the car park as exercise in a 3-day period. Horses, zebra and camels tethered in a tiny tent for 23.5 hours a day in Glasgow. Seen the premises animals are kept in between venues. In Glasgow we discovered that animals destined for a Christmas circus were kept in the area for many weeks prior to going on site. Before it was demolished, a rundown barn on a farm near Glasgow was used. For at least six weeks in 1998 this barn was home to five elements, three llamas and several horses. The barn was a ramshackle building constructed of brick, timber and corrugated iron sheeting. It was not wind or watertight. Each elephant was restrained by two leg chains. Their tails touched the rear wall, their trunks the front wall and roof and their sides the sides of the individual stalls they were kept in. A llama died while being held in the barn. In subsequent years, after the barn was demolished, the animals were kept in an unused factory warehouse in Glasgow. (Animal Concern)
Believe that it would be easy to prohibit circuses with performing animals or travelling menageries from entering Scotland. Believe that this would provide the impetus to modernise and dispense with animal acts. (Grampian Animal Defence League)
Prohibition on the use of animals in circuses would not have any significant detrimental impact on circus businesses in Scotland. To our knowledge, there are no Scottish-based circuses that use animals, merely one that visits Scotland from England occasionally. (Advocates for Animals, 2 individuals)
Given the popularity of all-human circuses in Scotland, we do not feel that a ban on the use of animals would adversely affect the circus industry but would actually benefit them by providing an incentive to modernise and develop their shows to comply with twenty-first century tastes and values. Following the removal of animal acts, circuses that are currently relegated to performing on the outskirts of town, may have access to superior venues such as council land from which they are currently banned. Audiences would increase and non-animal shows would not attract demonstrations from animal rights groups or receive negative publicity in the media. Animal circuses rarely visit Scotland; last year only three circuses containing animal acts appeared in Scotland, so a ban would have minimal impact on the circus industry. Circuses could continue as animal-free. (The Captive Animals' Protection Society)
Human circuses would have a number of advantages - they would not attract protests or negative publicity; they would have access to better venues; there may be a revival in circuses in the country, creating new job opportunities or acrobats, clowns, trapeze artists etc. (Grampian Animal Defence League)
Other performing acts that should not be permitted
Two organisations, Advocates for Animals and West Lothian Animal Rights and Veggies, and two individuals suggested that travelling equestrian shows should be prohibited. The Captive Animals' Protection Society also believed that travelling menageries should be prohibited, while Born Free Foundation considered that animal performances in zoos should be prohibited.
Question 5.2. What restrictions should be placed on the species of animals allowed to participate in performing animal acts?
Responders indicated a number of issues which should be taken into account when considering whether animals should be allowed to perform. The welfare of the animal was seen to be of paramount importance:
PAWSI has a policy of not objecting to animals in entertainment as long as all legal and welfare issues are in place, whether the animals are at the compound/home, at work and when travelling. (PAWSI)
We understand and take note of views which give concern with regard to content - elephants sitting on tubs - chimps in clothes etc. However most of these views are subjective and are not based on animal welfare issues. If the bill is a Welfare Bill this should be the first consideration and all other subjective issues will fall into place in due course. (PAWSI)
Opposed to the use of animals for any form of entertainment where distress or suffering is likely to be caused (Scottish SPCA)
If these animals or other types of animals cannot be offered suitable living and exercising quarters bearing in mind the 'obligation to ensure good welfare' at all times when on the road or otherwise, it poses the questions as to whether these animals are suitable for public performance? (LACORS)
Overall wherever animals 'perform' to the public in shows, in parks or farms, the highest standards of welfare must be maintained at all times. (British Horse Society)
The type of animal involved should also be given due consideration and not be subjected to an environment inappropriate to its species (such as too hot or cold a temperature) and not be of unacceptable danger to the human element in the performance. This could include poisonous snakes, except where handled by an 'expert' in this area. (PDSA)
Question 5.3. Species that should be allowed to perform or be restricted to perform
Responses indicates that this was a complex issue. Most responses did not simply list the species of animals that should be covered by the licensing system (the animals that should be allowed to perform have been noted above) but noted that the animals were connected with specific types of performances or activities (See also above). Two organisations, Central Scotland Police, and LACORS, commented that 'regulating what types of animals are allowed to participate in performing acts is difficult'.
Responders suggested that there were advantages and disadvantages to the approach of defining species that should be allowed to perform in an animal performing act. Highland Council considered that the 'species of animals allowed to perform should be defined (based on the obligation to ensure good welfare provisions)'. A species approach was seen to be advantageous for the enforcement of a licensing regime. Central Scotland Police and LACORS noted that 'defining the species of animals suitable for performing is advantageous for enforcement purposes i.e. the species is on the list or it isn't, and would go along way to addressing public concerns about animals being used for performing. However, provided all welfare and health and safety measures are adhered to for the animals as well as the audience and the performers, should it be down to a government or local authority to decide which species of animals should perform and which should not?'.
A small number of responders considered that this species approach was not required or was problematic:
No need for a species list. (Perth and Kinross Council)
Do not think that we can define which animals should be allowed to perform (all animals should be protected). (North Lanarkshire Council)
Do not need to be species specific. We are fully aware of all welfare issues with any animal in our care. (ACTA)
It would be cumbersome and inflexible to list in the legislation the species which may be allowed to perform. A better approach might be to allow the local authority to refuse registration on the ground that the intended performance is inappropriate for the species in questions. (RCVS)
It is very difficult to cover all eventualities regarding species. It should be a requirement that animal welfare must not be compromised by the training or the performance. (Stirling Council)
If an animal of any species is being subjected to conditions that are likely to detrimentally affect its health and mental well-being, then surely the legislation should cover that rather than the species. (Mr Bug Ltd)
The species of animals that should or should not be permitted to perform
A small number of responders commented on the scope of the species that should be included in the proposals. Some did not have strong views, though others believed that restrictions should be placed on the species that could be allowed to perform. They noted the importance of having a list that recorded specific species:
No strong views as to which species if any should be excluded from such activities. (Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary)
No strong views regarding species. (Scotlean Pigs)
No comments on the appropriateness of particular animals. (North Ayrshire Council)
There should be restrictions on the species of animals allowed to participate in performing animal acts. (Vetwork UK)
Restrictions on species would have to be very specific. When some dog breeds were 'restricted' under the Dangerous Dogs legislation, there were a number of well documented cases where some owners argued successfully regarding the breed of their animals. (East Lothian Council)
It is significant that an organisation and a business which worked with performing animals considered that the list of species should be made as wide as possible. Mr Bug Ltd pointed out that 'excluding species could exclude or affect situations that are of no detriment to the animals'. PAWSI considered that there should be no restrictions. It believed 'that all species of animals should be available for work in the audio visual industry. Providing that species specific knowledge and welfare are in place, there should be no species restriction. PAWSI believes that trained animals such as performing animals should not be confused with animals in the wild or animals in zoos'.
Organisations which believed that restrictions should be placed on the species of animals allowed to perform, listed the species of animals that could and could not perform. These largely related to whether the species were captive or domesticated:
Restrictions on the species of animal could relate to whether captive bred or not and how well such species adapt to captivity and confinement. (Aberdeenshire Council)
The only animals indigenous to the United Kingdom should be licensed to perform. We recently had problems with an elephant which escaped from a circus and found that the solution to ensuring the animal stayed within the confines of the circus was okay in the short term but we are sure would result in stress for the animal in the long term. (South Ayrshire Council)
There may be a case that non-domesticated animals should not be used in performing acts. (Falkirk Council)
If any species are to be involved it should
only be those domestic species which are used to human contact - horses, dogs etc - not any wild animals such as lions, tigers, elephants. (Skye Environment Centre)
Responders listed specific species that should be permitted to perform. With one or two exceptions, all of these included domesticated animals:
Should be limited to dogs, ponies and horses. (individual)
Horses, dogs and seals can be permitted to be part of a performance. (individual)
Content that, with appropriate safeguards, dogs may be used in such circumstances. (Dogs Trust)
Only dogs should be permitted to perform in such acts of entertainment. (Cat Action Trust 1977)
Horses perform in several circumstances. Last year Lusitano white stallions appeared in an opera in central Glasgow. At this level the performing animals are very cherished. We expect animals that perform in any circumstances to be kept properly. (British Horse Society)
If the animals are housed, fed, trained and exercised with care, some animals could be used - elephants, horses, dogs, donkeys. (Minches Hovawarts)
Responders also suggested the species that should be allowed to continue performing in circuses. Their range was more varied than those noted for other activities:
The Standards of The Care and Welfare of Circus Animals on Tour of the Association of Circus Proprietors now suggests that all animals should, in fact, be allowed to perform, but only under certain circumstances. This would automatically eliminate many species that clearly could not be catered for in a travelling circus, but not to be so restrictive that no wild animals could be exhibited. Domestic animals were not considered to be suitable for discussion as this would affect other forms of animal performance outside of circus such as horse dressage, agility dogs, police dog display teams etc. (individual)
It is doubtful if the retention of certain normally wild species of animals in circuses is acceptable and there are also doubts as to the need to use animals at all for performances, even to the extent of keeping sea mammals in confined spaces. It can be difficult to maintain standards of welfare etc if animals are moving around the country or even between countries. (BVA Scottish Branch)
Due to the inherent nature of circuses and travelling shows, the captive environment provided is most unlikely to meet basic welfare criteria; and that non-domestic animals therefore do not have a viable place in this industry. (IFAW)
Want to prevent non-performing animals from travelling with circuses with the exception of pets such as dogs that live with their keepers and are not on display to the public. (Grampian Animal Defence League, The Captive Animals' Protection Society)
Only humans should perform in circuses as they make the choice to do so. (individual)
Restrictions on the species of animals that can participate in performing animal acts
A small number of responders noted the species of animals that should be restricted or banned from performing in performing animal acts. These were largely wild animals brought into captivity:
Could well be some necessity for a restriction on the use of big cats and bears. (individual)
No elephants, camels, lions, tigers or sea lions should be used for performance purposes. (individual)
Cannot see how a lion/tiger can possibly be exercised in a circus situation. (Minches Hovawarts)
Lions, tigers and other wild cats should be banned due to their natural hunting instincts. These animals are dangerous and cannot be controlled as efficiently as more docile animals. (individual)
Other issues
Animals in the Media: Estimated costs on compliance with a Code of Recommendation for Keeping and Displaying Animals
PAWSI considered the effect which a Code of Recommendation would have on a wide range of performing animals establishments and acts:
It is almost impossible to predict any estimated costs until the code is in draft form so any ideas are purely guesswork as to what might happen.
Exotic animal collections are being brought into line by having to comply with the Dangerous Wild Animals (DWA) Act. This must have an impact on the finance of the persons involved. To bring cages which contain enrichment for the species up to speed can cost up to thousands of pounds. This also applies to health and safety aspects of animal keeping. Those open to the public need more changes than those purely for private pleasure. Some will be able to meet these costs and survive and some will not. But the very nature of keeping or reworking some sort of law, such as the DWA Act, this will help to clean up poor animal keeping which can only result in a win-win situation for the animals involved. Most of the small poor animal collections are owned by persons who have employment elsewhere so their income will not be compromised by losing their animals.
The persons who genuinely care and hope to improve conditions are in greater numbers than those who do not and these people will find the money to improve and welcome inspection and change. Animal exhibits such as zoos, safari parks, sanctuaries, bird of prey centres etc would not be able to attract the public support in attendance if they could not put on the animal shows as these shows are very popular with the general public. These shows are usually called 'educational talks' or 'animal information displays' but whatever title they are given they are still animal entertainment. The animals are trained to entertain the public for financial gain. If these shows were to be abolished the attendance revenue would reduce thus putting the exhibit at risk.
Most exhibits subscribe to conservation programmes and without their dedication many species would soon become extinct so they need the revenue. Most United Kingdom circus trainers do not train for the United Kingdom as the welfare pressure groups have changed the face of the old traditional animal based circus. However, a small group, maybe three or four persons, still work with animals and provide for the media industry such as films, TV etc.
Although trainers and suppliers are registered under the Performing Animals (Regulation) Act 1925, it actually means nothing. Apart from some exotic animals which come under the DWA Act, anybody can take an animal onto a film set and work it. There are no rules as to how long the animal can work or stay on a set. There is nothing legally binding to stop subtle abuse or even outright abuse. Most suppliers are good to their animals in front of the camera although some are quite tough. It is very hard to say no to a director when things are difficult and the animal won't work and there are lots of people who try and force the animal to complete the task in hand regardless of the stress to the animal. At the moment the only cost to animal suppliers is the registration fee for a certificate of registration. The cost of any changes are not known until fees under a licensing system or other scheme are set.
If changes were to take place such as the abolition of all animals in the media the loss of revenue to this country from overseas companies would be enormous. '101' and '102 Dalmatians' were budgeted at over £60m each with over 1,000 personnel employed from the United Kingdom, plus the unknown knock on employment such as film stock purchase, materials, equipment etc. There are many films and TV programmes which have animals that are essential to the plot and many commercial campaigns are dependent on an animal as their logo: 'Andrex' retriever puppies, 'PG Tips' chimps, 'HMV' dog and 'Anchor' cows. The financial burden on these companies if they had to change their logo and redesign their packaging is unthinkable. If the change for better animal welfare is just reliant on people sticking to a Code of Recommendation the cost to the animal suppliers would be nothing and they would also ignore the code. At the moment, most profess and talk long and earnestly about how they are humane, just, careful and genuinely care about the animals in their care but when pushed on a set some just give in and agree to anything even if it means stressing the animal. They are being paid a lot of money, the animals do not belong to them, the owner is not there and they are looking to get another job with the same director or company again. As in everything, money talks.
« Previous | Contents | Next »