Opinion
Help elephants, ditch the ‘bullhook’
An elephant at a Botswana waterhole. (Photo: Mike Dexter, via Shutterstock)At a time when the news is filled with political campaigns accusing each other of exhibiting divisive behavior and tactics, there is one piece of legislation on Gov. Brown’s desk that is actually bringing organizations together. Senate Bill 1062, by Senator Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) asks California to follow the lead of the cities of Los Angeles and Oakland by banning the use of a sharp device designed to inflict pain for the purpose of training or controlling the behavior of elephants.
Elephants are taught when they are very young to fear what’s called a “bullhook”– and those who wield them – by being poked, prodded, or struck with this instrument, and sometimes worse in sensitive areas causing them physical and emotional harm. Animal protection and humane organizations, conservation groups and California’s accredited zoos all strongly support Senator Lara’s bill.
Zoos have found that keepers don’t have to wield a sharp and potentially abusive tool while standing next to an elephant to get the animal to comply.
SB 1062 recently passed the Legislature with strong bi-partisan support. Last year he vetoed a similar bill because it made a violation of the ban a crime—and the governor has been reluctant to create new categories of crimes. In contrast, this year’s bill levies civil fines and allows for possible permit revocation for those who use a bullhook or similar device with an elephant after January 1, 2018.
Elephants in human care should be managed through what’s called “protected contact” according to professionals from zoos accredited by the Association of Zoos & Aquariums (AZA) and wildlife veterinarians. Under protected contact there is always a barrier between the elephants and the keepers; they never share the same space. Experts who have transitioned elephants from bullhook management say this recommended practice is safer and still allows for a full range of elephant care. Opponents of the bill insist that bullhook training is necessary to control an elephant. But zoos have found that keepers don’t have to wield a sharp and potentially abusive tool while standing next to an elephant to get the animal to comply. Handlers can easily use positive reinforcement from a protected distance to work with an elephant. Today, protected contact is required at AZA zoos across the country.
Elephants are classified as a restricted species under the Fish & Game Code in California. No one has a right to possess one – permits to do so come with certain responsibilities. SB 1062 is a reasonable imposition to place on those granted that privilege and the time prior to enactment is sufficient to transition elephants and businesses to a new management model.
Advocates and elephant professionals are united in support of this progressive legislation. And it’s heartening to see that many legislators are as well. Enacting SB 1062 is in the best interest of the elephants that call California “home.”
—
Ed’s Note: Rich Block is president of the California Association of Zoos and Aquariums and executive director of the Santa Barbara Zoo. Jennifer Fearing is a legislative advocate for The Humane Society of the United States and other animal protection organizations.
Want to see more stories like this? Sign up for The Roundup, the free daily newsletter about California politics from the editors of Capitol Weekly. Stay up to date on the news you need to know.
Sign up below, then look for a confirmation email in your inbox.
It always amazes me when people who know nothing about a subject complain about it. I just watched a story about elephants in Thailand on Animal Planet. Everyone of the people who worked the elephants had a stick with a hook on it. Bull hooks have been used to control elephants for hundreds of years and if they had been seriously injuring these large and expensive animals they would have stopped. That does not mean an improperly used bull hook can’t be dangerous to the animal, but the same can be said about a hammer. The problem is, the radical animal rights fanatics only present the improper use, while any any evidence to the contrary is attacked by them as staged. It is not the bull hook, it is how it is used and there are plenty of laws to protect elephants from improper use.
This is what professional trainers and VETERINARIANS say about bullhooks:
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/elephant-bullhook-guide-safe-ringling-bros-big-article-1.1620674
This is just another staged campaign by the HSUS to give the appearance of working for animals. The HSUS is an internet animal rights movement, that promotes unnecessary laws to get people to donate, the spends the donations on obscene salaries for its management. The CEO of the HSUS has a million dollar house in Maryland and a $800,000.00 apartment in DC. Every year the HSUS stashes millions of dollars offshore. Don’t believe anything the HSUS says and don’t give it money. Support your local shelters.
Every zoo in California has come out in favor of this ban. So much for “people who know nothing about a subject.”
What are we going to ban next, hammers, steak knives, how about cars. It is not the implement, it is how it is used. There are already laws to prevent the misuse of bull hooks. So this is just another stupid law eliminating something that when used properly serves a purpose. I guess the people of California are getting used to stupid laws, like the one about cage free chickens.
LOL Randy, it’s not worth trying to respond to you because you just change the subject. Just based on your comments to various articles, there is no treatment of elephants that you don’t support, including hunting them, and no laws that you don’t think are stupid. Back to the point, this is a law that is supported by every zoo in California that holds elephants, as well as the PAWS sanctuary, so clearly there are people supporting it who know plenty about elephant care.
The American Veterinary Medical Association, which is the primary accreditation group for veterinary schools, thinks the use of bull hooks is proper. Sorry, but I think veterinarians are a better source of information then some animal rights crazies.
“Animal rights crazies” who work in zoos. Uh huh. Again, the California zoos that handle elephants agree with banning the bullhook. I’d take their side over a bunch of non-elephant vets.
California seems to have more animal rights crazies then most states. Like I say, I believe veterinarians. Again, this is stupid and unnecessary legislation made by a bunch of crack pots.
Deb, you are WRONG–the vets ARE professional elephant vets. They are the ones advocating against the ban because they know how easily they can treat health problems and diseases when elephants are so quickly positioned for tests and treatments to save their lives. Do you know how many zoos in Calif have elephants? Do you know how many elephants are in these zoos? Do you know how many elephants are in private hands in California? Do you know how many people in California own elephants? If you do not know the answer to these questions–YOU are totally misinformed and the dupe of activists who will lead you to think you are on a huge crusade to save elephants in the world. Find out the answers for yourself. Finally, do you REALLY think a 6-ton animal that is in fear and panic is incapable of defending itself against a stick? Educate yourself.
I’m actually very comfortable with my knowledge on these topics. You’re the one who’s regurgitating nonsense put out by the elephant entertainment industry. Perhaps you need to try some independent thinking. And a real name.
Worth noting that a member of the AVMA’s animal welfare committee a few years back opined that putting 30,000 diseased chickens in So. California into a woodchipper was a “humane” death. Hardly a reputable source for ethical treatment of animals.
Keep up the good work, Randy!
Deb, Do you know how much money PAWS charges its visitors to just SEE an elephant??? Look it up. PAWS is a money making organization that relies on exaggeration and hyperbole to inflame emotions. Fact: The PAWS “sanctuary” was threatened by fire recently and its leadership opted to keep the elephants in place to possibly burn to death or die from smoke inhalation rather than transport them to safety. Why wouldn’t they allow the elephants to be loaded into truck trailers designed to transport elephants for a short journey away from the fire? Because PAWS people knew that the elephants could not be moved without the use of an Ankus to guide them to the trailers. They knew the elephants would not understand what was being asked of them because it was nothing they have any experience with–without the guidance of an Ankus the elephants would not know how to respond to the behaviors of their human handlers. Oh, yes, there also was not time to teach them new cues through “positive reinforcement” processes which rely entirely on trial and error. The elephants at the PAWS sanctuary would have all been capable of walking to trailers and getting into them without harm or panic. Instead, PAWS chose to leave them in a place where the elephants fearfully knew they were in danger from the signs of the fire in the air around them. If the fire had engulfed their area, I have no doubt PAWS would have let them burn to death rather than let handlers lead them to safety. Yah, PAWS obviously knows PLENTY about elephant care! (This did happen…I know the people who offered to help evacuate the elephants and were refused.)
Aww, you’ve been drinking the Murray kool aid. I won’t waste my time trying to have a rational conversation.
Well, there it is. How sad. You have resorted to the typical activist’s personal attack because you have no real information or experience. Ironically, you’re not the one who tried to have a rational conversation–so you’re not the one wasting her time. You offered NO facts, NO specific information, NO details–you just spewed the emotional catch phrases and talking points you keep hearing from the activists. You have no good, solid responses from your own brain. That is truly pathetic.
LOL
Again, obviously no solid response. Typical activist defense mechanism…laugh at those who disagree with you.
You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about me, “Golf,” which of course no one can make about you because of your fake name. I do know some of the people you are copying-and-pasting your arguments from, and I’m more than aware that offering facts or information do not make a dent in their emotions on the topic so, no, I’m not going to waste a lot of time presenting you with facts. I will say that you pick up facts rather discriminately from those people: for example, most of HTWT’s elephants and the surviving Murray elephant (as well as poor Annette) are wild-caught elephants; it is the same with the vast majority of the elephants in the San Diego and Los Angeles zoos and, of course, EARS (or whatever he’s calling it this week). Those would meet the very definition of “wild animals,” which you are denying any California elephants are – not to mention that domestication does not take place in one or two generations, making every elephant under discussion “wild.” You see, we are not “animal rights crazies,” by and large – we are people who, armed with a great deal of knowledge about elephants and their natural needs, and no vested interest in keeping them under direct control so that we can make money off of them, understand that bullhooks by their nature and their use are inherently cruel. And now you come back with insults and name-calling, and so I am completely done with this conversation with someone who is clearly one of those folks with a vested interest.
Deb, No insults or name calling came me, no where in any texts I sent you. Check i out. You must have me confused with someone else. You won’t find anything “cut and pasted” in what I’ve said, either. These falsehoods from you just reiterate what is apparent. You’re not really reading any of these messages…you just want to keep putting out your lies. You’re an activist…you can’t heIp it. And you can’t tolerate people who have a different view, without resorting to deceit because honest exchanges don’t seem to be part of your ability to engage on this issue. Also, I have no vested interest in any of this–in any way.
Hey Golf Tango (hiding behind a fake screen name – are you too ashamed to let us know who you are?) the PAWS sanctuary has several open houses per year and the fees they charge are reasonable and benefit the elephants’ care. Visitors are *not* allowed too close to them or to touch them, unlike the exploiters in California who use bullhooks like HTWT and truck their elephants around to fairs to provide elephant-back rides. As far as the wildfires in September 2015, PAWS clearly explained they have extensive fire safety prevention measures there, from their own fire truck to spending $40,000/year to have goats graze the land and reduce the fire hazard. I take it you don’t bother reading PAWS’ newsletter and educating yourself.
HTWT made a phony offer to PAWS to “help” to evacuate the elephants and used it to lobby against SB 716 (the first bullhook ban bill that Gov. Brown vetoed) last year. The FACT is that Ed Stewart and everyone at PAWS knows their fire prevention measures and protocols and there was no need to evacuate the elephants. Your silly arguments here don’t hold water.
Of course you’re comfortable with your knowledge…why would you want to learn the truth when you already have all the answers? Regarding my name…I’ve learned the hard way that people heavily into activism like yourself take advantage of my personal honesty and use it to attack me on facebook and besmirch me in public ways…with occasional threats of violence and damage. You use words like “exploiters” and “phony offers” to describe people and situations you know nothing about. Regarding PAWS…one fire truck wasn’t going to stop that fire if it came their way. And goats can eat all the vegetation they can hold but that doesn’t stop firebrands from drifting overhead for miles to ignite new fires. What you claim Ed Stewart knows as a FACT, is just his own assessment of their fire prevention efforts. There ended up to be no need to evacuate the elephants because the fire missed them–NOT because of their fire prevention protocols. Your arrogant dismissal of what you call my “silly” arguments is further evidence of your arrogance about your own position. Belittling those who disagree with them is the favorite defense of activists like yourself.
I’m pretty comfortable with Deb’s knowledge, too, Golf Tango. I don’t think you’ve done your homework here. 😉 Clearly you haven’t spent any time learning about PAWS – the fire prevention measures and protocol I noted were just skimming the surface. Visit their website and read. PAWS was in close contact with fire authorities as well and there was no immediate fire threat to the sanctuary that warranted evacuation. HTWT deliberately baited PAWS last year at the start of the wildfires, in their strategy to defeat SB 716, making a phony offer to help PAWS evacuate their elephants. Then when PAWS did the smart thing and refused, HTWT cooked up a ton of lies. That’s the ilk of the type of people who exploit and abuse elephants for profit. This bullhook ban will likely be signed into law and it will be a great day for elephants when it is. Maybe those who still believe in using them on elephants should get a real job instead.
Just because they are an AZA accredited zoo Doesn’t mean the staff knows anything about handling elephants. That is what protected contact is for. To protect staff with no experience handling animals from being injured by them.
Zoo officials will speak on the side of any issue that will give them the most $$$$ and support. The zoo leadership has no idea of how the animals are best handled. Virtually EVERY elephant in the US today has been trained to respond to guidance from its handlers via the Ankus. Your concept of abuse via a “bullhook” is antiquated and has had no place in modern elephant management for decades. The elephant guide is the instrument that cues them on what is expected of them. Without these cues, they will not know to lie down for medical exams or what to do with their feet when it’s time for their toes to be manicured. Their very health depends on veterinarians to have access to all parts of their bodies. The “protected contact” the AZA and its activists so proudly tout EXCLUDES the caretakers from close contact with their animals. This seriously affects the social world of all elephants that have close relationships with their handlers. Activists like you, Deb, have no clue about these close relationships and the role they serve in the lives of these magnificent creatures. Are you aware that the ban will only affect TEN elephants in the entire state? Did you know that? You have no idea of the DESTRUCTION your activism is bringing to the lifestyle of these ten elephants. They are well cared for and much loved, and they will be confused about the lack of guidance and will feel abandoned from lack of the close human interaction they have known all their lives. The ban on the elephant guide will inhibit medical care and health checks, as well as procedures that relate to elephant diseases that need attention and treatment. Elephants are not like wild animals. Stop treating them like they are.
Sorry, bud, but elephants are not only “like wild animals,” they ARE wild animals.
Not a single elephant in California is a “wild animal”– not any more than a dog, horse, donkey, or other animal that lives in peaceful domestication with human beings.
Sure. Except that science tells us otherwise.
Uh huh, and science tells us that bees can’t fly.
Elephants “are not like wild animals.”??? Really? Maybe you should be paying attention to world-renowned elephant *scientists* like Dr. Joyce Poole who has spent over 40 years in the field researching wild elephants. Her ElephantVoices website states, “Captive Asian elephants are often referred to as domesticated, but this is an erroneous use of the term. Captive elephants are tamed, not domesticated. True domestication requires many, many generations of selective breeding, isolated from wild populations, and results in genetic adaptation to living in the company and service of people.” All elephants are WILD animals.
As far as bullhooks, Dr. Poole’s website states at the link below in headers and describes *why* under each header,
“The use of the bullhook physically harms elephants
The use of the bullhook psychologically and emotionally harms elephants
The use of bullhooks constitutes harassment of elephants
The use of bullhooks, whips or other instruments on elephants can constitute handling in a manner that could cause emotional stress and trauma
The use of a bullhook on one individual has negative consequences for other elephants
The use of bullhooks on elephants is inhumane”
Please, learn something, Golf Tango, and also come clean about your real identity instead of using a fake name.
http://www.elephantvoices.org/elephants-in-captivity-7/about-the-bull-hook.html
Regarding Dr. Poole–domestication vs taming…is a technicality scientists use regarding genetics, not behaviors. An animal that is tame acts the same as one that is domesticated. Dr. Poole talks about how she genuinely loves to be in the presence of elephants. In an interview she said, “My favorite experience in the field is being in the presence of
elephants and feeling completely at ease because I understand their
behavior so well. I love to share my passion for elephants. I
particularly enjoy explaining elephant behavior and sharing my knowledge
with others. It is hard to choose one favorite experience, as there
have been so many. Establishing a relationship with Vladimir, a wild
elephant who permitted me to touch him, and being remembered by him
after 12 years, touched me deeply.” Does it sound like she’s talking about a wild elephant or a tame one? How do their behaviors differ? The ironic thing here is that you hold Dr. Poole up as your standard, yet as an activist you want to deny others from having the same opportunity to have a close relationship with elephants by putting them behind bars and denying them the human contact that they so very much enjoy. I know it annoys you that I use a pen name. I’ve learned that activists become irrational at times and make personal attacks and even threaten violence. What I’ve also learned is that many activists use fake names to hide behind so they can attack with impunity. Regarding the “bullhook”–there is no doubt that it could be used to abuse, just as almost any tool of animal husbandry can be misused. The reality is that the people you are going after with your ban are not abusers. There are only TEN elephants in California that are affected by the ban. Is that one of the things that you know? Every one of these ten elephants are in the care of people who love their animals and have dedicated their lives to them. It’s a 24/7 job to care for elephants, with no days off. Elephants don’t turn 18 and move away from home. Once someone takes on responsibility for these animals, it is a lifetime commitment because the elephants live a LONG time.
Golf Tango, Dr. Poole discusses a situation where a free, wild elephant approached her (as many wild elephants do, if you’ve ever spent time learning about elephants who are habituated to human presence, such as in Amboseli National Park). The facts don’t change with your spin – all elephants, no matter how long they’ve been enslaved by humans, remain wild animals. Just ask Tyke. Oh, you can’t, because she snapped and rampaged in Hawaii in ’04 during a circus performance and was gunned down on the streets of Honolulu. That would be Tyke, who obviously had enough of bullhooks and abuse and the moronic tricks she was forced to perform.
You write, “What I’ve also learned is that many activists use fake names to hide behind so they can attack with impunity.” That’s what so many elephant abusers claim but where’s your proof of activists threatening violence against you? Nobody I work with in advocacy, including myself, would dream of doing that. Lame excuse. Oh and my name is really Lori Sirianni. A simple Google search will turn me up; the name “Lori Sirianni” is not a common combination and my own Google search turns up only five women including me with that name. I’m a founding core organizer and strategist with the nonprofit organization Global March for Elephants and Rhinos and it would be unethical for me to use a fake name online – just like it’s unethical for you to use a fake name. I’ve always used my own real name since I joined social media in ’09 and use it across FB, Twitter, Linked In, Pinterest and in email.
If you want to be credible, you need to be honest enough to use your REAL name. Period.
Only TEN elephants in California who would be affected by SB 1062 being signed into law? Good. Now get the bullhooks away from them, hopefully let them retire from insipid performances or elephant-back rides that damage their spines, and go to an accredited sanctuary. It doesn’t matter how much you claim you LOVE your elephants, the elephants are wild animals by genetics and nature and they need to love other elephants and express their natures in a natural habitat setting, NOT be “loved” by you with a bullhook.
Lori, It isn’t unethical for me to use a pen name in order to protect myself from the kind of people you claim don’t exist–activists who would scream threats like, “May you rot in hell!” and “I hope some one beats you to death with a bullhook!” It’s not a “lame excuse” when a woman approaches me and others at an event, spewing spittle and yelling, “How does it feel to beat a baby elephant with a bullhook, you sicko?” (I have never even touched a guide in the presence of an elephant.)
Not everyone in your tidy animal activist world behaves as you would like us to think. At least people in the elephant world acknowledge that some sick people are capable of abusing elephants, as in the case of Rose-Tu in Portland. And they take corrective and legal measures to end that abuse when it is discovered.
You deny that those threatening kinds of activists exist. You refuse to even acknowledge that there are bad people in your activists groups…yet castigate all elephant people for the misdeeds of a few among their ranks. So you’re the founder of this and that group and you put your name out there for everyone to admire and praise you. How many people have spat at you in a public meeting and shouted, “You disgust me!”?
All this commentary about my pen name is just designed to take the attention away from the real issue. You just want to know more about me to give you fodder to try to discredit me–instead of paying attention to what I’m saying.
In your world, you ignore that you are destroying an existence for peaceful people who work daily with elephants in a loving and nurturing way. The elephant guide is the key communication tool between elephants and their caregivers. Your idyllic images of elephants in sanctuaries do not include the truth about the lack of medical attention or pain relief and the suffering they go thru because their keepers say, “We let nature take its course.” So the elephants can die a slow and agonizing death with no loving hands to soothe them or no natural predators to end the process.
You totally missed the point about the ten elephants in California. Your do-good attentions are misdirected and your collected donations of money would be better served to go after the TRUE enemies of elephants–the poachers who kill them for ivory in the sanctuaries that are supposed to shelter them. The ten elephants in California have loving caretakers who do not abuse them. All the time you spend going after the people who bring comfort and security for elephants is wasted while elephants in real danger of harm and extinction remain at risk and die at an alarming rate every day while you walk the halls of legislative buildings that have no connection to the real threat.
It’s pretty obvious that your agenda is to take all elephants (and probably most other animals) away from their human care givers–because you say they are “wild” animals with no acknowledgment that they do easily and harmoniously co-exist with human beings and have so for millennium. The word choices between “wild,” “domesticated” and “tame” reflect variations of behavior. Your example of Tyke’s rampage is a situation where some unforeseen or unknown event or circumstance caused the elephant to panic. It is NOT an example of an animal “who obviously had enough of bullhooks and abuse and the moronic tricks” as you anthropomorphically speculate, as if she just stomped out of the office one day and quit. Don’t be so trite.
Golf Tango if some activists have behaved as you described then they’re wrong to do so. I did not deny that those kind of activists exist, I wrote, “That’s what so many elephant abusers claim but where’s your proof of activists threatening violence against you? Nobody I work with in advocacy, including myself, would dream of doing that.” I do not know or work with every elephant advocate in the world, I work with intelligent, law-abiding and decent people whom I respect and who advocate in a responsible and ethical manner.
As far as Rose-Tu (and other captive elephants who’ve been abused with bullhooks), it’s not good enough to simply “end that abuse when it is discovered”. The abuse should never have happened in the first place and it wouldn’t have happened if the zoo hadn’t used bullhooks on their elephants. You cannot “undo” abuse – what about Rose-Tu’s mental and emotional scars? Progressive zoos are switching to protected contact because it’s more humane for the elephants and safer both for them and for their keepers and staff.
I don’t put my name out there “for everyone to admire and praise” me. I explained how and why I use my real name and I certainly don’t do it for admiration – I do it for *transparency*, accountability, credibility and honesty. Many of my friends and colleagues don’t even know much of the work I do because I do it quietly in private groups, as the FB pages I co-admin, by email or by phone and Skype calls. My work is about the animals, not about me.
I haven’t been spat on or yelled at in a public meeting like you claim you were, but I’ve been harassed online by circus and zoo supporters and been called vile names by them, especially by some Toronto Zoo supporters who are bitter that the zoo’s three surviving elephants were sent to the PAWS sanctuary instead of another zoo.
Nobody is trying to destroy anybody’s existence. PAWS said it best, in their letter to Governor Brown urging him to sign SB 1062 into law when they wrote, “Clearly, the two exhibitors still using bullhooks in California must adapt to this new, more humane environment. SB 1062 gives them ample time to retrain their elephants in protected contact, and PAWS stands ready to assist.” I hope the two exhibitors do evolve and retrain their elephants in protected contact.
Your claim that the elephant sanctuaries do not provide medical care for their elephants is patently untrue. Please do some more research.
We work on legislative issues because laws such as ivory and rhino horn bans or bullhook bans – and their enforcement – are critical to protecting elephants from abuse and poaching. Our Global March for Elephants and Rhinos (GMFER) does much more than organizing annual global marches – we actively work to pass or strengthen legislation to protect elephants, captive and wild, from California to South Africa, and are attending CITES CoP17 in September to lobby for all species of elephants and rhinos to be uplisted to Appendix I status.
None of us are paid a cent, we’re all volunteers and GMFER fundraises to help our African organizers in poverty-stricken areas be able to hold a march or event. We believe the future of Africa’s wildlife ultimately rests in the hands of the African people. Those are the hearts and minds we need to reach, to inspire and empower them to protect their own wildlife, mitigate HEC and poaching, and demand accountability from their governments.
I’m utterly confused what you mean by writing, “go after the TRUE enemies of elephants–the poachers who kill them for ivory in the sanctuaries that are supposed to shelter them”. Specifically, which sanctuaries are you referring to?
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/68-elephants-killed-last-two-months-african-wildlife-refuge/
Garamba National Park is not a sanctuary, Golf Tango, it’s a national park in the DRC where militarized criminal networks are decimating the forest elephants and other wildlife. Three rare Kordofan giraffes were killed in June, only their tails taken. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/08/wildlife-giraffes-garamba-national-park-poaching-tails/. You’re completely off-topic here, as these tragedies have nothing to do with banning the bullhook in California.
Lori,
The article I referred to is considered a refuge for the elephants…even the title of the article uses that word. I use “refuge” and “sanctuary” interchangeably, since they are synonyms. I realize it is not related to the “bullhook” ban…I was just saying that activist efforts against the ten elephants in California would be better served to move toward the slaughter of wild elephants in a wild environment–these elephants have no form of real protection.
With that said, I would like to add that I appreciate the respectful tone of your most recent posts. I realize that we both are passionate about saving elephants in one way or another. Perhaps we just differ on priorities at this point. I have been addressing attacks against elephant in private hands for some years, and have developed a “thick skin” when it comes to making posts in public venues like Disqus.net. So many posters come strongly right out of the gate with inflammatory words with little substance…which is often an indication of their passion, but also frequently reveals their lack of concrete knowledge of either side.
It is tedious to spar with them when the challenge is ultimately a game of “one-upsmanship” for who has the most personal experience or scientific support.
One of the “radical animal rights fanatics” who worked very hard on getting this bill passed is the Oakland Zoo’s lead elephant keeper Gina Kinzley. No AZA-accredited zoo in California uses bullhooks and neither does the PAWS sanctuary, whose co-founder Ed Stewart also supports SB 1062. The AZA prefers that its accredited zoos phase out the use of bullhooks and move towards protected contact. The only outfits still using bullhooks in California are those that exploit their elephants for ridiculous circus-style performances like Have Trunk Will Travel. Bullhooks are weapons of domination, fear and pain and have no place in a civilized society.
Less then 10% of the zoos and aquariums are members of the AZA. So that would make you think that it is out of step with most of the rest of the USDA licensed animal exhibitors. It appears that the AZA is comprised of the same type of animal rights crazies that want to shut down zoo and aquariums and then set all the animals free. Look at the mess the animal rights crazies made of Sea World.
SeaWorld (yes it’s one word, not two) made a mess out of SeaWorld, not animal rights activists. Documentaries like Blackfish exposed the abuse and suffering of captive cetaceans at SeaWorld – the TRUTH did them in, not the “animals rights crazies”. And the “animal rights crazies” are versed in science and know that captivity kills cetaceans and causes them lifelong suffering at aquariums like SeaWorld and Marineland. Heaven forbid that we should actually have immense whales swimming free in the oceans and not imprisoned in tiny concrete pools performing stupid tricks for people!
If Maybe thought he would get the Animal rights fanatics to stop trying to shut down Sea World, when he sold his soul to the HSUS, he should see by now he was wrong. He should also realize that stopping breading now is even more stupid when you consider the fact that the number of calves produced by Orcas in the wild is falling. Please read this:
http://awesomeocean.com/2014/12/16/starving-pregnant-look-j32s-tragic-death/
In the case of Sea World, the animal rights nuts use pseudo science, without any actual scientific evidence to make people believe that the Orcas are sad. Please read this:
http://awesomeocean.com/2014/07/22/blackfish-fans-debunked/
What is even more ridiculous is the fact that SEA World was in the process of expanding the Orca tanks to meet the animal rights crazies major complain. Please read this:
http://awesomeocean.com/2015/10/21/killing-kasatka-animal-activism-comes-animal-welfare/
Groups like PETA and the HSUS are vegan cults that want to stop the use of animals in society. That means no more ranching, farming, zoos and aquariums. Both the HSUS and Peta have a history of concocting stories of abuse.
So Sea World needs to think about what it is doing. That is because you can’t deal with these crazies. Next it will be dolphins then turtles. These fanatics will not be happy until they shut Sea World down.
Clearly you’re not seeing that captivity in itself is the problem. If you were an orca, would you want to be able to swim as far as you want in the open ocean with your pod and hunt for your own fresh food, or would you want to swim ’round and ’round in circles in a SeaWorld fish tank (even a bigger fish tank) and do tricks for dead fish? I’m curious – which life would you choose?
A lawyer I greatly respect with the Animal Legal Defense Fund worked hard for the gains for orcas in California and she’s hardly what I’d call a “fanatic”, “nut” or “crazy”. Randy you’re really not doing anything for your own credibility by foolish name-calling like that, or characterizing animal rights activists and vegans as “cults”. Name-calling just means you don’t have a solid argument to make.
Lori, The people you call “ridiculous circus-style” elephant exploiters like Have Trunk Will Travel have DONE MORE FOR ELEPHANTS and their well being than you EVER will. The ankus has been used for thousands of years to allow a healthy relationship between humans and these huge animals. You are so naive to think that a 6-ton animal would be dominated by a stick. An elephant guide is not a weapon. When an elephant is afraid and in pain, it will forcefully attack whatever is causing the distress. Elephants in human care today are loved and nurtured by their handlers. Your fantasies of violence toward elephants come from antiquated films about circus practices that have no position in contemporary elephant handling anywhere in the US today. Your misguided efforts to take away the only tool used in elephant husbandry will only affect the TEN elephants in private care in California. All ten of these elephants have a very close relationship with their handlers which gives them a strong sense of well-being and social belonging. Your ignorance about elephants and their handlers is destructive and will not serve any positive purpose for elephants.
Hi Golf Tango, I’m guessing that both you and Randy Janssen have financial and career interests here, are you both employees of HTWT or a traveling circus? Have you seen the demented video HTWT recently posted on their FB page showing their 5 elephants doing the most absurd, circus-style tricks that they’re forced through bullhook abuse to learn and perform? Oh, and did you pop over to YouTube and look up Animal Defenders International’s video of HTWT’s Kari Johnson beating the hell out of their elephants with a bullhook? Do you call that loving and nurturing?
You write that I’m naive to think a 6-ton elephant would be “dominated” by a stick. When it’s a stick with a sharp poker tip and hook on the end that can be used to stab and hook elephants in their most tender, vulnerable areas, yes they can. And the key word here is “dominated”. The Oakland Zoo, sanctuaries and other progressive facilities do not seek to “dominate” elephants – it is entirely possible and proven that captive elephants can be well cared for without dominance. Protected contact and no bullhooks gives elephants the autonomy they need for mental and physical health, by allowing them choice to participate or not in training and veterinary procedures. It’s a shame on humanity that we even seek to “dominate” majestic elephants.
The only reason to use a bullhook is to dominate, abuse and scare elephants into complying with training to perform stupid, degrading tricks for selfish human amusement. California is better than this – HTWT and their ilk need to come into the 21st century or best of all, retire their elephants to an accredited sanctuary like PAWS or TES and get respectable jobs.
As far as what I’ve done for elephants, you don’t know me or my work for captive or wild elephants so that just makes you sound ridiculous. Are *you* working to have all species of African elephants and rhinos uplisted to Appendix I at CITES CoP17 this year? Are *you* part of a core team organizing over 120 global marches for elephants and rhinos this year for the third straight year? Are *you* working to transfer suffering captive zoo elephants to sanctuaries? Are *you* working to support sanctuaries and provide the necessities they require to care for rescued elephants? All on a volunteer, unpaid basis for me. Or are you just profiting off of exploiting elephants under your control? And why are you using a fake name here? I use my real name on social media, why are you hiding behind a pseudonym? Who are you?
You have guessed wrong, Lori. I have no more financial interest in the elephant world than you do–I assume. Regarding videos of elephant abuse–I won’t be baited into defending outright lies and deceit. Did you see the movie Forrest Gump? Did you see him talk to JFK? Did you see the TV video that showed Christopher Reeve get up from his wheelchair and walk? Do you trust that Animal Defenders International would not edit and distort a video to enrage the emotions of viewers and use the results for their agendas and to solicit money? I don’t. I know better than to trust them. Generating emotions generates cash for them. Regarding “bullhooks” that’s your word. And it’s as antiquated as the decades-old film footage of circus people who had no education about elephants. That kind of behavior is totally out of context for today’s elephant handlers who generally have college educations in some way connected with the animal world. Even in those days, bad treatment of elephants was the exception, not the rule. Activists take individual situations or incidents and turn them into broad generalizations to apply them to everyone. They cultivate prejudice toward a large group of people, using the actions of a few to support their argument. They selectively use examples that are no longer relevant to exploit their own purpose. Elephant people don’t “dominate” their animals with “bullhooks.” Elephants are intelligent with a larger brain ratio than humans. They learn behaviors from each other and are eager to explore possibilities in their environment. The elephant guide is based on the basic premise of avoidance which is visible in humans as well. The point of the guide gives a touch that causes a reaction–to move away from it. When an elephant is touched on the front of a part of its body, it backs up. When the elephant feels the touch of the hook on the back of a body part, it moves forward. That simple process is what makes it possible for humans and elephants to interact. When an elephant veterinarian needs to examine an elephant, the guide is the tool that allows the elephant to know what to do–to lie down or to present a foot or open its mouth. The ban will remove that tool that is so vital for this interaction. Activists want people to believe that elephants are pathetically abused by this tool. That is far from the truth. Guides have been used with elephants for thousands of years. You’re right, “captive animals can be well cared for without dominance.” BUT you must remember that all the elephants currently in the USA have been trained to respond to cues by guides. It’s easy to care for them because they already know what the cues represent. Without these cues, elephants in human care will be left without an understanding of what they are to do–to go into a place for medical care or go away from a place that might not be safe for reasons they cannot know. Your hostility toward HTWT “and their ilk,” as you say, is unwarranted. You have no idea of the total dedication they have toward their elephants. It is a 24/7 RESPECTABLE job that goes on for decades. Their elephants are happy and healthy and get plenty of mental stimulation and emotional support. Why would you think that elephants are better off in a sanctuary? PAWS made it clear last spring that they would rather see their elephants possibly burn to death than evacuate them to safety via a process that might involve an elephant guide. The Tennessee Elephant Sanctuary does not medically treat their animals. They use a “holistic” approach that involves massages and no pain killers or medical treatment that could heal and give relief. When one of their elephants became ill and was unable to stand, the TES handlers sat in a circle around the animal for days and chanted until the elephant died, instead of contacting an elephant vet to address the problem. That is torture. Regarding YOU and what you’ve done? You want to do one-upsmanship with me? Organizing and volunteering and marching and core-teaming is your crusade that can do good for some elephants, but it is also for your own self-fulfillment and you know it. Plus, it makes you feel good and gives you social connections. Unfortunately, so much of your hostility is directed at the very people who work daily with elephants and have dedicated their lives to the well-being of elephants in their care. That is the sad part of your activism–you destroy what is good and what works to benefit elephants because in your mind anyone who works directly with elephants and has gained their love and trust does not get your blessing. I know that you have no direct relationship with any elephant and have not spent time with someone who has. Who am I, you ask…accusing me of hiding behind a fake name. I am someone who loves elephants. I have been with elephants in Sri Lanka and the US. I’m not an elephant handler, I don’t earn a living from elephants. I don’t own any elephants. I’m someone who believes that everyone deserves a chance to know elephants and the beauty of their nature–to really know them, not just ABOUT them. I worry for their future from poachers and habitat loss. I worry that overly enthusiastic activists think they know what is best for these wonderful creatures because they sit at home and watch faked videos and believe the lies and distortions of organizations that exploit and use donations to force others into their own scheme of how things should be. I use a pen name to protect myself from them. I used to be able to come forward as myself, but public attacks on my character and threats of violence have taught me to be cautious–as cautious as the high and strong fences around the compounds of the elephants I know and love. The fences were built for the same reasons–to protect the precious elephants from the very people who claim to help them by trying to kill them. Activism can be a nasty business. Just as you falsely generalize about those who really do the most for elephants–I generalize that you are one who would do potential harm to me. Besides, I’m not as strong as you are and I’m a lot older.
Lori, So no AZA accredited zoo in Calif uses “bullhooks”?? Are you sure? Check out this video to see that vets at the Santa Barbara Zoo use that tool during their medical procedure. The SBZ has been accredited since April 2015, and recognizes that the AZA only RECOMMENDS about “bullhook’ use. Clearly, elephant caretakers and vets recognize that it is one of the things they might need at some point during their work on an ailing animal. Your ban will not allow them access to the elephant guide for medical procedures which is a serious oversight. Thanks to you, medical procedures could come with a high cost fine along with the vet tab. See it yourself…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUHzCxL8FhI&feature=share
BTW–I wonder where TES and PAWS will find it in their budgets to do a procedure like this with its huge cost to help an ailing elephant. Privately owned elephants frequently have these kinds of procedures done–all at the owner’s expense–yes even your much maligned HTWT had this very procedure done on one of their elephants with a $100,000 price tag.
My thoughts are that in this type of circumstance, when an elephant is restrained and sedated for a dental procedure where staff have to enter the same space as the elephant would be an exceptional circumstance – the zoo appears to use protected contact in general. I’ve watched the full video and though there is a bullhook present, it doesn’t appear to me that anyone touched the elephant with it.
Yes, I saw that, too. My sense is…since it is present…and the vet has it in his hand…and he’s shown hanging it up…that its actual use has been edited out.
For the uninitiated, frequent commenter here, RANDY JANSSEN, has of late made it his mission in life to attack HSUS, PETA and anyone else working to improve the plight of animals.
Mr. Janssen is a charreada (Mexican rodeo) promoter and former “horse tripper” based in San Antonio, Texas. And a lawyer, if you can believe it. He has claimed for years that animals have neither “feelings” nor “emotions”–it’s all “instinct.”
See his remarkable website: http://www.legalizehorsetripping.com (I’m not making this up), and the many links therein.
x
Eric Mills, coordinator
ACTION FOR ANIMALS
Oakland
Eric…stick to your horses, you don’t know anything about elephant handling. And Randy Janssen has just as much of a right to go after HSUS and PETA as you do to go after rodeos. You’re no knight in shining armor yourself–with you deceptive tactics to get attention and MONEY for your cause.
As it happens, “Golf Tango,” I DO know a bit about elephant handling, having been a docent at the Oakland Zoo in years gone by, and done a fair amount of reading on the subject. But that’s irrelevant. There’s plenty of documentation out there regarding the problems with bullhooks. And they’ll soon be banned in California–you can bet the rent.
“Deceptive tactics and MONEY for my cause”?? A little elaboration, please.
Eric, being a DOCENT at a Zoo is a far cry from being an elephant handler. THAT’s an example of your deception. As for elaboration…there’s no need for me to offer any more than you ever give. At least, as far as truthful elaboration is concerned. Glad you’re reading a lot–it still doesn’t give you any direct experience about what transpires between elephant handlers and the animals they love. Unfortunately, your “documentation” is generally emotionally-ridden babble from questionable sources that distort isolated incidents into generalizations with a broad brush stroke.
Randy J, Golf T, and Eva N are the same person–or signers to one person (most likely RJ) who pens spiteful and vindictive posts. He can’t discuss civilly or win arguments, so has to resort to name calling and accusing others of ignorance, when he himself admits he “watched “Animal Place,” and now that makes him the expert. Talk about illogical! Don’t waste your time replying to any of RJ, GT, or EN’s posts, or any others that pop up in the same writing style/tone and posturing. Instead, thank your legislators who voted for SB 1062, and follow Eric Mills’ advice to urge the Governor to sign the bill–use the website or send a letter.
Interesting, Erniejay, that you think I’m the same as two other people who disagree with you. I can’t speak for Randy or Eva, but I don’t “pen spiteful and vindictive posts”–which you would recognize if you read mine carefully. I would say I have a much more sophisticated writing style than either Randy or Eva…but that’s personal opinion. I think you’re not very good at perceiving tone, as well. At any rate, even if Randy and Eva might be one in the same–rest assured that I am an entirely different individual..if you can handle the idea that two people would disagree with you. I find it interesting that you would even think that one person would operate under fake names–apparently, that’s something that activists often do to give more weight to their side. I use a pen name because I’ve learned the hard way that animal activists can be very nasty and mean spirited on social media, once they get their claws into someone.
Horse tripping is the hate filled racially motivated term used to describe mangana. Mangana is an event in Charreada, the national sport of Mexico. In mangana you rope a running horse and bring it to the ground. Charros have been catching horses by this way for over 400 years. It is also used by ranchers and veterinarians. A former President of the Association of Equine Practitioners says that catching horses this way is safer then roping them by the neck. Like most rodeo events, watching mangana is not for the nervous Nelly or the faint at heart, it is still a legitimate means of capture. Laws against mangana have been passed by lying about its dangers. The truth is, a horse used in mangana are in less danger then a high school football player. Please watch this video:
https://youtu.be/u_pKdfdkiIo
Mr. Janssen, if “horse tripping” is such a “hate filled racially motivated term” (as you quaintly put it), how come you use it in your website, http://www.legalizehorsetripping.com ?
Does not compute. And anyone who believers that either “horse tripping” or “steer tailing” are acceptable and humane practices, has an elevator that does not go quite to the top. I still can’t believe you’re a lawyer.
Hey Randy, here is an idea; why don’t you have one Charro run around the ring while another Charro tries to rope his legs. That would seem to require more skill as the running Charro would know what the roping Charro is attempting and could take evasive action to avoid being roped. This would separate the brave, and courageous Charros from the cowardly Charros. I’m sure you would like to volunteer to be the first running Charro, since you wouldn’t be in danger of being injured.
What you post makes you appear to be about 12 years old. What don’t you visit my web page horseroping.com. There is a massage board there and you can see just about every stupid remark made by every stupid person who complains about mangana and piales.
As I expected you’re afraid to subject yourself to what you are doing to horses.
Sorry to disappoint you, but the guys rope each other all the time. You don’t do it when someone is with their girlfriend, because as soon as the person roped gets up, you will probably get busted in the face. There are even videos on youtube, as soon as I remember how they are titled, I will post them. Charros are not a bunch of wimps. A fair number were in the Marines.
I look forward to seeing them but I’m not holding my breath you will provide them, if in fact they exist.
You have a lot of lip for someone who is too cowardly to use their real name. So grow up and look at the web page.
Instead of commenting why don’t you find those videos like you said you would.
Still waiting for the links to those videos on Youtube you claim show the “guys rop[ing] each other all the time.” I guess they don’t really exist. No surprise that your claim was false.
I don’t know anything about Randy Janssen or his activities (good or bad), but he certainly got this right. HSUS and PeTA DO NOT “work to improve the plight of animals”. They work to end all human/animal interaction. Wayne Pacelle of HSUS and Ingrid Newkirk, founder and leader of PeTA, have both remarked to mainstream media that they wish all domestic animals (yes, that includes your cat or dog) were extinct. HSUS has supported infinite numbers of bad pieces of legislation designed to cause problems for good animal owners. (See Humanewatch). PeTA has been caught in several instances of obtaining peoples’ pets under illegal circumstances and summarily killing them. (See PeTAkillsanimals.org and Justice for Maya facebook page.) They have created bogus videos of non-existent animal abuse —- in at least one case by paying someone to do something horrific to an actual live animal, on camera. Several years ago, HSUS people were convicted of paying a false witness to help them create a totally false animal abuse case against Ringling Brothers Circus. HSUS was fined in excess of fifteen million dollars. Mr. Mills’ group, Action for Animals. is yet another radical political group that seeks to end animal ownership by persecuting people who own and love animals. If YOU love animals, do not support these cruel hate groups in any way.
“Mr. Mills’ group, Action for Animals, is yet another radical political group that seeks to end animal ownership by persecuting people who own and love animals.”
PATENTLY FALSE, “flashdog”! Perhaps you’re confusing me with the Washington-based group of the same name. Me, I’m mostly a one-man operation doing what I can for animals and the environment, and mostly out-of-pocket (thanks to Social Security).
Cheers,
Eric Mills, coordinator
ACTION FOR ANIMALS
Oakland
email – [email protected]
OMG.
This is another stunt to have Domesticated Pachyderms to be banished into extinction. Look, Bullhook Haters, Here’s how to “Help” the Jumbos–BAN THE HATCHETS AND THE HIGH POWERED RIFLES that the Poachers use. They kill 96 Pachyderms in the “Wild” each day. Hatchets and Guns Hurt Pachyderms. NOT BULLHOOKS.
Right on, Curtis!!! You have focused on the REAL threat to our beloved elephants.
We’re working on anti-poaching and trophy hunting issues too, Curtis Livingston, III. Yes, we can multi-task. If you think bullhooks are so great, why don’t you watch the video on YouTube of Have Trunk Will Travel’s Kari Johnson beating on elephants with a bullhook? Or maybe read about Rose-Tu’s dozens of bullhook wounds at the Oregon Zoo, including in her anus? I could cite dozens of cases of bullhook abuse and YES, bullhooks hurt pachyderms.
?????? You need to take another look at Have Trunk Will Travel, Lori. I can’t imagine what you saw that looked to you like beating an elephant with ANYTHING. My personal favorite elephant facebook page is The Walking Elephant. There are numerous videos there of a girl and her elephant. In some of those videos, the elephant owner shows viewers a bullhook and explains its use. Sometimes the elephant owner drops her bullhook and Essex (her elephant) picks it up and hands it back to her. Yep, clearly a terrified animal. (Lol.)
Here you go, flashdog. Watch the entire video and then come back and say how great bullhooks are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1AvNGWAkCY
SB 1062 is now on the Governor’s desk. He has until August 31 to either sign or veto the bill, or simply let it become law.
Governor Jerry Brown (and all legislators) may be written c/o The State Capitol, Sacramento, CA 95814.
The Governor’s telephone number is 916/445- 2841. Let him hear from you!
THANK YOU for that contact information, ericmills! I hope everyone will make use of it. This seriously bad legislation is not a done deal. It CAN be stopped! If you love elephants, please contact Governor Brown and urge him to dump this.
You’re welcome, “flashdog” — That info was for proponents and opponents alike. It’s part of the democratic process, and the Governor needs to hear from all parties. It seems more than likely that he will sign this legislation into law. Rhode Island passed a similar bill only last month, becoming the first state in the nation to do so. Others are likely to follow suit, and eventually the entire country. The writing is on the wall.
Truth be told, the bullhooks may be the least of the problems faced by circus animals: the stresses of constant travel; being chained or caged whenever not performing silly “tricks” for an insensitive audience; brutal training methods, the impossibility of most normal social reactions, etc.
What is REALLY needed is a national ban on the use of ALL wild animals in traveling circuses and carnivals, as Mexico did last year, preceded by Bolivia, Colombia, Greece and others.
Can the U.S. be far behind? Write your state legislators, asking them to introduce the needed legislation.
All California lawmakers may be written c/o The State Capitol, Sacramento, CA 95814.
What a stupid idea. Born out incompetence by those who cannot properly use a tool and manage elephants in free contact. Rather than passing a damaging piece of legislation, try learning from professio als who actually have a higher standard of care and training. Who understand how to develop a proper relationship with elephants. In Asia they have managed to take care of hundreds of thousands of elephants for 5000 years in free contact.
Oh of course Ewa has to show up, always promoting elephant abuse and incarceration.
You mean a woman who literally has dedicated her life to saving and caring for elephants in Asia? What have you done for elephants, besides buy into AR propaganda and spew emotionally charged BS on forums and comment boards?
Really, thank you for everything you do. From overseas to caring enough to fight for our elephants here in the US
I sure hope Gov. Brown signs this. Protecting animals from abuse by circuses, and similar businesses, is where our country and the world are headed. The times they are a changing for the better. Thank you CA Legislature for putting this on Gov. Brown’s desk.
Oh mercy. This article is filled with SO much misinformation. Please note the editor’s note at the end stating that this was co-authored by the “legislative advocate” for the Humane Society of the United States. For those who don’t already know, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is NOT an animal protection organization. It has no affiliation at all with your local animal shelter or humane society. It is a radical political group that seeks to end all animal ownership by putting in place legislation that makes it difficult or impossible to own animals. (See the website and facebook page Humanewatch for information.) Knowing that makes the deliberate attempts at deception in this article more understandable. A bullhook or elephant guide is no more designed to inflict pain than the leash you put on your dog. It is a small cane with a pointed end designed to do EXACTLY what a leash is designed to do — guide. The point is because elephants communicate with each other by nudging with their pointed tusks. The bullhook is pointed like a tusk because that is what the elephant relates to, NOT so that the bullhook can inflict pain. If you inflict pain on a 6,000 pound elephant, he is likely to simply stomp you into the ground.
This article goes on and on about all the organizations that agree with this bad piece of legislation. But wait! People who actually own ,love, and handle elephants pretty much unanimously disagree. If everybody agreed that bullhooks were bad, why would the state government need to FORCE elephant owners not to use them?! The trick here is that, without a means to guide your elephant, you are in the same position as a dog owner if leashes were outlawed — it is very difficult to own them.
Let’s discuss the very bad “protected contact” notion. Think about it — if no human can be in the same space with an elephant, how can a vet care for an elephant? Simple — protected contact elephants generally receive no vet care. How can THAT be described as a good thing?! The main reason Governor Brown vetoed the original form of this bad legislation was because of the near disaster at the PAWS “sanctuary”. Last summer, PAWS was directly in the path of an uncontrolled wildfire. It was imperative to move the elephants, bears, lions, etc. to safety—- but PAWS would not. Even though the elephants there were retired zoo and circus elephants who would respond readily to gentle guidance from a bullhook, PAWS made it clear that they would rather let them burn alive than be guided to safety by a human, especially a human with a bullhook. Happily, the fire changed direction a mere few miles from PAWS and the elephants only had to suffer breathing lots of smoke. The terrible situation underlined the importance of being able to safely interact with the animals in your care. In the case of elephants, that means using a guiding tool.
Elephants have been domestic animals for hundreds of years. Tame elephants love their humans and vice versa. If YOU love elephants, please write to Governor Brown and encourage him to dump this latest attempt to harm elephants into the same wastebasket as the last one.
As with any tool, there is a correct way and in incorrect way to use them. Bullhooks are necessary when working closely with elephants, and working closely with elephants is also necessary!
Zoos are beginning to drop AZA accreditation to remain free contact, so that they can provide the best care for their animals. Free contact allows so much more freedom for elephants, as well a much higher standard of care. Very few zoos still do it due to being forced into switching to protected contact, but the ability to walk their elephants around the zoo twice a day is extremely beneficial. Being able to go in and interact with the elephants directly, whether playing or exercising with them, is great mental and physical stimulation. They form amazing bonds with their handlers, whether you choose to believe it possible it not.
Elephants are extremely intelligent. Can you imagine as a parent putting but your child in an large room, and then only being able to interact with them through bars, six feet away? Now, you need to feed(easy), medicate, groom, and get your child to listen so you can accomplish these things. I don’t know the kids you’ve been around, but good luck on getting them to listen all the time. They won’t. Here’s where it gets tricky. If your kid breaks their arm, or needs medical treatment, you now have to sedate (can be very unsafe elephants) to enter the stall and properly care for them should they decide to not cooperate.
Obviously this is a stretch, but as a elephant caretaker who uses a bull hook properly, they are my kids. Their happiness, enrichment, mental stimulation, exercise, medical care, and overall wellbeing, is my responsibility. If I want to walk the elephants I care for for a mile, stopping to let them drink, browse on grass and tree limbs on property, or kick around a ball with them, I can. If one of the elephants lays down and can’t get back up, I can help her to get back up. Some elephants lay down, and after trying to get up and not being able to (regardless of why) give up. They stop trying. They are so large, the blood pools and they will die after so many hours. There have been zoo staff fired for rushing in to help a downed elephant who’s stuck in a moat barrier (terrible for elephants, btw) because they cared more about their elephant than keeping their job.
There’s pc facility’s who’ve needed an ultrasound for one elephant, who then had to sedate the whole herd. But you don’t hear about that. There are dangerous elephants who can’t go to pc facilities because their simple medical care would be impossible and dangerous for the attending vet and future staff . Now, for all you tree-hugging animal rights nuts. Do you remember the wild fire that was in California recently?! The animal rights-ideology ran sanctuary was right in the line of fire. The people who run that, PAWS, were literally deleting the posts(FB) of animal professionals around the country begging them to let them come help evacuate their animals. We were sick to our stomachs convinced that these people were going to let their animals die before letting someone touch them with a bullhook. That’s mandated protected contact in a sanctuary setting(which everybody seems to froth at the mouth for), “if we could do something we would, but we can’t.” I wish there was a talley for all of the elephants euthanized in protected contact settings for completely treatable conditions.
That being said, There are great protected contact programs throughout the US and abroad. You have facilities with staff who are excited that they were able to get their elephants to lift their foot and come on command(very basic) to facilities who have an entire educational show for their audiences. Most lie in between, needing sedation(again dangerous) for procedures easily done in free contact. It isn’t the job of non-animal care professionals to dictate how we care for our animals. Each one is different. And needs different care.
The point of this, is there is so much more to this issue than you would think. By supporting this bill statewide, you’re potentially allowing a domino effect country wide. If you care for elephants the way you think you do, take time to educate yourself from sources other than organizations that do very little for animals and would prefer that all animals, pets included, be free from captivity (HSUS,PETA, ADI).
Bullhooks are not abusive, they have been demonized by people who nothing about them. The design themselves don’t allow for abuse. Remember, we’re talking about a 4-8oz hook, used on an animal who weighs 8,000lbs with up to 2in thick skin. If you’ve ever seen the “damage” they cause by scratching on objects, or how they interact and correct each other, you would realize that emotion is taking the place of logic here.
As with any tool, there is a correct way and in incorrect way to use them. Bullhooks are necessary when working closely with elephants, and working closely with elephants is also necessary!
Zoos are beginning to drop AZA accreditation to remain free contact, so that they can provide the best care for their animals. Free contact allows so much more freedom for elephants, as well a much higher standard of care. Very few zoos still do it due to being forced into switching to protected contact, but the ability to walk their elephants around the zoo twice a day is extremely beneficial. Being able to go in and interact with the elephants directly, whether playing or exercising with them, is great mental and physical stimulation. They form amazing bonds with their handlers, whether you choose to believe it possible it not.
Elephants are extremely intelligent. Can you imagine as a parent putting but your child in an large room, and then only being able to interact with them through bars, six feet away? Now, you need to feed(easy), medicate, groom, and get your child to listen so you can accomplish these things. I don’t know the kids you’ve been around, but good luck on getting them to listen all the time. They won’t. Here’s where it gets tricky. If your kid breaks their arm, or needs medical treatment, you now have to sedate (can be very unsafe elephants) to enter the stall and properly care for them should they decide to not cooperate.
Obviously this is a stretch, but as a elephant caretaker who uses a bull hook properly, they are my kids. Their happiness, enrichment, mental stimulation, exercise, medical care, and overall wellbeing, is my responsibility. If I want to walk the elephants I care for for a mile, stopping to let them drink, browse on grass and tree limbs on property, or kick around a ball with them, I can. If one of the elephants lays down and can’t get back up, I can help her to get back up. Some elephants lay down, and after trying to get up and not being able to (regardless of why) give up. They stop trying. They are so large, the blood pools and they will die after so many hours. There have been zoo staff fired for rushing in to help a downed elephant who’s stuck in a moat barrier (terrible for elephants, btw) because they cared more about their elephant than keeping their job.
There’s pc facility’s who’ve needed an ultrasound for one elephant, who then had to sedate the whole herd. But you don’t hear about that. There are dangerous elephants who can’t go to pc facilities because their simple medical care would be impossible and dangerous for the attending vet and future staff . Now, for all you tree-hugging animal rights nuts. Do you remember the wild fire that was in California recently?! The animal rights-ideology ran sanctuary was right in the line of fire. The people who run that, PAWS, were literally deleting the posts(FB) of animal professionals around the country begging them to let them come help evacuate their animals. We were sick to our stomachs convinced that these people were going to let their animals die before letting someone touch them with a bullhook. That’s mandated protected contact in a sanctuary setting(which everybody seems to froth at the mouth for), “if we could do something we would, but we can’t.” I wish there was a talley for all of the elephants euthanized in protected contact settings for completely treatable conditions.
That being said, There are great protected contact programs throughout the US and abroad. You have facilities with staff who are excited that they were able to get their elephants to lift their foot and come on command(very basic) to facilities who have an entire educational show for their audiences. Most lie in between, needing sedation(again dangerous) for procedures easily done in free contact. It isn’t the job of non-animal care professionals to dictate how we care for our animals. Each one is different. And needs different care.
The point of this, is there is so much more to this issue than you would think. By supporting this bill statewide, you’re potentially allowing a domino effect country wide. If you care for elephants the way you think you do, take time to educate yourself from sources other than organizations that do very little for animals and would prefer that all animals, pets included, be free from captivity (HSUS,PETA, ADI).
Bullhooks are not abusive, they have been demonized by people who nothing about them. The design themselves don’t allow for abuse. Remember, we’re talking about a 4-8oz hook, used on an animal who weighs 8,000lbs with up to 2in thick skin. If you’ve ever seen the “damage” they cause by scratching on objects, or how they interact and correct each other, you would realize that emotion is taking the place of logic here.
Time to ban the bullhook. Time to ban animals in circuses. Cirque du Soleil is plenty enough circus for me.
The elephant guide is a necessary tool for the management and veterinary care of elephants in human care. To force free contact elephants behind bars, elephants who have had hands on care all their lives… That is true elephant cruelty. I am an elephant handler from one of the oldest circus families in the world, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that banning free contact is wrong, and will have a huge negative impact on the lives of elephants in human care.
same old tired AR hysterics and propaganda..”enslaved” elephants…really? yawn…just like dogs and cats and all other animals are “enslaved” by humans according to extremists. Governor Brown sees through this nonsense and will veto the ban just like he did last time.
The Governor vetoed similar legislation last year primarily due to the fact that violation would have been a felony. The penalties for violation of SB 1062 are considerably less, which is why the Governor is expected to sign the bill this time around.
Express your views to the Governor’s office at 916/445-2841. As of 11:00 a.m. today (August 24) he had taken no action.
One thing I don’t see here is a comment from someone who actually works with elephants. I am a veterinarian and I have worked with elephants for almost 3 decades in both protected and free contact. I can tell you that both ways of managing elephants is OK and humane when done correctly. There is no need for the government to tell you how to manage your animals. The government can and should enforce the animal welfare act and leave the management style up to the animal professionals. I have personally worked with sick elephants when if it weren’t for the contact allowed with the guide, bull hook, ankus or whatever you want to call it the elephant would have died. The guide, bull hook, ankus is a tool and like any tool can be used correctly and humanely or not. Right now the elephants I work with in protected contact if they won’t swallow a medication, then the manager is out of luck and quite possibly the elephant too. Don’t agree with me? sorry, but each individual in our society needs to stop being a moral narcissists about everything they don’t personally agree with, that doesn’t make it wrong just different from what you believe. Also everything you read on the internet is a short simplification of a complicated issue, and not the full story. Please consider what it would be like if someone with no experience in what you did for a living waltzed into your office, business or workplace and began dictating that everything you did was wrong and you were a terrible person unless you did it ‘this way’ and only ‘this way’.
HUZZAH! Governor signed this legislation into law on August 29. It becomes effective on January 1, 2018.
Thanks to all who made this happen.
Now for a ban on the use of ALL wild animals in traveling circuses and carnivals, as 29 other countries around the world have done.
(Pleasant dreams, Randy.)
x
Eric Mills, coordinator
ACTION FOR ANIMALS
Oakland