Archive for the ‘Wildlife’ Category

Reason for Wolf Hunts in Rockies Doesn’t Hold Water to Michigan Wolf Study

Tuesday, October 27th, 2009

Michigan has a lot of wolves—the most in the lower 48 states! Over 4,000 wolves live in the western Great Lakes region. Livestock owners in this area want to share the landscape with wolves. Their losses to wolves are rare only 1%. So who’s lying about livestock losses? Michigan or Idaho? Surely Idaho has as many deer, elk, and moose as Michigan, and livestock ranches and wolf packs share the area just the same. Heck Idaho has Yellowstone Park for the wolves to roam. So what’s wrong with this picture? Because from what I’ve read, the wolves of the Rockies are being hunted because of livestock losses and because as wolf numbers grow they supposedly pose a threat to deer and elk populations.

Michigan has a lot of deer! Cars hit them. They enter buildings. I recently watched a video where a deer waltzed through a diner, in the front door and out the back. So why aren’t 4,000 wolves wiping out our deer population?

The answer lies on Michigan’s Isle Royale, a 45-mile long island off the UP (Copper Harbor) in the western part of Lake Superior. According to an article by Heidi Ridgley of Defenders of Wildlife, “Isle Royale is the least visited National Park in the country.” But it is the lab where the longest ongoing wolf study is being conducted by biologists from Michigan Tech. The co-director of the wolf program at Michigan Tech, Rolf Peterson continues the work pioneered by Durward Allen in 1958, as an “uninterrupted study of a predator and its prey.” There is 51 years of expertise here involving the gray wolf and the moose of Isle Royale. This study produced facts that are inconsistent with the reason for hunting the Great Rockies’ wolves. Wolves prey predominantly on old and/or debilitated animals. And when the prey declines the wolf population also declines. It’s nature’s balance.

So if the Great Rockies’ wolves are as prolific as we’re lead to believe than Idaho’s deer and elk populations should be thriving—and are. That’s what I found to be true when I looked at the state stats of deer and elk populations in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. It simply is not true that the wolves threaten deer and elk populations at this point at all. So that leaves the rancher’s losses and we have to wonder about that reporting because it’s the same type of wolves, same ole cattle, just different states reporting very different loss statistics.

In the meantime, the latest wolf hunts will have detrimental affects on the gray wolf farther down the line than just this hunting season. Oh, the wolves will rebound eventually but fractured wolf pack families, and packs that are disjointed from other wolf packs do not survive well. The study on Isle Royale confirms that wolves will interbreed for survival. The biologists in this study have already found spine and hip deformities in the carcasses of dead wolves from interbreeding on Isle Royale where populations of wolves are endangered as global warming has had a horribly detrimental affect on their main prey, the moose.

The biologists have tracked the summer seasons on this island national park. There have been shorter winters almost every year since 1998 and it shows in the decline of moose populations on Isle Royale. In Minnesota where there is a lot of prairie and scattered trees that does not offer enough shade, “moose numbers have dropped from several thousand to 100 in recent years.” Moose need frigid climates. Frigid climates kill fleas and ticks, another horrible parasitic problem plaguing Isle Royale’s moose that I blogged about.

All I know is that the wolf hunts are political in origin. It’s got little to do with the poor wolf. Big hunting lobbyists were anxious for the wolf hunts and the NRA is never far behind them. They won for now. However, as stated in the Los Angeles Times and quoted in an article in discovermagazine.com ‘Judge Donald Molloy also wrote that the Fish and Wildlife Service, in continuing to list Wyoming wolves under the Endangered Species Act while delisting them in the two neighboring states, “has distinguished a natural population of wolves based on a political line, not the best available science.’

What I’m concerned with is man’s interference with natural balance. Suppose the wolves do interbreed more and more. Can there, will there eventually be wolves mentally impaired and unpredictable as interbred dogs? It gives a whole new meaning to the “Big Bad Wolf.”

Read the whole story about what’s happening up north in Isle Royale:
http://www.defenders.org/newsroom/defenders_magazine/fall_2009/royale_challenge.php.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/09/10/wolf-hunt-in-the-rockies-can-continue-judge-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-62547.

Growing Loss of Biodiversity Will Fundamentally Affect Humans on Many Levels

Wednesday, October 14th, 2009

We don’t usually think of biodiversity as affecting humans directly. We think of disappearing plants, animals, and habitat and while some of us are saddened, others could care less. But according to an Environmental News Service (ENS) article loss of biodiversity is accelerating as the world’s leading nations have missed their target goal for 2010 to stem that loss, and humans will indeed feel that loss significantly because ‘biodiversity is fundamental to humans having food, fuel, clean water and a habitable climate,’ according to Georgina Mace “vice-chair of the international DIVERSITAS program, opening its four-day Open Science Conference with 600 experts from around the world.

The article said, “Mace, [] develops criteria for listing species on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and co-ordinating biodiversity inputs to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment,” so she should know. Hal Mooney who chairs DIVERSITAS said that biodiversity experts are finally engaging in policy debates, as they should. I think a global panel of biodiversity scientists collecting data worldwide on all species is long overdue and their input badly needed. Much like the IPCC for climate change, there needs to be a unified system for tracking loss of species on this planet. It is after all, loss of life and should be a forewarning.

So it was good to read in the ENS article that scientists are planning “a science-based global biodiversity observing system called GEO-BON to improve coverage and consistency in observations at ground level and via remote sensing.” The GEO-BON head, Prof. Robert Scholes stated: ‘GEO-BON will help give us a comprehensive baseline against which scientists can track biodiversity trends and evaluate the status of everything from genes to ecosystem services.’ Recently in Nairobi, the world’s environment ministers “considered the creation of IPBES-the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services-which would require UN General Assembly Approval.”

That’s impressive and I would say to track biodiversity is probably harder to do than track climate change. While biodiversity scientists are busy trying to ascertain how quickly extinction approaches many of our beloved animal species like primates, whales, dolphins, all big cats and bears, all elephants and rhinos, other scientists are still discovering new species. I just read an article in the Sept. 23rd edition of Time that over 30 new species of animal were recently discovered in an extinct volcano in Papua, New Guinea. They exist because they were obviously sheltered from man, and the outside world. GEO-BON has its work cut out for it, and none to soon because there is a silent crisis emerging—the collapse of freshwater ecosystems. Collapse is a scary word that should tell us we’re way behind where we should be.

Read the whole article:
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2009/2009-10-13-01.asp.

Delisting Wolves Was Illegal?

Wednesday, September 9th, 2009

After thoughtful deliberation, Federal Court Chief Judge Donald Molloy found that the Federal Government likely violated the law by removing the gray wolf from the Endangered Species Act. Ken Salazar, Secretary of the Interior, is off to a bad start, but then again no one in the conservation/animal world is too surprised. Salazar is a RANCHER. Although many ranchers in the west are adapting their routines in order to accommodate both wolves and bears in the region, many, many more view them as expendable.

Unfortunately, the same judge failed to issue an injunction to halt the hunts this year. According to ENS, the 13 conservation/animal groups that filed suit against Salazar said that they feared the hunts would “cripple the regional wolf population by isolating wolves into disconnected subgroups incapable of genetic or ecological sustainability. They warn that the wolf hunts would allow the killing of the breeding alpha male and female wolves, disrupting wolf social groups and leaving pups more vulnerable.”

Idaho is allowed to kill 220 wolves and Montana 75 wolves. So how is this done fairly? It ends up being far more than 220 wolves in Idaho or 75 in Montana because of orphaned pups that won’t survive. At 4 to 7 pups on average per litter, 1000 wolves or more could perish in this seemingly small hunt. It’s not well known to the public either that over ¼ of wolf pups succumbed to parvo virus in the spring. So the wolves are taking a bigger hit than we think.

I’ve read the 3 year USDA study of radio collared wolves living around the perimeter of cattle fields and saw the scientific evidence that disputes wolves are just “cold blooded” killers. The wolves crossed the cattle fields nightly. In 3 years only 8 head of cattle disappeared and I’m sure the rancher was awarded money for those few head of cattle lost annually. There doesn’t seem to be as much science as politics in Salazar’s decision. The head of Defenders of Wildlife, one of the 13 groups thinks likewise. This new ruling by Judge Molloy should garner the interest of the Obama Administration relative to Salazar’s thoughtless decision. Hopefully, our wildlife populations will get a fair shake in the future.

Read more: http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2009/2009-09-09-091.asp

Native Americans Stand Up for the Environment and Sue the Secy. of State, and Army Corp. of Engineers

Saturday, September 5th, 2009

The Native American community is standing up for the environment in the form of a lawsuit against Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Deputy Secy. James Steinbridge, and the U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers over Enbridge Energy’s Alberta Clipper pipeline set to “deliver 450,000 barrels of tar sands oil per day to be pumped from northern Alberta to Superior, Wisconsin, for refining,” according to an article on ENS.

Evidently, the pipeline crosses Native American soil without their approval. It would also “impact over 200 water bodies and would destroy more than 1,200 acres of upland forested lands, more than 650 acres of open lands, and more than 1,300 acres of wetlands.” The Native Americans have support in the legal system through major Environmental Groups like Earthjustice, the Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation and state environmental groups also.

Tar sand oil is some of the dirtiest and the Native Americans say that the pipeline is not is not keeping the ideology of moving toward cleaner energy promoted by the Obama Administration and that the Obama Administration is not listening to the petitions and voices of a growing number of Americans that want to move to a cleaner future for America.

I have to reiterate here that after the presidential election the number one issue people were concerned about was 1) NATIONAL HEALTH CARE, and 2) THE ENVIRONMENT. I was happy to hear that and blogged about it. I have to admit that I was a little surprised that the Iraq war was not in the one or two slot. I was also surprised to see the Obama Administration put so many conservative leaning politicians at the head of many of the Departments within the government relative to the environment and animal welfare like Ken Salazar, who to me is not any better than Kempthorne that headed up the Dept. of Interior under Bush. Salazar is nothing but a Blue Dog Democrat (might as well be a Republican) RANCHER, and therefore, the plight of polar bear has been ignored and we’re now slaughtering wolves in Yellowstone park even though they never grew to the numbers they were supposed to before control measures were needed.

Just so you know, we’re slaughtering wolves claiming they are over running their numbers when in fact 27% of all wolf pups suffered horrible deaths due to the parvo virus that can strike our own dogs. Nature balances many of our wild animal populations, plus we infringe on them horribly through urban sprawl and loss of habitat, and our pollution, but we insist on hunting them anyway because of the power of the HUNTING LOBBY and glorified NRA.

I’m glad Native Americans are finally speaking out to protect the land that was rightfully theirs to begin with. Hopefully, they will support efforts to keep wolves protected too since wolves have long been an honored part of their culture also.

Read more: http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2009/2009-09-03-091.asp

More Contamination from Agricultural Community Kills Thousands of Fish in Black River

Friday, August 14th, 2009

According to an article on MLive, just two days ago state officials reported, “Tens of thousands of fish have been killed in the Black River in Michigan’s Lower Peninsula, possibly because of an improper manure discharge from a farm. Nearly all the fish in a 15-mile stretch of the river in Sanilac and St. Clair counties, along with other aquatic life, were wiped out.” http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/national-46/1250096472134250.xml&storylist=newsmichigan.

I just wrote a blog about unprotected groundwater, an unregulated agricultural industry relative to groundwater, and Michigan’s Senate. See what’s happening?

Forty Million Acres of National Forest Get a Reprieve While Our Biggest Rainforest Gets the Ax and We’re Paying for It.

Friday, August 7th, 2009

Thanks to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 40 million acres of national forest get a reprieve from the ax. According to an Earthjustice e-mail, the court stated: “The watered-down roadless policy put forth by the Bush administration was illegal and reinstated the original 2001 Roadless Rule throughout the country except for Alaska’s Tongass National Forest and Idaho.” Why not the Tongass? Well that’s an interesting story.

In 2002 Alaska Growth Capital in partnership with Alaska’s Forestry Service set up a program to help rural communities in Alaska. Federal funding was leveraged to help produce a variety of forest–based goods and services to meet domestic and international needs. This program also granted loans for business start-ups. Steve Seley secured an $800,000 loan and put up $800,000 of his own money for his company’s (Pacific Log and Lumber) sawmill on Gravina Island in the Tongass. http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:8LQDo7Unq4MJ:www.fs.fed.us/r10/spf/publications/spf_2002AccompReport
_finalbyUntalaso_090503.pdf+who+is+Steve+Seley+related+to+in+government%3F&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
.
An odd place to plan on making money since the Tongass was protected by the roadless rule in 2002.

In 2003, Bush decided to exempt the Tongass National Forest from the 2001 Roadless Rule in the late afternoon, the day before Christmas. http://www.nativeforest.org/action_alerts/archive/wildlands_1_13_04.htm .
That’s a little curious. He also announced that he planned to allow the governors of the lower 48 states to have the last say so as to what is protected by the Roadless Rule. In short, he effectively repealed the Roadless Rule by relinguishing Federal Power over NATIONAL parks. What does a state have any business deciding what happens in a NATIONAL PARK? National parks go over state lines, and are therefore shared by other states. That would be like Michigan deciding everything to do with the Great Lakes just because we have the most shoreline.

By 2006, Steve Seley’s business, all of 23 people, was in trouble. A timber sale that was supposed to happen did not happen yet. http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/373461/gravina_island_mill
_owner_hardened_by_hardship/index.html
. But a little farther on in the year, the U.S. Forest Service signed an agreement with Alaska that assures Seley’s company will get the timber sales agreement in exchange for biological data of the Tongass area. Alaska and the USFS stated: “‘This is a cooperative agreement that accomplishes two things: to provide a timber supply, and to collectively share state data on all biological information gathered and collected with the Forest Service to help rewrite the Tongass Land Management Plan,’ said Michael Menge, commissioner of the state Department of Natural Resources. Oh I’m sure they would love to rewrite the plan and open up a heck of a lot more of Tongass National Park to useless logging. One of the Forest Service’s sticking points in offering sales, according to industry and state officials, is the rewrite of the plan.” http://www.alaskajournal.com/stories/020506/hom_20060205005.shtml.
In the same Alaska Journal article it was noted: “Gov. Frank Murkowski’s chief of staff, Jim Clark, who was the former chief lobbyist and attorney for the Alaska Logging Association, signed the memorandums for the state, and that Jack Phelps, special projects manager for the state, is the former executive director of the Alaska Forest Association.” We can see that the state of Alaska relative to this agreement was pretty much represented by the logging industry. So we can basically say that the logging industry cut a deal with the U.S. Forestry Service to give timber sales to the logging industry while they collect biological data of the habitat in and around the Tongass. Isn’t that a little backward?

Usually data like this is collected in order to understand what and how many species and/or ecosystems will be impacted by the logging business. To log first and study the impact during or afterward is ridiculous. And do you think it’s ethical to allow members of the logging business to be the ones to collect data in the first place that might possibly influence decisions made by the USFS in the future relative to the Tongass? The data might be a little skewed in the lumber industry’s favor.

Well, I guess we’ll see because our Secy. of Agriculture Tom Vilsack agreed to a new plan using taxpayer dollars to allow logging in the Tongass basically so that Steve Seley and others like him can stay afloat. So our taxpayer dollars are financing logging that is not really needed so that small businesses in rural areas of Alaska can stay working? http://www.examiner.com/x-13344-Wildlife-Conservation-Examiner~y2009m7d27-Obama-administration-clearcutting-Tongass-National-Forest-with-taxpayer-money. A sweet deal for Steve, but why was it we didn’t bail out the auto industry? Citizens of Alaska have the 5th highest median income of all the states.

Surely keeping the Tongass in an unprotected state for 6 years to ultimately allow unnecessary logging to take place in our largest U.S. temperate rainforest is not about Steve Seley. He’s the door that just opened. The data collected about environmental impacts will more than likely be watered down in the logging industry’s favor and slowly we will destroy a rainforest for no good reason than to give someone a job. For all that I read and there is much in the articles just cited here, the Tongass area lumber cannot compete with others between the quality of wood, and the shipping distance. As taxpayers we should not be happy about this.

As the Chicago Examiner asked: Why should we care about protecting Tongass National Forest from logging?

For one, this ancient, vital forest ecosystem belongs to all Americans. It’s our own 17 million acre lush, cool shaded rainforest. It is supposed to exist for all Americans for all time, not as a quick cash-cow for a few greedy businesses. There are endangered wildlife
like the Alexander Archipelago Islands Wolf, which exists nowhere else on earth, and black-tailed deer, grizzly bears, wolverines, black bears, timber wolves and bald eagles.

But oh, that’s right, Alaska aerial kills wolves and bears like they are rodents. We’re not going to get a lot of empathy for these critters out of the logging industry.

Finally this is a shady, cool, forest canopy. If it’s destroyed the area will dry out. There is a likelihood that the dried mosses, and needles could ignite no differently than down here.

Americans, the environment, the wildlife and their habitat are being swindled on this one. There is more natural resource wealth in the Tongass National Forest than will be made on lumber sales. Call your congress people before the door opens too wide on this one. It’s a real travesty.

Visible Signs of Oil from Exxon Valdez Spill Still Found on Beaches

Thursday, August 6th, 2009

World Wildlife Foundation’s newsletter “Focus” reported that scientists are still finding visible signs of oil from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. It’s been 20 years! You might be thinking, “But how many oil spills are there, really?” The list of oil spills from 1967 to 1991 on NOAA’s website is extensive considering they only list significant spills. The criteria are 100,000 gallons or more for international spills, and 10,000 gallons or more spills happening in the U.S. The chart of oil spills from the NOAA is in barrels. There are 42 gallons in a barrel. http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/book_shelf/26_spilldb.pdf.

The 25 years between 67 and 91 saw a lot of oil go into our oceans. Luckily, the past 20 years has seen a decrease in tanker spills worldwide. The Exxon Valdez was so horrible; the attention caused a marked improvement in reducing accident rates for oil tankers. Unfortunately, the concern wasn’t so much for the environment or wildlife as it was for the financial liabilities from a spill. A shame, since we know quite well that oil companies do indeed recover financially. We know what big oil’s net earnings are these days. The irony is that wildlife and the environment doesn’t seem to recover quickly at all, or ever for that matter.

Thirteen hundred miles of Alaskan coastline was spoiled from the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
Communities and fisheries were ruined. Four thousand otters died and at least one population of orca whales has yet to recover. Local livelihoods were destroyed, and many wildlife and fish populations are still depleted, while Alaska’s economy lost millions, according to the same newsletter.

It’s good to know we learned from that spill. Tanker spillage is drastically down but we haven’t licked the problem altogether. The same environmental research information from a consulting firm that reported tanker oil spills are way down, also said that pipelines have taken up the slack. It stated: “Since 1985, U.S. pipelines have spilled more oil than tankers and barges combined. Since 1991, pipelines have annually spilled 37 times as much as tankers. The change in the proportion U.S. pipeline spillage is largely due to the fact that since 1990, pipelines transport more oil across more miles than water carriers.” And that infrastructure is old and getting older. Luckily, we’re spilling less and less over the past two decades, but as the report went on to say:

While the statistics show encouraging downward trends, there is no room for complacency. An ill-timed oil spill that occurs in a sensitive location, regardless of spill size, can cause devastating damage to natural environments, property, and business, and, occasionally, to human lives. Aging pipeline and facility infrastructures,
as well as aging vessel fleets, may be ticking time bombs, especially as they become subjected to increasing oil throughput and transport in future years. Increased international attention to tanker safety has had a positive influence that is sorely needed in other vessel categories and for non-vessel sources, particularly pipelines.

Oil is a leaky business both on land and sea. We’re faced with more oil exploration in the sensitive areas spoken about here. In 2007, Bush lifted a longstanding executive ban on off shore oil leasing in Bristol Bay, Alaska. According to WWF’s newsletter, Bristol Bay is known as America’s fish basket that contributes $2.2 billion to the economy annually. It is near the Bering Sea, “which produces nearly half of America’s wild seafood.” Do you like seafood? Consider Gulf shrimp also, since the recent Senate version of the energy bill includes more oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico. We’re messing with our food supply when we go for the crude. We endanger wild life, and the economy of the regions at risk for “oil spillage.” Right now the U.S. Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia vacated Bush’s plans for oil leasing in Bristol Bay. Help keep it that way. Contact your representatives and tell them to limit oil drilling, especially in areas that have long been protected FOR GOOD REASON. Besides, we only have 3% of the world’s oil supply, and use 25%. This horse is not going to win the race this time. The math dictates we must find replacements for our energy needs or forever be dependent on nations that, well, just don’t like us.

http://www.environmental-research.com/publications/pdf/spill_statistics/paper4.pdf

Enter The Great Lakes Photo Contest 2009

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

There are just 2 weeks left to submit your favorite photos in this contest.

From the Great Lakes Forever website:

Biodiversity Project and Budweiser are seeking your help in designing the 2009 Great Lakes educational beer coasters. For five years, Anheuser-Busch, one of the world’s largest brewers and a recyclers of aluminum cans, has joined Biodiversity Project to help protect the world’s largest fresh water resource – the Great Lakes.

This year, we’re asking amateur and professional photographers to submit their favorite pictures of the Great Lakes region. The contest also carries gift prizes for all six winners, including a kayak, GPS system and Budweiser Day Pack. photos for use on our 2009 Great Lakes Forever beer coasters. One amateur and one professional photographer will see their photos printed on a Budweiser/Great Lakes Forever beer coaster to be distributed to bars and restaurants throughout the region.

For Contest Rules goto: http://www.greatlakesforever.org/great-lakes-photo-contest-2009-official-contest-rules-and-entry-guidelines.

I have so many pictures over the years I’ve lived on Lake Erie, I just might enter this myself. The deadline is August 14th, 2009. Your pictures must be in Biodiversity’s offices in Chicago on that date. Have fun, get involved. You never know.

U.S. Forest Service and Ad Council Launch Campaign to Reconnect “Tweens” with Nature

Saturday, July 25th, 2009

The U.S. Forest Service joined with the Ad Council to launch this campaign. It’s a positive move toward motivating parents to get outside with their kids more. According to an article on the “Children and Nature” website:

The campaign primarily aims to reach “tweens” (children aged 8-12) and their parents. The goal is to encourage children to get outside and experience nature first-hand, instilling a life-long love for nature by fostering a connection with urban and national forests.

Children spend less time outdoors due to safety concerns, an increase in the number of working parents and the development of new technologies that capture free time indoors. As a result of this limited interaction with the outdoors, many children are unaware of the benefits that nature provides, including improving their physical and mental health and emotional well-being.

Hmm, a heck of a lot of adults should listen up too. The true figures state children spend 50% less time out of doors. Nonetheless, research showed that the “vast majority of children had a positive association with nature and wished they could spend more time out of doors.” Safety concerns just don’t allow children to hop on their bikes with buddies and go fishin’ somewhere for the day with stops at the local neighborhood market for penny candy or an ice cold Coca Cola. Sad isn’t it? We’ve let our society degrade far enough to limit activity that makes us better people—physically, mentally, and emotionally.

But I digress. I checked out the U.S. Forest Service website. There is a section “Just for Kids” wit-a-share-the-experience-photo contest. Trying to capture photos of wildlife is a great way to connect children with nature. I’ve been trying to do that myself. It doesn’t take a terrific camera to begin with, mostly time and patience watching nature. How many times we encounter something absolutely beautiful in nature and say, “If only I had a camera”

If you or your kids are on the PC all day anyway, check out U.S. Forest Service website and “Just for Kids.” They list fee free weekends at 100 national parks and just about everything else including maps, and all types of activities at parks near you.

Read more:

http://www.childrenandnature.org/news/detail/targeting_tweens_the_u.s._

forest_service_and_ad_council_launch_national_cam

Ringling Brothers Circus Caught Smacking the Elephants Around

Saturday, July 25th, 2009

Elephants suffer more than most wild animals in captivity. They are very social and need to interact freely in a group. I’ve witnessed documentaries where an elephant mourned the death of its baby elephant. About 6 other elephants stood in a silent circle with the parent elephant for quite a long time. They were clearly heartbroken. They were clearly empathetic to one another, something humans need to embrace more. To have them or any wild animal perform as part of captivity is an archaic form of entertainment that has seen its better day. Ringling Brothers Circus needs to rethink its entertainment.

The true essence of a circus does not necessarily dictate that animals of any sort be involved anyway. A circus is a troop of performers that entertain whether by acrobatic feats, walking tightropes, juggling, tumbling, clowning around or any of many other types of entertaining stunts. Watching humans perform highly skilled acts appears to be much more mesmerizing to current generations of people too. The proof is the many productions of Cirque de Soleil. Consumers are willing to pay a good deal to see a Cirque show because the human performances are truly amazing, and something we can relate to better.

We do not relate to animal performances in the same way. We view animals as so subservient to us that something such as standing on their hind legs is a feat. In the last 30 years we’ve learned much about the intelligence of animals. They are smart and they show emotions. Unfortunately, the amount of illegal animal ownership, canned hunts, internet hunting, research animals, and animals used heinously for military training has gone up at the same time. And the way we treat our poor farm animals is barbaric, yet pigs are highly intelligent! What’s wrong with this picture? What’s wrong with us?

Forcing animals into subservience when they can do just fine without human beings at all is curious to me anyway. What lords and masters are we when it’s always an unfair playing field with us and the animals like aerial killing. We’re pretty much uncivilized in thought and feeling for a 21st century generation. All living things were here before us as gifts. I thought as a Christian nation we are to have reverence for all living things following the philosophy of Dr. Albert Schweitzer.

Dr. Scweitzer was “profoundly moved” when awarded a medal in his name by the Animal Welfare Institute in 1954. He said he never would have believed that his philosophy of compassion toward all creatures would be noticed and celebrated in his lifetime. I’m a follower of Dr. Schweitzer who said: “The human spirit is not dead: It lives on in secret…. It has come to believe that compassion, in which all ethics must take root, can only attain its full breadth and depth of it embraces all living creatures and does not limit itself to mankind.

That was over 55 years ago. Again, what happened to us? Ringling Brothers Circus is still operating with animals and treating these beautiful creatures in inhumane and disrespectful ways just so we can get a grin. Our children do not know better. They would laugh and enjoy the circus performers without any animals present. We adults keep the tradition of circus animal abuse alive. We haven’t come a long way on this one. Wild animal acts should have been abolished long ago.

I petitioned and donated to animal welfare groups that were trying to stop Ringling Brothers from establishing a site at Coney Island, New York this summer. Of course, it happened anyway. The only way Ringling Brothers will stop abusing animals is to not use animals in its entertainment. It takes much prodding, smacking, shocking and hooking to get a herd of elephants to behave in a small area let alone stand on their hind legs. So let’s not say it doesn’t go on. Ringling Brothers likes to say that the general public doesn’t understand. Oh some of us do. Forcing what is not natural to a wild animal is like locking a human child in a cage and forcing it to eat from a bowl with his/her hands tied. Neither is living a natural life. If you want to see animals go to a major zoo that at least attempts to provide natural habitats for its animals.

Watch the video: