Page 871 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 16 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
With all this, members of the national circus association have only ever been charged for two offences of cruelty. We are talking about circuses that go back for generations. The Circus Federation of Australia has engaged the services of veterinarian Dr Karl H.C. Texler of the Bright Veterinary Clinic to prepare their own code of ethics for management of animals in circuses. I have here a copy of the draft proposal. It is a very comprehensive code of ethics and demonstrates the very high level of responsibility of circuses to be, in fact, self-regulating, let alone all the other obligations that they must conform to.
There have been exhaustive studies carried out on circus animals and there has been no condemnation of using them arising out of this. Circus animals, like budgies in cages and battery-fed laying hens, are bred over many generations for the life they have. They have not been captured from the wild and brought immediately into circuses. Ashton's Circus has its felines going back seven generations. Dr Marthe Kiley-Worthington is one of the first ethnologists to go and study wild African animals and to recognise behavioural problems of captive and domestic animals. Her work includes studies of many large mammals, animal welfare and training. Since 1971 she has been an animal behaviour consultant. After 3,000 hours of scientific observation of animals and many visits to circuses and zoos, including training, travel and performance, Dr Kiley-Worthington concluded that, while there are improvements that must be made, circuses do not by their nature cause suffering and distress in animals. Dr Kiley-Worthington states in her book Animals in Circuses and Zoos:
On balance, I do not think that the animals' best interests are necessarily served by money and activities diverted to try and ban circuses and zoos either locally or nationally. What is much more important is to continue to encourage the zoos and circuses to improve their animal welfare.
Madam Speaker, banning animals from circuses is an overreaction and is based on misinformation. It may also be useful for Mr Lamont to acquaint himself with the correct sizes of cages before he spouts off.
A survey conducted in Canberra shopping centres last Saturday shows that almost one Canberra person in two has seen a traditional circus in the past five years. A total of 260 people were asked, "Have you been to see a traditional circus in the past five years?". Forty-four per cent of respondents had been to a circus in the past five years. The survey was conducted by the Circus Fans of Australasia, Canberra Branch, with the assistance of the Circus Federation of Australia. A survey conducted by the North Sydney Council on 14 September asked the question, "Should circuses with performing animals be banned from operating on public land in the municipality?". Fifty-seven per cent of respondents said no, they should not be banned. Madam Speaker, what is needed is controls, not bans, and that goes for rodeos.
Mr Wood has stated that this matter is not negotiable. That is a pretty democratic path to go down, I must say! The truth is that this is an overreactionary approach. What it demonstrates is an aspect of the life of country people. Breaking in horses and roping cattle is a part of our country heritage. It is skilful and rough, with the cowboys invariably the ones coming off second best. It is an irrational argument that a rider could harm a steer or bull that weighs something close to a tonne. One need only witness how long the riders last to see which one of the two is the superior in the contest.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .