Contents   >   Previous Page   |   Next Page

2. ENDANGERED SPECIES – IN ABUNDANCE

2.3   Captive Breeding

Yet for the pro-circus lobby there is another argument in favour of having critically endangered species confined to the menagerie beast wagon: conservation through captive breeding. For Dr. Thomas Althaus, an ardent supporter of this view, the picture is clear-cut: "People have always had animals in their care - I don't like the word 'captivity.' If you are against keeping wild animals in the zoo or circus then you are also saying that if a species is highly endangered, you are prepared to let it die-out. Those are the consequences - which I'm not prepared to accept." Despite this re-discovered credibility of the travelling menagerie, once again the inherent illusion of the circus is ever-present, masking a much bleaker reality.

As we have already seen, the international trade in animals has been subject to the provisions of the Washington Convention since 1975, forbidding the importation of strictly endangered species for purely commercial purposes. It is thus that most of today's circus animals are either captive bred, or were caught in the wild before the Convention came into force. And yet due to difficulties in captive breeding, some circus animals such as chimpanzees and elephants are in chronically short-supply - perhaps presaging their eventual disappearance from menageries. Circus Knie's elephant population for instance is far from being self-sustaining, even though it maintains that it plays a valuable role in the conservation of the species and enjoys an international reputation in the circus world for its captive breeding efforts. Indeed, although the first Asian elephant to be bred in a zoo was more than a century ago, since then, in all of Europe and America, only about 120 have been born. Even today, says Fred Kurt "it's still very rare for an elephant to be born in captivity, and in the second generation, there's not even half as many born. From what I've discovered this is because the wild male baby elephant has to learn about copulation and reproduction, something that's not easy when the animal's constantly fettered in a row in a circus tent." The spectre of disease also haunts the young elephant in circus captivity. The third captive-born elephant at Knie, Lohimi, lived for just three years, succumbing to disease in 1988. According to Fredy Knie Snr., Lohimi died of herpes and he states that "now all the elephants in Switzerland are infected with herpes." Fred Kurt believes that it was the stress of training and performing in the ring which made Lohimi's herpes infection break-out, and that the young elephant was just too weak to combat it.

At the same time, lions, tigers and leopards have been bred to such abundant excess that there are now more of these animals to be found in European menageries than in their country of origin - where some sub-species are on the brink of extinction. Apart from very few species however - such as the Arabian Oryx which does not have to re-learn survival skills, or animals such as orang-utans or chimpanzees which must first be put through exhaustive and failure-prone rehabilitation programmes - most zoo and circus species are virtually impossible to re-introduce into the wild. Are circuses then, merely pretending to play a vital role in conservation? Not so, says Thomas Althaus: as endangered animals in the wild become the victims of poaching and habitat destruction, the zoo and circus may provide the species with a final refuge, thereby preventing their extinction.

Asserting that "breeding in zoos has become an essential part of conservation," science writer and broadcaster Colin Tudge, writing in New Scientist, concedes that "unless such breeding is carried out on a large scale, through cooperation between zoos, and between well-chosen animals, it would be bound to fail. The results would be inbred and probably infertile parodies of wild creatures that, at best, were only fit for life in captivity. The task of matchmaking is becoming so large and the orchestration so intricate that only computers can cope. No one doubts that the ideal way to conserve animals is to do everything possible to save their habitats; the loss of wilderness, rather than the direct assault of the hunter, now endangers an estimated 25 per cent of all species." Unfortunately, even the world's most renowned and prestigious zoos can only point to a few limited successes in re-establishing such animals in the wild. No more than 20 species currently benefit from co-ordinated breeding programmes and even the staunchest proponents of captive breeding admit that it could only save a minute fraction of the Earth's endangered species. Given the results of the first comprehensive survey of zoos in the EEC, such dismal results may not seem altogether surprising. Out of more than 1000 registered zoos, holding an estimated one million animals, inspectors found "depressing" standards of welfare, education and conservation. Animals used to wide open spaces were discovered kept in pits where they could only see walls and sky; a gorilla in Rome zoo was confined behind glass to a barred enclosure with virtually no light; polar bears in Napoli were forced to endure the summer heat with temperatures soaring to over 40oC.; and at Marwell Zoo in Hampshire, animal facilities were so badly designed that when two black rhinos died, their cages literally had to be cut into pieces to remove them. Small wonder then that the notion of captive breeding for conservation in the even less sophisticated environment of the circus beast wagon resembles a theatre of the absurd. Even so, apologists for captive breeding have some remarkable plans for the future of wildlife, as outlined by Colin Tudge, apparently without irony: "As human populations decrease from the 26th century onwards," he writes, "it will be possible for animals to live in the wild again. So the task of conservation breeders is not to keep animals for ever, but to tide them over for 500 to 1000 years in a state in which they are able to return to the wild - albeit a 'wild' that is very different from the wilderness of today." This grand vision is expected to be accomplished utilising "huge genetic banks of animals as frozen sperm, eggs and embryos," reminiscent of the 1970's cryogenics fad in the USA which saw deceased humans frozen in liquid helium with the vain hope that in generations to come they would be thawed out and given new life by the future miracles of science. The fundamental flaw in the equation is the inconvenient fact that once de-thawed, the endangered species that had been kept on ice for a thousand years would have no one to teach them their survival skills. Indeed, in all of these grandiose, high-tech solutions that cannot seem to tolerate the idea of the unquantifiable and elusive elements of creation's life-force, one can just perceive the stalking ghost of Descartes and his belief in the clockwork animal.

Even for more prosaic methods of 'conservation' through captive breeding, the dilemma remains virtually the same, but with some familiar and ugly twists. Bill Jordan and Stefan Ormrod, for example, in their book The Last Great Wild Beast Show, point out that if 48 gorillas are captured in the wild, only 30 will survive initial trapping and handling, only 12 of these will survive their journey to the zoo and only half a dozen will live to maturity. Before even considering 'conservation', those six individuals would have to produce 48 progeny simply to ensure no depletion of stock - an impossible feat since the animals are slow breeders. As there are now some 400 gorillas in captivity around the world, this represents an astounding death-rate and hardly an endearing or efficient form of conservation. The chronic condition that seems to afflict the human race - fragmentation, perhaps even some virulent but as yet unrecognised form of schizophrenia - is all too evident, particularly the irrational notion of conserving wildlife as something extraneous to their natural habitat and its intricate ecology. Indeed, perhaps the most difficult species to re-introduce to the wild is homo sapiens.

To pro-circus scientists like Thomas Althaus, the stud-book is the circus' testament to its role in conservation, despite the slow but inevitable degradation of a species' genetic identity in captivity. "You have stud books for endangered species like the Siberian tiger or the snow leopard to enable the circus people to keep the genetic changes as low as possible," he insists. But, strangely enough, for all this faith in preserving the 'genetic material' of the wild, re-introduction is a four-letter word to most circuses, usually met with scorn and derision. A reflex reaction that betrays such extreme defensiveness is perhaps predictable since successful rehabilitation of circus animals into the wild would become one more reason for the menageries to be closed down altogether. The catch-word that all seem to have learnt is "Man-Eater!" though it is difficult to see how, even after twenty years of captivity in a beast wagon, an elephant, rhinoceros, chimpanzee or orang-utan would begin preying upon human beings. Obviously, by focussing attention only on the profound difficulties which have surrounded attempts to re-introduce wildcats, raising the spectre of mauled children, the circuses hope to destroy any notion of re-introduction - even though it is ostensibly central to their justification for "keeping species on ice." Dr Thomas Althaus: "These wildcats in the circus are now all captive bred and it's impossible for example to re-introduce captive-bred tigers into the wild. This has been tried several times but has always failed. The only thing that might work is the re-introduction of captive-bred snow leopards. This is because their habitat is a very vast area without human population - so the risk that they begin eating livestock or killing people is less acute. But it is also a big risk for the animals themselves since it's difficult to ensure that they'll get their food - there's a chance they may survive and a chance they may die." Under the present regime, it is a risk that the animals will never have to take since no circus that I have heard of is engaged in any re-introduction programme.

According Dr Fred Kurt, although not fully wild, working elephants from Asia which now provide a small reservoir of supplies for circuses, could theoretically be used to re-populate the wild - if room could somehow be made for them. "During colonial times, the British used elephants for their teak forestry in Asia," he recounts. "They shipped elephants from Burma to the Andaman islands and these elephants escaped, and their offspring still survive - at least 30 or 40 wild elephants of former working elephants. But working elephants in the forests of Asia are, ecologically-speaking, not tame - although hobbled they are quite able to find their own food, you don't have to teach them what can be eaten and how to find water. But an elephant who has lived 20 or 30 years in chains in a circus just wouldn't know what to do - it would be almost impossible to re-introduce them to the wild."

For other species, perhaps the gravest and most intractable obstacle to re-introduction is a consummate lack of will and effort. Such programmes remain chronically short of funds, and attract little or no interest from the self-professed conservationists of the zoo and circus world. Indeed, while the global Zoo budget is estimated to be one billion pounds, the national parks of black Africa are afforded an annual budget of 60 million. Similarly, for all the talk of conserving species in captivity with the vague, dim and distant aim of eventual re-introduction, even the zoological community plays virtually no role whatsoever in attempting to protect the disappearing natural habitat of these animals, thereby making the cryogenic process even more irrelevant. Furthermore, with indiscriminate cross-breeding in both zoos and circuses, there is the very real danger that re-introduction could pollute genetically pure strains in the wild with animals of uncertain parenthood. In the final analysis, only reserves and national parks which hold together an intact ecology will have any hope of saving a species from extinction, something that has already been proved time and time again. The Indian tiger population, for example, fell from an estimated 40,000 at the turn of the century, to about 2,500 in 1969 and 1,827 in 1972. It was only when Indira Gandhi, with the collaboration of the WWF, stepped in to conserve the species, selecting nine areas to become special reserves as part of the successful Project Tiger, that the wild tiger population once again began to increase. Indeed, for both the zoo and circus, it seems that it is easier just to play at conservation, and studiously keep the stud-book as an alibi. Fuelled by the fatalism of seeing vast areas of natural habitat destroyed, such complacency may give rise to an even more daunting prospect. Says Althaus: "Well, you never know. The few remaining rhinos that we have in the wild may end up in Africa behind a fence with military guards in helicopters and jeeps around those fences with machine-guns. That's the future unfortunately, that many wild animals face. Of course many species are not quite so spectacular and nobody really takes any notice until they've already disappeared. But for the spectacular animals - the risk is that the few remaining animals that there are will be left in zoos and circuses."

Sadly, it can hardly be denied that these captive animals now inhabit a strange limbo of existence where they are neither wild nor domesticated. Deprived of their natural habitat and behaviour, as unique species they face almost certain biological and psychological disintegration. Although circuses proudly insist that stud books are kept in order to ensure the genetic purity of these animals, in the final analysis, these may be of no more significance than the breeding records of pedigree poodles. Indeed, says Dr Fred Kurt, after several generations in captivity, where genetic change is almost unavoidable, these species become merely deformed shadows of their former selves. Facing eternity behind bars, eventually the menagerie animal may bear more than a passing resemblance to the white tigers displayed by the likes of the American animal tamer John Campolongo of the Hawthorn Circus Corporation, based in Richmond, Illinois, which currently owns 40 of the animals. Cruel mockeries of creation, perhaps more than any other single example, the white tiger acts as a devastating indictment of the menagerie's avowed role in conservation and its respect for the sanctity of wildlife. Though many circus owners and animal trainers feel a kind of repugnance for these pitifully bizarre freaks of nature, as "super-exotics", they have nevertheless proved to be an irresistible money-spinner. Grotesquely over-bred, they are known as "star-gazers" because their bluish eyes, sadly disconcerting, are slightly crossed and raised towards the heavens. Explains Fred Kurt: "All of these white tigers originally came from Delhi Zoo, bred from a single male that was caught in the wild in the 1960's. He was obviously discovered at a lucky moment because normally, a genetic mutation of this kind couldn't possibly survive for long. On top of anything else, a white tiger, without any camouflage, how could he hunt? He would be completely lost. At Delhi Zoo he was bred with a normal tiger and then was re-bred again with his own daughter to keep the purity of the strain. The result was total in-breeding and today these animals all suffer from liver and kidney deficiencies and other physiological problems."

Triangle Of Trade

As certain species are bred to excess, individual animals, unwanted and often uncared for, face an ominous future. In recent years, to cope with this overbreeding, a triangle of animal trade has developed between circuses, zoos and research laboratories, often with specialised animal dealers acting as well-paid intermediaries. Says Fred Kurt: "Circus Knie had a tiger some years ago which had been trained to ride on the backs of horses and rhinos. But after a time this is passé, you can't show this act every year in any circus. Then of course the circus management looks for another place for this tiger and they become increasingly desperate to be rid of it, but the fact is that there are just so many of these animals in captivity that so sooner or later they always end up with a rather dubious animal dealer." In 1983, press reports revealed that for several years, a 150-strong colony of rhesus monkeys at Woburn Animal Kingdom, a safari park in Bedfordshire, had been utilised as a reservoir for terminal laboratory experiments. Woburn's animals - including lions, elephants, and giraffes - were under the care of director John Chipperfield, yet another member of the great British circus clan. The rhesus monkeys, on loan from the notorious Shamrock Farms in Sussex which specialises in the purchase and sale of animals for the laboratory, were periodically rounded up to be sold-off as 'models' for drug and chemical testing. Similarly, when chimpanzee trainer Mickey Antalek, a performer of 15 years' standing at Ringling Bros., Barnum and Bailey Circus, died suddenly of a heart attack in August 1984, his four chimps were hurriedly shipped to the White Sands Research Center in Alamagordo, New Mexico. As IPPL pointed out, White Sands, whose facility holds over 500 monkeys and 70 chimpanzees, earns most of its profits from the giant Hoechst Pharmaceutical Company of West Germany and advertises the availability of its chimpanzees for the testing of insecticides, cosmetics and new drugs. Efforts by IPPL to have the chimps released were met with disdain, the immensely rich Ringlings stating that they were under no moral or legal obligation to ensure the animals' future welfare. At the same time however, the caring image was of paramount importance, as evidenced by the statement in Circus Reports, a trade publication, that the chimps had gone to a wildlife sanctuary. "Ringlings washed its hands of the animals," announced IPPL, "despite the fact that they had been 'star attractions' for years, since the chimps were able to do such complex tasks as riding motor-bikes." But then perhaps Ringlings' obligation did not even start at their own circus. According to the testimony of one vet, the chimps were "in very bad shape" when they were transferred to White Sands, and "had many scars and some burns, possibly from motor-bike training." Determined to have the chimps released from the research facility, IPPL issued an Emergency Alert to its members and supporters. Demonstrations subsequently took place outside the arena where Ringlings were performing and thousands of letters poured into the Circus' headquarters in Washington. Foreseeing pickets, boycotts and unfavourable publicity, by February 1985 Ringlings had finally succumbed to media pressure, and wishing to preserve image, that most valuable of all commodities in the circus world, had the chimps transferred, at IPPL's behest, to the Wild Animal Retirement Village in Waldo, Florida. Interestingly, the case also shed light on the training methods that the chimps had endured at Ringlings, probably the most famous and prestigious circus in the world. According to Nick Connell, a former trainer at Ringlings, the chimps had been subjected to systematic cruelty by Mickey Antalek - adding that he had also witnessed similar abuse in the training of bears and lions. He wrote: "I first saw him training these four chimps in Winter Quarters. They were on a long multi-seated bicycle on which three of the large chimps rode as passengers while the large chimp Louis steered and pedalled. The vehicle was difficult for even a human to ride in these conditions, and Louis had a hard time of it, spilling the ensemble repeatedly. And, repeatedly, he was struck with a sturdy club. The thumps could be heard outside the arena, and the screams went further than that. My blood boiled. I am ashamed to say I did nothing!"

The chronic problem of surplus animals in the menagerie also sheds light on the absurdity of the circus' new rallying cry of 'Captivity for Conservation.' Explains Fred Kurt: "Every sub-species of tiger is on the endangered list, but in the circus, the vast majority of these animals are never on a stud-book. They are bred in such large numbers that eventually they either have to be killed or sold. But who on Earth wants to buy a tiger? Tigers are sold at between 50 and 300 Swiss Francs^* because there are just too many of them in captivity. And so sooner or later these animals always end up with a dubious animal dealer or at a primitive menagerie." Indeed, some surplus species, he adds, may also end up as fashion wear, or even on the dinner table, in much the same way as some of the famous bears of Berne, still held in a medieval pit in the centre of the city, are served up as haute cuisine in city restaurants. The bear and tiger cubs may look cuddly when born, but they soon outgrow their usefulness as a crowd-puller. It is then, says Kurt, that the animals either end up on the dinner table in restaurants that specialise in exotic meats or as fashion wear in stylish department stores like the Kaufhaus des Westens in Berlin where customers with a weakness for curiosities can buy tigers' tails or bears' paws. Again, the law is blind to such dealings.

In the USA, unwanted circus or zoo animals may find themselves as cut-price bargains in such outdoor sales as the "Annual Southeast Exotic Animal Auction", held in Atlanta, Georgia. Among animals offered for sale in 1984 were squirrel, owl, and macaque monkeys, llamas, antelope, bears, wolves, cougars, giraffes and ostriches, Bengal tigers and mountain lions, all to be sold "to the highest bidder" regardless of the customer's experience in keeping wild animals or the standard of their facilities. Shoppers at the fair included speciality restaurants, pet shops, and also recreational "game farms". Also known as "shooting ranches", it is here that the unwanted circus or zoo animal must surely suffer the ultimate humiliation. Catering for those jaded and image-conscious city slickers afflicted with a craving to play the fearless white hunter, for a price, lions, tigers, leopards and other wild beasts can be 'wasted' with automatic weapons, and their heads mounted to adorn some New York penthouse or Miami condominium. The irony of it all is that having lost all their innate wildness in the beast wagon or the zoo cage, these animals even have to be "spooked" with shouts or gunfire otherwise they just lie there passively and wait to be shot.

Often, the surplus circus animal may simply languish behind bars until the day they die. In May 1988, for example, a male chimpanzee was discovered in a roadside menagerie at La Place, locally known as Snake Farm, 50 miles north of New Orleans. The animal, a former circus performer billed as "Gorilla" and "Jungle Killer", had endured solitary confinement for 20 years, in a cage measuring 2.4 x 2.4 x 1.6m with a bare concrete floor and with nothing but a swing for exercise. Extricating the chimpanzee and the other primates from their cages proved a daunting task. Reported IPPL: "None of the primates had been let out in approximately two decades and the rusted doors had to be hammered and pried open with a crowbar and winch."

One might well ask why measures are not taken to prevent over-breeding in the beast wagon. The answer, unfortunately, is that over-breeding, particularly of lions, tigers and leopards, is actively encouraged because those cute and fluffy cubs remain one of the star attractions of the circus menagerie. Furthermore, there are other problems which show the situation in its true squalid light. Castration will make the male lion, the king of the jungle, lose his mane - and a bald lion is probably going too far even for the freak-hungry menagerie.

Contents   >   Previous Page   |   Next Page