Stakeholder Position: Animal Defenders International

Tuesday 10th January 2006 at 00:00
Stakeholder Position: Animal Defenders International

Animal Defenders International

 

NAVS and Animal Defenders International

 

**NEWLY ADDED**

 

STATEMENT FROM ANIMAL DEFENDERS INTERNATIONAL:

Circus Industry claim that ADI MORI poll has been withdrawn, and veracity of data

Statement Date:  
14 March 2006

From:  
Jan Creamer, Chief Executive.

I have spoken to MORI this morning, and the ADI Poll has not been “withdrawn” as claimed by the circus industry.  

 

Please see the the following statement from MORI:

 

“MORI conducted a survey of public opinion on behalf of ADI in October 2005, regarding views towards performing animals in circuses.  The survey comprised a nationally-representative sample of 1,007 people across Great Britain, interviewed by telephone.


“The results were posted on our web site – www.mori.com – for general information.

 

"Last month, we received a complaint from a member of the public, claiming that the question was biased by the wording of a preceding question.


“The results were removed whilst a similar question was run among a comparable sample – without the preceding question - to judge the effects of the claimed bias.


“In the event, the two sets of results proved to be very similar – and so the hypothesis of bias was not proven.


"We are therefore re-posting the ADI survey results, and are happy to confirm that MORI stands by them."


The correctly conducted and weighted ADI Mori Poll in 2005:  

80% say ban all wild animal circus acts.
65% say ban all animal circus acts.
90% against whipping and beating when training circus animals.
Only 7% strongly opposed the calls for bans.

 

The poll also revealed that more than twice as many people now visit animal-free circuses as opposed to those with animals.

 

In the last five years, those attending animal-free circuses has risen from 6% to 16%.
Animal circuses remain slumped at 7% attendance.

 

The most popular forms of animal entertainment attended are aquariums (50% of respondents), zoos (39%), safari parks (22%), showing that people see circuses as an area where specific action is urgently required by the Government – even if they do not oppose the broader issue of animals in captivity.

 

Significantly this Poll supports the findings of earlier opinion polls:-

In 2004, NOP Poll:  Question:  "The use of performing animals in circuses should be banned"

 

Agree strongly 51%
Agree slightly 12%
Neither agree nor disagree  9%
Disagree slightly  18%
Disagree strongly  8%
Don't know  2%

 

Thus:   

 

63% support a ban on performing animals
26% oppose a ban

 

In 1999, a MORI Poll:  72% wanted wild animals banned.


Significantly, all the polls have shown no significant strong opposition to a ban.

 

Poll by Zippos Circus

 

On the specific issue of horses in circuses, a poll conducted by MORI for Zippo's Circus in February. This has shown opinion split fairly evenly on this issue, but with more strongly supporting a ban than those strongly opposing it.

Q1:  To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement?  

 

"Horse / equestrian displays in circuses are acceptable"


Strongly agree  14%
Tend to agree  29%
Neither agree nor disagree  17%
Tend to disagree  13%
Strongly disagree  26%
None of these / Don't know  2%

Zippo’s say on their website:  

 

"MORI poll shows 62% of the public support for horses in circuses."  This is clearly a misrepresentation of the facts and is achieved by adding those who "neither agree or disagree” to “support”.

ADI’s current position is based on successive polls over two years, by different independent companies, rather than a single poll.

 

---------------------------------------------------

 

The Government’s Animal Welfare Bill is schedule for its second reading on 10 January, and is expected to go into Committee from 17 January.  

 

This hugely important Bill will not only replace outdated legislation, but will set the tone of animal protection in our society for the future.  

 

It is therefore vital that Members of Parliament work to get this right and we implore all MPs who can help on animal protection issues, to become active on this Bill. 

 

Please read what our celebrity supporters say below.

There have been some key changes since the Draft Bill which cause concern, as well as key omissions:-

 

·     cephalopods (eg octopuses) are still excluded, making this legislation inconsistent with the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, and legislation abroad.  If this legislation is to bring the UK up-to-date, then it should at least equal other legislation.

 

Some damaging changes have been made to Clause 4:

 

·     Unnecessary suffering
Although it may appear to represent a tidying up, we are disturbed at the insertion of a new paragraph 4(3)(d); a get-out clause which states that any judgement of suffering should include whether it was “proportionate to the purpose of the conduct”. 
 For performing animals, this will negate the protection of the Act and continue the situation as it stands now.  It is currently legal to inflict an extreme beating on an animal in a circus (or to perform for film or TV) until it complies with what the trainer wants; it only becomes illegal if the trainer/handler continues to beat the animal after it has complied.  An animal welfare act should not allow for any level of beating to be an industry norm (when no life is in danger).

 

·     Effectively, provision for suffering and violence in the use of animals for entertainment has been legitimised in this Bill.

 

·     Section 10 – regulations to protect animals – has been stripped; specific protection provisions have disappeared, or been merged and weakened.  The section dealing with Regulations to promote animal welfare previously included an outline of the basic needs in the construction of accommodation.  There is now a broader ‘catchall’ which is a significantly weaker proposal as a whole.  Key subsections have been removed completely, including:

 

·     consideration of the welfare of animals in light of a type of commercial use;

·    prohibition on the keeping of animals of a specified kind in specified circumstances;

·    provision for prohibiting the use of animals of a specified kind for a specified purpose.

·    In the case of traveling circuses, clear and incontrovertible evidence has been produced over many years that, given the circumstances, it is simply not possible for traveling circuses to provide their animals with the space, environmental enrichment, companionship, and diet that would provide good welfare and maintain them in a healthy and happy condition.   

·    These changes since the Draft Bill, together with the omissions on the commercial use of animals for entertainment, are at odds with public opinion (a recent MORI poll found that 90% of the public are against whipping and beating of animals being trained for entertainment; 65% would like to see a ban on the use of animals in circuses, and 80% a ban on the use of wild animals), and even at odds with suggestions made by the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs committee, following its review of the Draft Bill. To see ADI’s MORI poll findings on ‘Attitudes towards Circus Animals’, click on:  http://www.mori.com/polls/2005/adi.shtml



Animal Defenders International will be producing briefings for MPs on this Bill and the effect of changes made to key clauses, and will be happy to provide further information on these issues.

 

To see ADI’s evidence for the Bill to EFRA, please visit: http://www.ad-international.org/home and click on the article entitled ‘Animal Welfare Bill Evidence’.

 

 

What our Celebrity supporters have to say

 

In December 2005 in support of ADI’s Christmas campaign to free ex-performing chimpanzee, Kirby, abandoned and dumped at a roadside zoo:

 

Howie Watkins (Broadcaster & Naturalist):

I support the Free Kirby Campaign because I want to do what I can to help Kirby live the remainder of his life as comfortably as possible. However, for Kirby, it is already too late. More importantly, I want to help publicise the terrible mental suffering that is caused to social animals like chimpanzees when they are trained to become "actors" and prevented from developing naturally. I praise those companies (such as Brooke Bond in the UK) that have ceased using chimpanzees in their advertising and condemn those companies that continue to do so.

 

Julia McKenzie (Film and TV actress):

I support the free Kirby Campaign because respect for any animal should be a prime part of human nature. Sadly, this is not always the case. Those of us who care deeply about the treatment of animals must speak out loud and clear.  In the 21st century this treatment of Kirby and his like is simply not acceptable!

 

In support of ADI’s campaigns to end circus animal misery:

 

Jamiroquai (Musician):

Please help the barbaric practice of keeping animals caged in zoos and circuses for the sole purpose of entertaining humans.  I find it utterly distressing to see beautiful animals, which should be in the wild confined and abused, both mentally and physically.  We should be ashamed of ourselves.   

 

Sir Elton John (Rock star):

The animal circus is a relic of a bygone era and has no place as a form of modern entertainment.   Many people don’t stop to think how appalling life behind the scenes for circus animals really is.   Wild animals such as elephants, lions, and tigers may spend most of their time shackled or cooped up in tiny cages when their only real exercise is performing in the ring.  Circus animals live a life of constant upheaval in makeshift and inadequate circumstances. Their suffering is very real.

 

Pam St Clement (‘Eastenders’ actress):

I am horrified at the suffering of circus animals who spend their lives on the move, chained up for the majority of the day, frustrated and deprived of stimulus.  In the 21st century when we are overwhelmed with choices of entertainment, we must ask ourselves what possible pleasure can be found in watching animals degraded into performing tricks completely unnatural to them.  Furthermore, knowing the misery they are forced to endure outside the ring, it is inexcusable for rational and caring human beings to allow this outdated ‘freak-show’ to continue.

 

Jenny Seagrove (Film and TV actress, currently in ‘Judge John Deed’):

It breaks my heart to know that animals are still chained and caged and dragged around the country in miserable conditions with circuses.   We know how much these beautiful creatures suffer, so why do we still allow it?   Animal circuses are a thing of the past to anyone wit a heart, so let’s put an end to them for good.

 

Michaela Strachan (Wildlife TV programme presenter):

I’ve seen elephants in the wild in Sri Lanka and Africa, these animals roam great distances, they’re very social animals as well, they need space. I can’t get to grips with how miserable these elephants must be living in those conditions. I think the argument that circuses have about their animals being educational to children doesn’t even deserve the time to discuss it.

 

For further details please contact Allison Tuffrey-Jones, Head of PR, ADI, at allisontuffreyjones@ad-international.org or on 020 8563 0250

 

Tue 10th Jan 2006

Latest Podcasts

Bookmark and Share

Advertisement

Discuss this article via video now

FrictionTV
More from Dods
Advertise

Spread your message to an audience that counts, with options available for our website, email bulletins and publications including The House Magazine.