Gypsy Vanner liberty Act
Bactrian and Zebra Liberty act
Dromedary and Grey Arabians
White Dromedary and Black Arabians
These are a few of the liberty act's that Mr. Ian Garden Sr.(former producer of Garden Bros. Circus) has produced for Circo Atayde(Aguilar) from Mexico in the past 5 years. Ian is at the moment getting another act together for them consisting of White Bactrians and Black Arabs, as well as training a couple of Arabians for Taba and the Ringling Bros. Circus. In addition he just delivered 3 Buckskin Andalusians to Cavalia and his Palomino half Arab high school horse.
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Circo Atayde(Aguilar) Hermanos
35th Anniversary Tour Circus Roncalli
1:100 Circus Roncalli model available from Schreiber-Bogen Homepage for E18.50
Translate this page
What's going on in Europe? Krone has Togni's horse's and will be combining with Bouglione this winter for a presentation and Roncalli has Florian Richter's fabulous equine production(What is the Richter Circus using in Hungary?) for their 35 Anniversary Tour. Are circus's in Europe "combining" their talent's in touch economic times, although we have all been assured "business is great," with no family connection's, instead acting like smart business people and consolidating their efforts for something great instead of limping along, with it and for it with some low rent production, which continues to force people to find another avenue for their entertainment dollar/euro/pound?
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Old MarineWorld-Africa USA
1979
I believe that is Ron Whitfield, year unknown, in the third and fourth pictures, who had one of the greatest lion and tiger act's of what Buckles Woodcock refers to as the "GGW era," for many years at MarineWorld. Does anyone know who is presenting the elephants in the first two pictures?
Author Jason Hribal need's to be heard also, if for no other reason than a warning to civilized society!!!!
Ventriloquists for the powerless: translating the revolutionary consciousness of voiceless animals
Do Some Circus and Zoo Animals Dream of Freedom and Revenge ...
Link courtesy of Ryan "Radar" EasleyFriday, May 27, 2011
What Is The Difference?????
Is this "behavior" natural because it occurred spontaneously in the "wild" surrounded by trees and rocks and there for acceptable? Is this "behavior" unnatural if it occurs in a performance ring on cue, instead of spontaneously? Apparently a bear possesses the physical ability to move hand over hand, over a rope to attain a reward? Does he then not also possess the intelligence to learn to do the same thing on cue, in a performance ring, surrounded by lights and spangles without it being deemed "unnatural or inhumane?" A normal response is, "he has a choice if he is in the wild, and is not forced to do it." What choice did he have in a house being built in his world, and eliminating normal food stuffs so that he had to go to a bird feeder, placed by a human to feed the wild birds, in order to survive? I hope someone can explain to me what is "natural" and "living free and wild" as "God intended" instead of being forced to do "unnatural things in the service of man."
What Is The Difference?????
Is this "cute and charming" if only done with a dog, in the back yard, by people whom for all intents and purposes have no animal training/husbandry skills past the purchase of or adoption of the animal, yet "cruel and inhumane" if done with an exotic animal, born in captivity like the dog, in a performance ring, by people whom are knowledgeable about animal training/husbandry?
PAWS letter to the AZA
A well worn cliche in regards to divorce or the breakup of a relationship is "there is her side, and there is his side, and somewhere in the middle lies the truth." That cliche is very appropriate for the current issues between circus/zoo captive animals and the sanctuary/animal rights captive animals. In order to make an intelligent knowledgeable decision on the issue, much like in a relationship break up you must listen to BOTH sides impartially and without prejudice or bias. If not you are a radical, with a "for radical" or a "against radical", with no more validity or importance to the issue then an snowball in an Antarctic winter.
This letter is from Zoo News Digest one of the few blogs I follow, as the administrator Peter Dickinson doesn't duck any issues, unlike the "history channel" and a number of others. Peter states: (I am not in agreement with much of the following letter though it makes some interesting points. It is included here for the interest of Zoo News Digest Readers - Peter)
I will echo Peter by saying also that (I am not in agreement with much of the following letter though it makes some interesting points. It is included here for the interest of Circusnospin Readers. Hopefully we can be open minded enough to get past she said, he said and arrive in the middle with the truth some day.
May 24, 2011
Kristin L. Vehrs
Executive Director
Association of Zoos and Aquariums
8403 Colesville Road, Suite 710
Silver Spring, MD 20910-3314
Dear Ms. Vehrs,
As I write this letter, I continue to be astounded by the intransigent attitude of AZA and the misinformation promulgated by your organization regarding sanctuaries, particularly PAWS' ARK 2000 in San Andreas, California, information that, in my opinion, is defamatory.
Our management program (protected contact), barns, habitats and protocols are meticulously presented on our website. Therefore, when you suggest "so-called sanctuaries" such as PAWS are staffed with volunteers or untrained individuals, maintain inadequate fencing and barriers and cannot meet the so-called "rigorous" AZA Standards for Elephant Management and Care, I must assume that your organization has, at best, failed to do its research or, at worse, has no regard for the truth about our sanctuary.
For that reason, I find AZA's statements unfortunate, especially in the wake of the disturbing news reports concerning the training of elephants at the Have Trunk Will Travel movie compound, an AZA affiliated facility, and an organization that promotes its participation with the Elephant Managers Association, the AZA, and the Species Survival Plan.
The decision of some AZA zoos to send elephants to sanctuaries such as PAWS demonstrates that AZA's pronouncements do not reflect the opinions of all AZA accredited zoos, notwithstanding that those zoos are bound by an agreement to abide by AZA policies with which they may not concur. It is arrogant and disrespectful to those individuals who are committed to the welfare of elephants that their opinions are ignored.
What I have learned and I am sure you well know, there is a wide diversity of opinion and ethical concern within the AZA community regarding the AZA's posture concerning sanctuaries such as PAWS and that this has exacerbated anger and frustration among many zoo professionals, humane organizations, government officials and members of the public who support sanctuaries.
I suspect the support for sanctuaries such as PAWS within some segments of the AZA community results from the adverse publicity which occurs whenever an accredited AZA facility sends surplus animals to hunting ranches, movie compounds or AZA accredited facilities with neither the space nor the expertise to properly house or integrate them socially.
Sadly, this is evidenced by the transfer of Ruby, an older African elephant, from Los Angeles Zoo to Knoxville with the full support of AZA, EMA and SSP; a plan that failed miserably because there was no plan and no physical plant to facilitate her socialization. In the past, Los Angeles Zoo has also traded elephants with Have Trunk Will Travel with disastrous results for Los Angeles Zoo and San Francisco Zoo.
These irrefutable incidents, and PAWS has documentation of many more, invalidate the AZA assertion that: "the only way to assure that these elephants receive the highest level of care is to send them to an AZA-accredited facility."
Ruby suffered unnecessarily because of AZA's insistence that she be sent to an AZA accredited facility; a facility with limited space for socialization, rather than to a sanctuary with the capability to improve her quality of life. One wonders how these pedantic and unreasonable decisions can be construed as "contributing to professional and humane animal management and care."
Perhaps this contumacious campaign against sanctuaries is fomented by those in AZA who do not conform to their standards and who do not share the proclaimed advocacy for animal welfare and conservation.
The continuing misinformation published by AZA is defamatory and untrue as we have stated for 20 years. In an effort to once again inform you of the true protocols and policies of PAWS, I am listing some of the most egregious misstatements in your publications:
"Non-accredited zoos and private elephant facilities (so-called sanctuaries) are not an appropriate alternative. These are places where elephants live with assistance from people who provide food water and shelter but are not required to meet the rigorous AZA Standards of Elephant Management and Care."
Unlike most AZA "accredited" facilities, PAWS maintains 24-hour trained keeping staff at our sanctuaries. This eliminates the possibility of leaving a mobile animal at night and discovering a downed animal when keepers return in the morning. This has been our practice for many years and should be part of AZA's so-called "rigorous" standards, particularly for facilities housing aging arthritic elephants.
While many zoo elephant keepers care for other species as well, our nine experienced elephant keepers, and four apprentice elephant keepers, do not take care of other species. Their time is devoted exclusively to the elephants. We do not utilize volunteers or interns for the care of elephants entrusted to our sanctuary.
Ed Stewart and I (PAWS founders and directors) personally train each of our keepers in hands-on, humane, bullhook-free Asian and African elephant care. This training also includes bull elephants. Together, Ed and I have more than 70 years of experience in elephant care. Brian Busta, our Elephant Supervisor, has more than 15 years of experience with both species, including bulls, and we regularly utilize the services of Protected Contact Management consultants, Margaret Whittaker and Gail Laule of Active Environments.
"Not all sanctuaries are open to the public or support education and worldwide conservation."
For many years most zoos have collected elephants and other species from the wild, transporting them to small spaces with artificial habitats, separating them from families and their natural surroundings, to be "ambassadors" for their more fortunate relatives who avoided capture.
PAWS indeed provides public education but does so without subjecting the elephants in our care to the often times inadequate facilities of some AZA accredited facilities. We provide this in the form of periodicals, educational "Seeing the Elephant" weekends, educational seminars and conferences, as well as guest lectures by such esteemed scientists as Joyce Poole, Cynthia Moss, Ian Redmond and others-all focusing on the protection and conservation of the animals that zoos capture in the name of conservation.
i.e. - The highly unacceptable capture of young elephants from Swaziland to replace aging African elephants at the San Diego Wild Animal Park. The older "surplus" elephants were sent from the balmy San Diego climate to the frigid cold of Chicago. They all died within a short period of time. Another AZA-sanctioned transfer that resulted in the deaths of three African elephant "ambassadors" who were the victims of AZA's carefully conceived public relations campaigns to justify wild capture.
As I write this letter, my colleagues and I are protesting a similar effort by Auckland Zoo, an accredited zoo in New Zealand. This was promoted as a worldwide conservation bid to save elephants in the wild; the zoo is negotiating with an elephant orphanage in Sri Lanka for two juvenile elephants. This can in no way benefit the wild elephants of Sri Lanka.
ARK 2000 is not open to the public. Our time is devoted to the care of the animals who live here. We do, however, conduct controlled tours which are often free for school children and at-risk youth. (View our website.) We also provide educational programs about elephants which promote conservation and habitat protection for wild species. We do not attempt to persuade the public and the media that we are performing some panegyric service to the species that we are forced to confine; we demonstrate the need for conservation of wildlife and habitat.
"AZA accredited zoos have carefully planned elephant breeding programs, which help build the North American herd."
Sanctuaries do not breed. We are often the recipients of "surplus" animals resulting from breeding programs that are certainly not well planned. The hypocrisy of breeding animals in captivity who will be doomed to live in unnatural enclosures in the name of conservation and science is a practice which should be eliminated by the AZA and replaced with truthful information about captivity and the compelling need to protect wild species and habitat.
AZA zoos have been passing elephants around like baseball cards, trading individuals who have bonded with companions for years to be transported from familiar surroundings and companions, traumatized with the sudden appearance of an aggressive bull or the unpleasant procedures involved in artificial insemination.
If captive breeding programs were incredibly successful, producing a profusion of healthy calves, there would be no benefit to wild elephant populations and the resultant surplus bull elephants would be in need of sanctuary.
AZA is aware of this dilemma since some of the more prolific breeding facilities have for many years been sending surplus bulls and cows to circuses and other facilities with questionable standards of care.
Other comments about the financial incapability of sanctuaries and the lack of accountability is outrageous and insulting. Sanctuaries are 501(c)3 non-profit organizations operating within the strictest financial guidelines of the federal and state governments. We are audited annually and our 990 is always available on our website.
PAWS has been operational for more than 27 years, growing and improving annually with no support from city, state or federal tax funds. The continuing complaint of zoos with substandard housing for elephants is their inability to fund improvements for the animals in their care. Today, with city, state and federal funding at a record low, many zoos are forced to make drastic cuts in their budgets.
For many years, PAWS has attempted to establish good working relations with AZA to no avail. While we have respected the progressive zoo directors and dedicated keeping and veterinary staff at many zoos, the animosity and defamatory statements generated by AZA undermines these efforts and does not reflect the opinions of many wonderful zoo directors and staff that we have met. Our relationship with those special facilities, despite the deceptive propaganda distributed by AZA, is a source of pride to PAWS.
PAWS has great respect for those individual facilities, but we are opposed to the philosophy of the Elephant Manager's Association and the brutish proponents of dominance training, who feel that electricity and bullhooks (or other weapons) are "acceptable training tools" and who ridicule members who practice Protected Contact in elephant management.
AZA professes to be professional and the leader in elephant care, yet the history of AZA and their lack of enforcement of their own standards which are considerably lower than sanctuaries, repudiates this shallow posturing, and the frequent exposures of abusive training at AZA approved facilities indicates a critical need for reform.
For all of the reasons stated above, and many others which are well documented, PAWS proudly declares we are not an AZA accredited facility. Furthermore, we insist that AZA cease from publishing defamatory statements about our sanctuary. The quotes of Toronto Zoo staff based on your misinformation have led Toronto media and the Zoo Board to make public statements about "fearing the animals may be mistreated at a sanctuary." This is reprehensible, unprofessional, false and damaging to our reputation.
Sincerely,
Pat Derby
Director and Founder
Performing Animal Welfare Society
cc: Board of Management of the Toronto Zoo
Mayor Rob Ford, City of Toronto
USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack
USDA Deputy Under Secretary John Ferrell
Toronto Sun
Toronto Life
Associated Press International
Richard Bickelman, Esq.
Seattle's Woodland Park Zoo defends treatment of elephants
I posted this picture a few weeks ago in reference to the great work being done at the Seattle Zoo(former institution of David Hancock, now his righteous focus) in regards to elephant reproduction and husbandry. It is now included with this new issue of the zoo having to "defend" their elephant reproduction program. Amazing!!!! Bruce Bohmke offers great insight and commendable rebuttal.
Listen: Bruce Bohmke: Woodland Park Zoo Elephants
The Woodland Park Zoo is facing criticism and a lawsuit over the way it treats its elephants. We talk with the zoo's COO, who says the allegations are largely false. Bruce Bohmke is chief operation officer at Woodland Park Zoo.
Seattle's Woodland Park Zoo is defending itself against accusations of animal mistreatment and illegal breeding practices.
A scathing article written in The Stranger cites a lawsuit filed against the City of Seattle, which claims the zoo participates in abusive breeding practices and subjects the elephants to conditions that lead to severe foot injuries.
On Friday, Bruce Bohmke, zoo Chief Operations Officer, defended the zoo on News Talk 97.3 KIRO FM's Ross and Burbank Show saying The Stranger's story is, "full of half truths and inaccuracies. They just made some of that stuff up."
At issue was whether the elephants at Woodland Park have enough room. While Bohmke conceded that "confinement of any animal has an effect on the animal," he also said the zoo association they're accredited with requires 1/3 of an acre per elephant.
"We certainly have that." Bohmke explained the article's World Wildlife Fund citation that elephants in captivity need 247 acres to roam and wild elephants need to walk 20 miles per day is inaccurate.
"Elephants do walk 20 miles a day in extreme conditions where they're trying to find food or water and they're desperate. Most studies that have been done on elephants in the wild talk about how they move maybe three miles a day and, in some cases where there's abundant food and water, they move very little."
Bohmke said giving zoo animals a rich environment is one of the best ways to keep them stimulated and happy.
"They can lay down, they can dig, they can move around and manipulate their environment; that's what's important to animals...to behave naturally."
Besides the lack of room to roam, the article and lawsuit point out the zoo's 57 procedures to artificially inseminate Chai, which Bohmke clarified.
"About 48 of those inseminations were done more than 10 years ago. They weren't real inseminations. They were attempts to just inseminate by putting semen into the elephant, which was not, as we know now through studies in captivity, an effective way to inseminate them," Bohmke said. "We have an effective way to inseminate them now and we have had at least one pregnancy because of that, which unfortunately ended up in a miscarriage."
Bohmke said the animals are trained to stand still, but it's impossible to inseminate an unwilling elephant.
"The procedure is very safe and supervised by our veterinarian staff. We have veterinary specialists that help us do this. It's about as good as it can be," he said.
As for foot problems, Bohmke said the barn floor features rubber surfaces and the staff performs daily inspections.
"We give them pedicures on a weekly basis," he said.
According to Bohmke, the zoo's elephants are over 40 and it wouldn't be surprising if some of them developed osteoarthritis.
"It's a human/animal/mammal condition that just happens. It happens in the wild. It happens in captivity," he said.
Bohmke wanted to remind people the "zoos are staffed by a whole bunch of caring scientists that really know animals very well" and the reason for keeping elephants in zoos is to help save them in the wild.
If you opened the gates to free the animals, Bohmke said he's not sure what they would do.
"I will tell you that there are a lot of stories of zoo animals escaping that are extremely unhappy until they can get back to their enclosure. It's their home. That's where they're comfortable."
(Front page photo by Ryan Hawk)
"At the news talk link above, if you click it it takes you to a video referred to as a "uber cute" internet clip of a dog raising liger cubs in a Chinese Zoo. Amazingly folks eat this kind of "uber cute" "cute and charming" "feel good" nonsense up. I am sent "amazing animal" clips daily which I just delete because they have no value for any thing except an exceptional "feel good" moment. I wonder if folks who look at these clips, and fawn and goo over "how sweet!!!!!" have ever considered that those ligers might possibly grow up to be a jug of wine......... Folks really need to get out of Wonderland and leave it to Alice and Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum and join the real world of reality."
Kellog Arabian Horse Ranch Revisited
The Arabian Horse, which at one time was quite rare in the United States is now a popular and not so rare breed. I have to be honest and tell folks who gag at the thought of collecting bull elephants and artificially inseminating cow's that I, as well as the industry collect Arabian stallions, artificially inseminate mares, and yes, horror of horror's will use a surrogate grade mare if the need arises, which might be one of many reason's why the Arabian horse is no longer rare anymore. Do you suppose?
Dealing With a Pushy Horse--Tommy Garland
Tommy Garland is one of the more successful trainers in the Arabian industry, and I have mention my respect for him in the past. Even had the pleasure and honor of shaking his hand a few years ago at the Egyptian Event. Here he is addressing a "pushy horse", in an abbreviated clip and explaining a "stud chain/shank" as I did a few weeks ago(type Water for Elephants in the search bar) in reference to the American Humane Association training clip that was issued in which we saw horse's touched with whips and animals lead with chains, but all they basically addressed was how an elephant was or was not trained. Chains are acceptable for a horse, cow, zebra, dog etc. but taboo for an elephant???? I have to wonder, as I have for years, why OABA, ECA, Elephant Managers Assoc., AZA, Ringling Bros. etc. etc. hasn't put out something entitled, "Dealing with a Pushy Elephant." Not the "feel good" Prof Heeb tapes or the thousands of "training tapes" on you tube, which while being entertaining, have absolutely no educational value, in explaining how, what, or why something is done or not done. Where is our Tuff Hedeman, Ty Murry, or Tommy Garland?
The Buckeye 2011
Arabian Horse Global - Promoting the Arabian Horse Around the World
I am sharing this link with any readers of the blog who are interested in Arabian horses and horse training/showing. The Buckeye, which is currently going on until May 29th, is one of the major show's held each year by the Arabian Horse industry. It is free to sign up for an account so that you can log in to, and view the show as it progresses. I must warn you, you will see everybody wearing spurs, the equivalent of equine bull hooks used in a proper and accepted manner. You may also see some carrying whips in certain classes. And yes, they don't just "carry them" they may also use them in a proper and accepted manner. If training, controlling, and insisting that an animal perform a certain function, at a certain time, when asked to do so, upset's you or offends your sensitivities, you may not want to watch it. The rest of you, I hope you appreciate it and enjoy it as much as I do.
A Word from the Technical Department
We are experiencing blog difficulties, which my crack staff, lead by Schlitzie is attempting to rectify. We appreciate your patience during this difficult, hateful actually, time. We are able to receive comment's but not able to post them at the moment.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
San Antonio Zoo Hoof Stock Exhibits
The San Antonio Zoo housed the first herd of Addra Gazella in captivity in 1969 and continues to be active in the breeding program for this critically endangered species. Due to the former hoofstock quarantine point in San Antonio, the San Antonio Zoo has historically had a wide variety of hoofstock species.
For anybody that loves old zoo architecture as I do, the hoof stock complex at San Antonio Zoo is a definite must see. Just amazing to think of what must have been spent to create what is today so very inadequate. As mentioned in the past I can only suppose it had something to do with San Antonio's flooding situation. That's the only explanation I can come up with for building something like this. In a smaller Okapi exhibit(a second Okapi could be seen in "Africa Live") attempts were made to soften the exhibit by placing turf on the steps, and as the Okapi was fenced in at the top of the exhibit, I assumed the grass had just been placed. Piles of sand/concrete, I couldn't tell has been added in some of the exhibits along the walls at the "steps" and in the center points, again supposing as an aid for the animals to go up and down more naturally. By far my favorite part of the zoo, followed by the WPA Hippo building, the rhino complex, and the "Aquarium." Sadly, it seems the direction San Antonio has chosen to go is with the "Africa Live" Walt Disney see the world without leaving the United States architectural style which is all the rage in the zoo world today.
Below is an excellent review for ZooChat, that pretty much say's it all:
Review of San Antonio Zoo and Aquarium » San Antonio ZooReview of San Antonio Zoo and Aquarium » San Antonio Zoo
San Antonio Zoo Hoof Stock Exhibits
This was one of many exhibit's which I mention below, that appear to have been intended for a different species when it was first built and is now used for a more appropriate species.
San Antonio Zoo New Hippo Exhibit in "Africa Alive"
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION - Jones & Jones Architecture and Landscape ...
Credit given to Jones & Jones, you can sure create the "illusion" of more space and thus in the public eye more happiness. This exhibit was most assuredly the most popular the day I was at the zoo, in fact viewing was difficult given the line of people pressed up against the class. I had to come back an hour later to be able to view it. Later I went back to the closed WPA facility pictured below( because I love old zoo exhibits), and I really didn't get it. With the exception of a tad bit more real estate(which could have been gotten by knocking down a wall or two), it didn't appear any better or worse then the new exhibit. It even had the cloudy green water. The only difference I could see was you looked down at the hippos, and in the new facility you looked up at them, or viewed them through disintegrated clouds of feces. The fish had their work cut out for them, that's for sure.
San Antonio Zoo WPA Hippo Building--2005
Does anyone know why a program similar to the WPA has not been initiated today? From my understanding if it, it was an incredible program of "earning" your aid and not just getting it because you were "entitled" to it.
The Works Progress Administration, known by the acronym WPA, was one of the many programs initiated by the federal government under President Franklin D. Roosevelt to combat the devestating effects of the Great Depression.
The Works Progress Administration was established by Executive Order No. 7034, dated May 6, 1935. This action was taken by the President under the authority of the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935, approved April 8, 1935.
The Emergency Relief Appropriation Act signaled the withdrawal of the federal government from the area of direct relief, which was left to the states and local communities, and provided for the establishment of a large-scale national works program for jobless employables, who were required to meet a means test in order to qualify for work relief. Established as the major agency of the program was the Works Progress Administration (WPA), which beginning in 1939 was called the Works Projects Administration .
As originally designed, the WPA was to have two important functions. First, it was to operate a nation-wide program of "small useful projects" designed to provide employment for needy employable workers. Second, it was to coordinate the activities of the "Works Program." About 85% of the funds spent on WPA programs went directly into wages and salaries.
Particularly novel were the special programs. The Federal Writers' Project prepared state and regional guide books, organized archives, indexed newspapers, and conducted useful sociological and historical investigations. The Federal Arts Project gave unemployed artists the opportunity to decorate hundreds of post offices, schools, and other public buildings with murals, canvases, and sculptures; musicians organized symphony orchestras and community singing. The Federal Theatre Project experimented with untried modes, and scores of stock companies toured the country with repertories of old and new plays, thus bringing drama to communities where it had been known only through the radio.
By March, 1936, the WPA rolls had reached a total of more than 3,400,000 persons; after initial cuts in June 1939, it averaged 2,300,000 monthly; and by June 30, 1943, when it was officially terminated, the WPA had employed more than 8,500,000 different persons on 1,410,000 individual projects, and had spent about $11 billion. During its 8-year history, the WPA built 651,087 miles of highways, roads, and streets; and constructed, repaired, or improved 124,031 bridges, 125,110 public buildings, 8,192 parks, and 853 airport landing fields.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
