With all due respect, RJR, I have to state again that it is my personal opinion that some animals should not be used for entertainment purpose's, and never should have been. This is as entertaining as watching a hippo eat a head of lettuce in the ring, or an ostrich being chased around, and any "educational value" is zilch. The transportation logistics's could not have been good, or of any benefit to the well being of the animal. I think we can appreciate them more, and learn about them better in either Wolong or a well designed zoological facility.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Panda's from the Chinese Circus in Canada
Posted by
Wade G. Burck
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
Wade,
Along with the picture of the machine gun and this one playing poker, I am thinking pandas are more mobsters than they are whale hunters.
Also I read an old article from Sports Illustrated on you. Wondering if you have any photos of your old hound dog. :)
Amy
Wade - -your comments can be made to apply to any exotic animal in a performance setting.
A giant panda is a bear (per the most recent genetic studies which debunk the old procyonidae classification). We have other types of bears in performance routines so why not a GP, unless it is offensive from the standpoint its exceptonal rarity.
I agree that performing exotic animal acts have no educational value in terms of the animal itself but may have some to illustrate the historic mastery of man over beast.
Or they may have some value in providing healthy stimulation to the animal which it might not otherwise get in a captive setting.
For me, personally, I just like to see exotic animals of all types in the ring regardless of the ethics of such - -assuming there is no overt cruelty (at least that I can see).
All of this, of course, is an issue that has no foreseeable resolution. I see no "I won the argument" result from any of the camps debating the issue.
The magnitude of your hypocrisy is truly astounding, Mr. Burke.
Anonymous weasel Sheridan Wyoming,
What part of the statement did you find hypocritical. Go ahead tell us, so you can show the world your ignorance as well as timidness. Is it because I transported and trained "endangered" white and crossbred tigers, that adapted fairly well to the entertainment field, that I can't oppose the use of a severely endangered, difficult to reproduce species, or a species that does not adapt very well to a transported way of life. Is that what has upset you? It's Burck, not Burke, and I have told you that before.
Wade
Endangered white tigers, eh? lol
Radar,
And cross bred endangered ones too. Do you think that was what numbnuts(not Casey, anonymous numbnus)was inferring with "magnitude of your hypocrisy is truly astounding" because I don't think you should used severely endangered or animals not suited for the road, but don't object to non endangered animals, raised and acclimated to that life?
I also would object strongly to a cow being locked in a stocks and whacked between the eyes with a steel wedge or a stun gun 10 times a day for the rest of her miserable life for no good reason, but I don't object to one whack or two if it is going to proved me with a fine ribeye.
Wade
Wade,
Yes, or elephants. Mr. Reynolds has a valid point that the argument can be applied to "any exotic animal in a performance setting." Circuses do not advertise the crisis in the wild and that there is no habitat for them, or that they could be dead or dying if not in captivity. Instead we tout, "They are family," which has no truth or educational value to offer.
I disagree though, if taking the act for face value, the panda is more entertaining than the hippo. Saying that there is no entertainment value would be affected by the morals or ethics, which could again cover any exotic animal. Not because a bear playing cards is not interesting, nor pushing a cart/buggy is less interesting than watching a dog do the same trick.
Radar,
Thanks, that's why I stopped working with elephants in 1981. There was starting to be an effort to breed them, after import's were banned. Much like gorilla's, and a number of other animals after the bans they just cooperated more and became better at procreating. I want to see an animal do something, if it is touted as "trained." If it walks in and eat's a cookie it is "handled" not trained. Like a horse is "handled" at halter in a show, but "trained" if someone is on his back in Western or English pleasure. A Syrian bear riding a high bike is "trained", and a Panda Bear rocking on a toy horse is "handled." I can appreciate a bear more on a high bike, then I can rocking on a toy horse. I can appreciate a tiger, lion, leopard, walking on it's hind legs. I don't need to see a Snow or Clouded Leopard do it to appreciate a felines physical prowess. Plus, nothing is being hurt, provided it is cared for as regulated, from what may be a suddenly evaporated gene pool.
Wade
What regulation? We do not regulate ourselves. Shows hire acts despite their lack of animal care or lack of skills. The USDA's standards are minimal at best and they fail at enforcing them. With all the opposition we face, there seems to be no effort from many to improve or save ourselves.
Radar,
"Shows hire acts despite their lack of animal care or lack of skills", the circus has done that for as long as I can remember. Word is comparable talent has never been available in America. Might that be one of the reasons why the American Circus has wilted? As long as you follow the regulations set by elected officials, or hire ones who will set them "proper", the rest has to come from "inside" each individual.
Wade
Post a Comment