The postmortem evaluation of Initiative 100, which Denver
voters defeated on August 10 by more than a 2-to-1 margin,
could boil down to something as simple as this: big business
won, wild animals lost.
Feld Entertainment, the parent company of Ringling Bros. and
Barnum & Bailey Circus, was in a jovial mood after
Denverites gave a thumbs down to Initiative 100, which would
have banned the display of wild or exotic animals for public
entertainment. The proposal, initiated and promoted by
teenager Heather Herman and the Denver for Cruelty-Free
Circuses, lost by a vote of 21,001 for and 52,799 against.
In both reported remarks and in the company's official press
release on Initiative 100, Feld Entertainment painted the win
as a rejection of a foolhardy animal activists' agenda and as a
victory for freedom of choice.
"Ringling Bros. believes the Denver vote sends a strong
message that Americans reject the activists' agenda that would
separate animals from their human caregivers and dictate how
people spend time with their families," said Tom Albert, vice
president of Government Relations at Feld, in an official
release after the vote. Likewise, Kathryn Works, a campaign
manager with Keep the Circus in Denver Committee, told a
television reporter in Denver, "I think voters saw through the
greater agenda of the animal rights activists and wanted to
maintain their entertainment choice."
Feld's concerns over freedom of choice would seem to be
limited to humans, not wild animals.
Even as Feld was celebrating its win, company officials were
confronting allegations from a former Ringling Bros. lion
handler, who claims that a circus supervisor refused to stop a
train and water down the animals as it crossed the Mojave
Desert, likely contributing to the death of a 2-year-old lion
named Clyde. The same lion handler also claims, in an affidavit
sent to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, that Feld lawyers
ordered him not to talk to USDA officials as they investigated
the lion's death. More on that in a moment.
All About the Benjamins
Initiative 100 was a historic moment in the growing movement
to ban wild animals from public entertainment. Between 35 and
40 municipalities, including nearby Boulder, already ban wild
animals for public display in the United States and Canada. But
had Initiative 100 passed, Denver would have been the largest
city to adopt such a ban.
Not surprisingly, Feld pumped a lot of money into fighting
the initiative. Feld reportedly channeled at least $125,000
into the Keep the Circus in Denver Committee. Compare that to
the $50,000 budget for Denver for Cruelty-Free Circuses, money
that was provided by groups such as The HSUS. This discrepancy
no doubt partly inspired Poncho Hays, co-campaign manager for
Keep the Circus in Denver, to tell the Rocky Mountain
News (in a paraphrase of the tough-guy talk from Brian
DePalma's The Untouchables), "The lesson here is don't
bring a knife to a gunfight."
All that money helped Feld reposition Initiative 100.
By the time the vote came around on August 10, it seemed less
about animal welfare and more about the revenue that Denver
would ostensibly lose if it passed the initiative. This
position was sumed up by an editorial in The Denver
Post, which wrote, "City Councilman Charlie Brown and
others oppose the ban on the pragmatic grounds that it would
apply only in Denver, meaning promoters would probably find an
alternative site in the metro area….Such a relocation…would
deprive Denver of the economic and entertainment benefits it
receives when the circus comes to town."
Whether Denver would actually lose money was an open
question, since animal-free circuses or even other
entertainment could have filled the void. More certain was the
Ringling Bros., if it didn't change its act, would stand to
lose millions with the passage of Initiative 100. According to
official estimates, Ringling took in $8 million during two
weeks in 2003, while the city received $240,606 from
refreshments, taxes, and parking.
A Different Kind of Victory
Despite the loss, supporters of Initiative 100 had their own
reasons to cheer. Their bold stance had attracted a lot of
media attention, the very thing that plants the seeds for
action down the road.
"Win or lose, it's a big victory for everyone who has put
countless hours into this campaign…It definitely brought
awareness to the issue," Herman told reporters after the votes
were counted.
"Right now we're just reflecting on the fact that we brought
the huge cruelty abuses from Ringling Bros. to the center…We
think we've raised a huge awareness level that was a voice for
the voiceless," said Dan Hanley of Denver for Cruelty-Free
Circuses. "Over 18,000 Denverites made conscious decision not
to go to the circus…They truly believe elephants don't belong
in chains.
Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United
States, put the situation in perspective: "It's a loss for wild
animal performers in Denver, but it's not a waste. Each year
sees new communities turning their backs on the questionable
exploitation of wild animals for entertainment. And that tide
will continue to surge. We have no intention of giving up the
fight for these animals."
Why We Still Fight
Ringling Bros. has been frequently investigated for failing
to care for its animals in a manner that meets even the minimal
standards mandated by the Animal Welfare Act. Two recent
incidents underscore the circus's problematic history with wild
animals.
In mid-July, the 2-year-old lion Clyde died in a train car
while traveling across California's Mojave Desert. Trainer
Frank Hagan, described in one news report as a "veteran
Ringling Brothers employee," contends that Clyde died because
of the extreme heat and that, when he and another employee
asked a Ringling Bros. supervisor to stop the train and cool
down the animals, the supervisor refused, allegedly arguing the
train was already behind schedule.
According to an August 8 story in The Washington Post
Hagan alleges that when USDA inspectors showed up, lawyers for
Ringling "kept those of us with knowledge of the lion's death
away from the USDA and instructed us not to speak to the
inspectors." Hagan also claims that the car was outfitted with
a cooling system the day before the USDA inspectors arrived.
Ringling fired Hagan shortly after the investigation began, and
Hagan submitted his accusations in an affidavit to the
USDA.
In August, Ringling reported (though the circus says it was
not required to do so) the death of an 8-month-old Asian
elephant named Ricardo. The elephant broke two legs falling
from a 19-inch pedestal in a play yard. The elephant was
euthanized.
Despite Ricardo's untimely death, Ringling spokeswoman
Debbie Fahrenbruck told CBS News that animals in the circus
have it good: "They get food every day, they don't have to
worry about being poached, poisoned and all the things that go
on in the wild."
What her self-serving quote neglects to point out is that
Ricardo, had he been born in a normal wild elephant society,
would have been carefully watched by his mother and others in
the herd.
What's more, says Richard Farinato, The HSUS's Director of
Captive Wildlife, "Captivity brings with it a whole new set of
threats to a baby elephant's survival, including unsupervised
'play yards,' viruses, and injuries that account for the deaths
of more than 50% of Asian elephant babies born in captivity in
the last ten years."
Denver may seem like a victory for Feld right now, but the
battle over wild animals in circuses is far from over.
