iBerkshires.com - Boston
October 17, 2007
By Kyle Cheney

Original Article

BOSTON - It was a committee hearing that could only be described adequately as circuslike.

State lawmakers on Wednesday listened to descriptions of bleeding, screeching elephants mishandled by violent circus employees. Those claims were sharply disputed by Ringling Bros. executives, who insisted that elephants were treated with dignity and shared close bonds with their trainers.

Indeed, the testimony given to the joint Committee on Tourism, Arts and Cultural Development seemed to describe alternate universes of animal care.

The hearing featured a re-enacted beating with a bull hook – a device that animal protection advocates decry as a tool for abuse – incredulous lawmakers who queried Ringling officials about receiving mass e-mails and, from one Western Massachusetts resident, a prayer to God, despite protestations from the committee’s Senate Chairman Brian Joyce, D-Milton, that "We have a separation of church and state."

The matter at hand was a bill that could mean the end of elephant acts in the Bay State. The proposal (S 2002), filed by Sen. Robert Hedlund, R-Weymouth, would ban the use of bull hooks and the chaining of elephants, which Ringling officials say would effectively end all traveling shows in Massachusetts.

Ringling officials contend that when used properly, a bull hook – a long rod with a sharp, curved end – is simply an extension of a trainer’s arm, used to guide an elephant, not to harm it.

"We will not tolerate the misuse of any equipment," said Bruce Read, Ringling Bros. vice president for animal stewardship. "As leaders in elephant care, we believe the bill before you is both unnecessary and unjustified."

Asked by Rep. Brian Wallace, D-Boston, if the passage of the bill would be the end of Ringling Bros. presence in Massachusetts, one circus official said, "Unfortunately, yes."

"Animals are the No. 1 reason that people go to our shows," said Thomas Albert, vice president of government relations for Ringling Bros.

Circus Officials Deny Abuse

The Ringling executive said various zoos and venues, including ones exempted from Hedlund’s bill, opposed the measure, arguing that the bull hook is a humane and essential tool for raising elephants in captivity. They also said they were subject to routine, unannounced inspections by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which had never uncovered any serious cases of abuse, let alone the widespread, systematic violence that the bill's proponents cited.

On the other hand, animal rights activists warned of elephants mutilated and even killed by aggressive trainers, mercilessly beating them as they writhed and shrieked.

"I quit Ringling in June of 2006 because the animal abuse I witnessed on a daily basis," said Archele Hundley, who cared for Ringling Bros.’ horses from April 2006 until she quit. "It upset me and it will haunt me for the rest of my life."

At one point, Hundley picked up a bull hook and, with permission from Joyce, demonstrated for the committee an incident she claimed to have witnessed in which a trainer speared an elephant's ear canal until it bled profusely.

"[Ringling's animal department] has a culture of it's own, and mainly it's made up of violence and domination," she said.

Hundley, an Oklahoma native setting up a business in West Virginia, disclosed that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals had arranged and paid for her travel to the commonwealth, although she denied being an active member of any animal rights groups.

Hedlund, the bill's sponsor, opened the hearing by reassuring circusgoers that he did not intend to bar circuses from the state.

"If families understood what went on behind the scenes, there would be a different perspective about how animals are taught to do these kinds of tricks," he said. He also half-jokingly apologized to Wallace, who the News Service reported earlier had received more than 800 e-mails on the elephant issue.

Wallace and Rep. Ellen Story, D-Amherst, both questioned the volume and similarity of e-mails they received in opposition to the bill. Story prodded the Ringling executives until they admitted drafting the language of the e-mails, which they then sent to supporters.

Supporters and opponents also sparred over the practice of chaining elephants, animals that by nature rove long distances each day.

"Chaining severely restricts an elephant's fundamental movements such as walking and lying down," said Tracy Silverman, general counsel for the Washington D.C.-based Animal Welfare Institute. "The reality is that elephants in circuses and traveling shows are shackled [for most of the day]."

Ringling officials said chaining was most often done to ensure that all animals were fed appropriately.

"Tethering ensures that elephants respect each other's physical space," Reed said. "Dominant animals do take food from less dominant animals."

When one woman from Western Massachusetts recited a prayer and then attempted to play a violent image of an elephant being beaten in Texas on her PDA, committee members objected, with Joyce telling her to submit it separately as evidence.

Zoos, Big E Exempt

Versions of the elephant bill have come up in previous sessions. Rep. William "Smitty" Pignatelli, D-Lenox, who has been on the committee for those debates, questioned the wisdom of language in the current version that would exempt certain venues from the bull hook ban. The bill would not apply to "an institution accredited by the American Zoo and Aquarium Association, the Southwick's Zoo, the Forest Park Zoo (in Springfield), and the Big E in West Springfield."

The bill explicitly bans traveling shows from using, or even possessing, "any implement on an elephant that may reasonably result in harm to the elephant including, but not limited to, the damage, scarring or breakage of an elephant's skin." The bill would also ban chaining, except when there is a medical need. Violations would result in a $5,000 fine, a year in prison or both.