Even after seeing a video showing the cruel treatment of animals in circuses at the April 17 board of supervisors’ meeting, Hildy Angius responded by saying there are already anti-cruelty laws in place, but obviously those laws are not sufficient. The terrible treatment of animals in circuses can be easily researched and is well-documented. We used to believe that animals in circuses led acceptable lives, but now we know differently. Circuses are not conducive to the humane treatment of animals; having animals in circuses IS cruelty.
Angius talked about the health and safety of human constituents, which did not make sense since the subject was the welfare of “animals used for traveling commercial display or performances.” And wouldn’t the interests of humans be better served by not forcing wild animals into completely unnatural existences that cause extreme psychological and physical stress and could eventually lead them to snap, thereby endangering the public, which has already happened?
Angius said that such a decision (to stop cruelty) could come back to haunt us. How a decision to choose common-sense and compassion could be so misconstrued is hard to comprehend. On the contrary, it is something the community can take great pride in. Then, incredibly, Angius spoke of the proposal as being part of a geopolitical movement, whatever that means. It is actually about everyday people giving a voice to animals to protect them from unnecessary suffering. A no-brainer.
Buster Johnson voted against the proposal, saying he didn’t know if they had the authority to pass such an ordinance, but it seemed like he really just passed the buck. The citizens who spoke at the meeting very clearly stated that there are numerous counties, cities and even countries where such ordinances have already been implemented. At least, it is a good idea to look into the matter further.
Just because animals do not vote, does not mean they should be exempt from any kind of consideration. They are also part of society, and societies, as well as individuals, can be judged by the way they treat animals – animals who deserve to live in peace, as naturally as possible, free from harm and exploitation. A big thank you to Supervisors Moss, Bishop and Watson who humanely and sensibly voted to move forward with the matter.
More like this story
- Letter | Danette Zachary: Council’s cowardice in the face of animal abuse allows cruelty
- Supervisors ask county attorney to look into ban on shows with exotic animals
- Letter | Greg Henderson: When Does ‘Animal Abuse’ End?
- City Council opposes mistreatment of animals, but doesn’t ban circuses
- State senate panel votes for harsher punishments in animal cruelty cases