Tourists abroad risking life and limb.

We seem to lose all common sense and concern for our own health and safety

With mass tourism spreading round the world it doesn’t take long for local entrepreneurs to realise the strong lure of displaying local wildlife to tourists in unregulated collections, animal rides and shows, particularly when it concerns young animals or up close encounters. And they are quick to entertain the hordes and grab the foreign exchange.

As tourists abroad we seem unable to stop ourselves from taking part in these pursuits just to while away a few hours. Often visits to these places are part of excursions and day trips advertised on boards outside every tourist information stand.  Many of those who book these trips see no wrong in it, and become fed up with ‘do-gooders’ or ‘animal lovers’ telling them it is wrong.

We seem to lose all common sense and concern for our own health and safety and visit certain attractions which we would never consider supporting at home, usually as part of our holiday itinerary, such as riding elephants, posing with baby monkeys, tigers or snakes or watching crocodile wrestling, performing bears and elephants, cock-fighting and bull-fighting, the list is endless.

Asian elephants forced to perform for tourists

The promise of close contact with animals entices us and for some absurd reason we are eager to accept assurances from total strangers in charge, or tour guides, that the baby monkey or tiger cub we are about to hold, the pen we are about to walk into containing adult tigers, lions or leopards or the animal we are about to ride on are perfectly safe to be in close contact with and have our photograph taken with. We have no idea of the unpredictability or danger posed by ‘tame’ or semi-tame wild animals.

We also, for some inexplicable reason,  cannot associate the same cruelty and suffering involved, with that of circus animals which most people are supposedly against.   Globally, incalculable numbers are trained by methods which normally involve fear and pain and they face torment and neglect living in unnatural environments. Trainers force them to do demeaning and unnatural tricks and although there is plenty of advice and publicity available on the issues, most tourists abroad lap it up, particularly the burgeoning tourist trade from countries which see little value in animal rights.

No consideration is given to what kind of life the animals experience and what happens to them once they outgrow their usefulness. The poor things are only brought into the world to make a lot of foreign currency for the owners, which is only made possible by the clueless tourists who support such ventures.

For me it is impossible to understand why watching some local idiot wrestling with a snake or a crocodile or a poor monkey riding a kids bicycle is a pleasurable experience. Honestly what do we get from experiencing these or riding on an elephant’s back for twenty minutes or so when the poor creature spends most of its life chained up.

Such behaviour is not just restricted to ‘exotic’ countries with different values, as such activities are common in the USA, Canada and Australia where you can pay to meet and stroke tigers at petting zoos or watch alligator wrestling. Tiger petting attractions are very popular throughout South East Asian countries such as Thailand where tour companies promote the experiences, such as Tripadvisor and ‘animal loving’ reviewers laughably give them the thumbs up.

When the animals are too old to perform or are no longer ‘cute’ and particularly if they rebel, the owners discard or kill them. Baby monkeys are taken from their mothers, attached to rope leashes and paraded around all day. Once their cuteness wanes with age and they become aggressive through frustration, they are either killed or discarded. They are rarely able to fend for themselves or safely join a troop.

History is littered with highly publicised tragic incidents of so-called rogue animals attacking, mauling or killing innocent tourists, but usually it is the tourist who is mainly culpable. Despite these regular incidents we never seem to learn.

Tourists have short memories and still put their lives at risk to go elephant trekking as it is a thing to do on their bucket list.

In 2000, at an elephant ‘show’ in Pattaya, Thailand a man and his two daughters were crushed by a frustrated elephant that ran amok into the seated audience. One of his daughters was tragically killed and after the incident the naive father criticised the lack of medical facilities at the park and lack of an ambulance. Attacks by exasperated and cruelly treated elephants in countries like Thailand occur every year and are widely publicised, but tourists have short memories and still put their lives at risk to go elephant trekking as it is a thing to do on the tick list.

In 2016, a Scottish tourist named Gareth Crowe was trampled and gored to death by an elephant in Koh Samui in front of his 16-year-old daughter having allegedly tormented the animal with a banana and when attacked by his handler wielding a speared hook, gored him as well.

No matter how well-trained and socialized with humans an animal is, we fail to understand that wild animals never lose their wild instincts and can rebel at any time when they become frustrated and their natural wild urges come to the surface.

The message is not getting across that posing with captive wild animals with no thought to how the poor creatures was obtained, housed and cared for, and ultimately disposed of is a crass behaviour just to get meaningless photograph posting on social media and forgotten in no time.

By attending these events you are not only playing a part in continuing the cruelty and suffering involved behind the scenes, but RISKING YOUR LIVES!

It is killing whatever term you choose to call it.

Our complex attitudes to killing animals

Deep down in our consciences those of us with any empathy to animals are obviously uncomfortable about the act of killing them which manifests itself in our confused use of expressions to describe it. Whether a professional or layman, we seem to have a subconscious hang-up about discussing or contemplating what we mostly view as a taboo subject. For those with little empathy and who enjoy killing animals for fun and entertainment there is no issue

If we kill a fellow human without justification, we call it murder, and it is viewed a heinous crime unless legitimised by war, when we tend to use the word kill. When we deliberately and brutally kill a large group of humans, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group, we use the terms genocide or massacre and when we legally terminate the life of a condemned person, we execute them. We almost exclusively reserve these words to describe human on human killing, but when it involves animals, for some inexplicable reason we refrain from using such terms as they appear to offend our sensibilities and prick our consciences if used in this context.

Instead we prefer to use more agreeable phraseology that we feel befits the occasion and the type of animal involved, such is our idiosyncratic approach to killing millions of them each day. In order to appease our sensibilities, we even manage to categorise certain animal groups as being more worthy of our compassion.

hunting, shooting, country pursuit

The act of euthanasia for companion animals has become almost a ritual”

The most popular generic term for the act of killing an animal is euthanasia, which derives from the Greek words Eu and thanotos meaning ‘well killing’ or ‘good killing’ and has been used since the 1600’s to describe mercy killing of both humans and animals. We tend to reserve its usage for companion animals, particularly dogs and cats, which we hold in more reverence because we view them as almost human family members and our friends.

The act of euthanasia for companion animals has become almost a ritual, carried out with extreme compassion, sensitivity and veneration as suits such a situation, and it is usually performed by a qualified veterinarian in calm circumstances by injection, and with a familiar face present, often in the owners’ home, and is as humane as possible, so different to the way we treat other animals in their final moment.

Some people though, still find this term too severe and so we use more assuaging phrases such as ‘putting to sleep’ or ‘putting out of its misery’, to make it appear less callous when we are discussing it, as though in some irrational way it makes it a more pleasant experience for both the animal and ourselves.

When it concerns farmed food animals our sympathies change, and we go out of our way to distance ourselves from any emotion or guilt. For a start we call them livestock instead of animals, live’ because we have to accept they are living creatures but alsostock’ because we need the assurance that they are also a commodity for us to utilise. We then employ the somewhat ruthless word of ‘slaughter’, the definition of which, in the context of humans, is brutal killing, but with animals just means killing for meat. Slaughter is of course an apt description as it is a rather brutal and ruthless death no matter how humanely done. We are also happy to use the same term for the place where the carnage takes place, so we call it a slaughterhouse in preference to a ‘euthanasia-house’ which we obviously find strangely unsettling because of its inference to pet animals.

We find using the word ‘harvesting’ more agreeable for the act of wholesale slaughter of animals.

When it involves wildlife our compassion unaccountably changes again, and we choose tocull them and the heartlessness of this term is borne out by the word’s definition which is ‘removing an inferior person or thing from a group’ and ‘something regarded as worthless, especially an unwanted or inferior animal removed from a herd’. Culling can involve just an individual, a certain species or millions of individuals.

Conservationists appear to find the word culling a little harsh in certain instances, so they find the term ‘harvesting’ more agreeable for the act of wholesale slaughter, usually with the tag that it is implemented in their long-term interest. But it doesn’t end there as different professions where killing animals is intrinsic also try to ease their sensibilities by using other phrases such as humane killing, hunting, management euthanasia and zoonasia.

We are psychologically uneasy about the killing of animals.

It is obvious that as a society we are uneasy with our various deeds of ending their lives and prefer to distance ourselves from any thoughts of their demise, but it doesn’t stop us from committing animal genocide the world over. The bottom line is that whichever term we choose to use they all mean the same thing – the intentional and premature ending of the life of a living creature.

As already mentioned, when it is time to put companion animals ‘to sleep‘ the procedure is treated with great compassion, sensitivity and veneration as it should be, but it does seem a pity that we cannot extend the same deference to all animals by at least giving them the courtesy of using the same terminology.

Related articles:

What is Zoonasia?

Big Game trophy hunting always in the headlines.

The Shooting of Harambe the gorilla