It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pat Derby, crusader for the rights of exotic and performing animals

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 02:01 AM
link   
I just finished the autobiography of Pat Derby, The Lady and Her Tiger. I thought it was going to be a cute, fluffy book about animals. Although there are some cute stories, most of the animals in the entertainment industry at the time of the book are not treated with respect.
Pat Derby went on to create PAWS, Performing Animals Welfare Society. Whenever I see animals in a movie, I wait for the ending credits to see if they made sure not to mistreat them.
Things have probably come along way since 1976, when the book was published but it is definitely an eye opener.
Wild animals should be left in the wild and rescued animals should always be treated with respect. It is a sad day when someone thinks they can just take a poached animal and try to raise it, they almost always get overwhelmed by the time, energy and responsibility it takes to keep the animal happy and healthy.
Anyway just felt like sharing. Link about Pat Derby
en.wikipedia.org...




edit on 12-10-2015 by peppycat because: added video



edit on 12-10-2015 by peppycat because: added video

edit on 12-10-2015 by peppycat because: added video




posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 02:55 AM
link   
a reply to: peppycat

Things have come on a bit since the 1970s, but things are less than rosy for some performing animals. The things that happened to some of the animals from The Lord Of The Rings films do not bare thinking about.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 03:12 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit ugh... I knew there was a reason I didn't like those movies
it must be the horses, but I'm afraid to look into it and take your word for it.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 04:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: peppycat

Things have come on a bit since the 1970s, but things are less than rosy for some performing animals. The things that happened to some of the animals from The Lord Of The Rings films do not bare thinking about.



Like what TB?
I would have thought in a huge production like that there would would be animal welfare representatives on the set throughout.

Maybe I'm naive.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 04:18 AM
link   
a reply to: peppycat

The most readily documented incidents actually occurred as part of the Hobbit cycle of movies, although incidents have been hinted at, from the Fellowship of The Ring onward.

Allegedly, animals have drowned during periods where there was no location filming, including pigs, chickens and other farmyard animals, twenty seven of them. This was as a result of those animals not being monitored during off periods, and being free to exploit weaknesses in the perimeter of their enclosures. Wranglers returned to the area to discover the deaths. Of course, those animals should have been under some sort of watch, even if they were not being used on set at the time.

The actual LoTR films had horse injuries, some light, others serious, and at least one horse had to be put down, so bad was the injury they received. However, there was markedly less attention being paid during the filming of the Fellowship of The Ring, through to Return of The King, by outsiders as to the welfare of animals on set, and during down time.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 04:25 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit yeah, I went ahead and looked it up even though I didn't want to and found this
www.huffingtonpost.com... it is really sickening that even though it was on off times that the animals died, they could have prevented this. Pat Derby talks about how alot of wranglers used abusive techniques back in the past and I feel that, really, it is the wranglers responsibility to see to the care of animals on and off filming.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 04:41 AM
link   
a reply to: peppycat


As with many elephants in captivity, Delhi’s feet began to deteriorate and in April, 2002, a Hawthorn handler soaked her feet in full-strength formaldehyde causing severe chemical burns. After 20 months of continued inadequate care, the USDA exercised emergency intervention, confiscated Delhi and turned her over to The Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee on November 23, 2003. Delhi became the first captive elephant in American history to be seized from her owner for inhumane treatment, and her condition lead to a landmark case of federal prosecution and the eventual release of the rest of her herd three years later.
Sanctuary

When you begin to look and research how performing animals are treated it really can sicken you...

You got me to thinking about that movie black fish or black fin or something about the Orcas in captivity with Sea World. I'll have to go find that show again...Think it was a nat geo maybe...



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 04:47 AM
link   
a reply to: stargatetravels perhaps the fact that it was such a huge production, is the reason for carelessness. As TrueBrit pointed out it was the Hobbit and here is link to proof.
www.huffingtonpost.com... I do take TrueBrit's word about there also being injuries on TLOTR set too.
If it is a smaller production, they could most likely better focus care on the animals.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 04:56 AM
link   
a reply to: TNMockingbird oh my gosh! Sweet Delhi has put a sweet tenderness in my heart, thank you for that link. I'm so glad Delhi finally found good and loving care in her later years.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 06:36 AM
link   
a reply to: stargatetravels

You are absolutely right. There are bodies and entities who make it their business to monitor the well being of animals on movie sets. The American Humane Association is one of these, and the most well known.

However, as the link I am about to provide makes clear, that organisation is not as stringent as folk might assume, when it comes to issues of animal welfare in movie making, television program filming, and the like.

www.hollywoodreporter.com...

I think it is well worth remembering therefore, that just because a film, television show, or even an advertisement might get the "no animals were harmed" rating, does not mean that animals have not been harmed during its creation.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 07:10 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Wow that's awful, I couldn't even read it all.
Thanks for the info.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 07:36 AM
link   
a reply to: stargatetravels

I would advise reading the entire article. I know it makes for some deeply upsetting reading, especially for anyone who particularly loves the natural world, and the plethora of wonderful animals on this planet. But it is important to know the details and the conclusions that this article comes to.

In the event that you simply cannot stomach the whole read, the big take away line here, is that the AHA is funded by the industry it regulates, making for an overly cosy, and not at all proper level of stringency when it comes to the protection of animals in film. These failures have occurred by way of inconsistent reporting of incidents and their seriousness, and odd loopholes being used to gloss over serious failings, as in the case of the Hobbit incidents, which were explained away and glossed over because they occurred off set, during a period where no filming was taking place. This means nothing of course, because the studio/producers/etc were still in notional control of the animals at the time, and the entire period for which those animals were contractually in their care should be taken into account when deciding culpability, and indeed whether the film receives its AHA clearance or not.

Suffice to say, that the situation for animals in Hollywood productions is NOT rosy in all circumstances, even when the film you watch has accreditation which might have the viewer, quite reasonably believe, that the company making the film has cared very well for any animals it has hired to take part in the creation of that movie.


edit on 12-10-2015 by TrueBrit because: Grammatical error corrected. Auto flagellation will commence shortly.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Anaimal abuse will continue as long as they captive breed for zoos and circuses and the legal exotic pet trade is allowed to flourish. The illegal trade, too. People value ivory, rhino horn and bear gall bladders, Americans want to visit the zoo and have a long snake or big bird.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr yes, this is sadly true. The animals in zoos and circuses do not have to be abused though. Pat Derby used what I believe she called affection techniques to get her animals to perform. She describes in the book one example of a bear that after being punched in the nose several times, after the final punch he stopped performing. She took the bear in and he was so shy and afraid of humans for the longest time. With her affection training the bear went on to gently take cookies out of children mouths. The bear didn't need to be punched, he needed to be seen for the gentle giant he was. This is not to say that bears aren't dangerous, they need the proper respect of any wild animal, but if they are for whatever reason in captivity they shouldn't be abused in order to perform.



posted on Oct, 13 2015 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: peppycat


The animals in zoos and circuses do not have to be abused though.

Actually, imagine being placed in a cage for a crime you didn't commit, without knowing how long you will be there, day after day, for the rest of your life?




top topics



 
6

log in

join