The Nastiest Show on Earth
Most circuses, including Ringling Bros. Greatest Show on Earth, claim that they treat elephants and all animals in the circus in a humane and loving way. On the Ringling Bros. website they explain the care of the animals as, “the animal care professionals at Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey® believe that a positive, healthy environment is the only acceptable and successful method of working with animals” (Ringling Bros. 2015). They claim the only way to get the animals to perform successfully is to allow them time spent with their mother and reward them with positive phrases as they train. “Trainers teach animals routines that showcase their physical abilities and beauty, as well as their distinctive behaviors. Our training methods are based on reinforcement in the form of food rewards and words of praise” (Ringling Bros. 2015). They are very clear when they explain that each of the animals in the circus are thoroughly cared for and not abused in any way. When the circus trainers teach they young calves the routines they are “tailored to each animal’s natural abilities and individual preferences which we observe during their playtime” (Ringling Bros. 2015). Basically, Ringling Bros. is claiming that each of the elephants routines are only enforcing their acts that they would normally perform in the wild as well.
If elephants are treated like family and only trained through humane tactics why do they not allow fans to watch the training process? This would surely be much more entertaining for viewers than watching elephants stand on one leg. There has to be something circuses are hiding from the public. Ringling Bros. makes a strong case that positive phrases and treats may successfully train some animals like dogs, or cats. Elephants on the other hand are wild animals that are meant to roam up to thirty miles a day and be close with their family of elephants. Some elephants that perform in the circus can weigh up to 7,000 pounds and usually tower over any trainer trying to dominate the animal. When circus handlers attempt to train animals of that immense size solely positive phrases and treats simply just do not cut it. Elephant trainers are constantly being accused of abusing the elephants by bounding their legs with chains and using bullhooks to get the elephants to cooperate. This makes more sense because to get the elephant to follow the routine they must be abused because of their immense size and nature. “The wild animals fare the worst, and elephants top the list in the inherent cruelty that circus animals experience, simply because their size makes transport and housing so confining and unnatural for them. Their training protocols are geared to ensure that the public will never see the underlying abuse, and therefore circus owners remain assured of their wide profit margin after each city stopover” (Humane Review 2012). It is inevitable for circuses to train elephants in harsh ways due to their size, this is the reason that elephants need to be kept out of shows.
What circus owners do not tell the public is how each individual elephant is “broken” in order to learn each routine. Trainers “positively” use abusive tactics in order to break the elephant. An animal activist group explains this process as, “All four of their legs are tied together so that all they can do for up to 23 hours a day for up to six months is stand on a concrete floor…this is emotionally and physically devastating to a young elephant” (Peta 2015). By tying the elephant’s legs together it is preventing the elephant’s natural desire to walk and roam. This is the opposite of the Ringling Bros. claim which states that their acts only enforce the elephants natural acts. Also, Ringling Bros. claims that elephants stay with their mothers for the first two years of their life to adjust to the world. Animal Rights activists prove that claim wrong when they expose the heart wrenching process that goes into the birth of a elephant calf. They explain, “the very young babies taken from their mothers early so that they can learn the fear of humans and the pain that human handlers can inflict at a very early age, while our species is still able to dominate them” (Humane Review 2012). This is the only way that the circus trainers can implement dominance over the young elephants, and maintain it throughout their lives.
If Ringling Bros. along with any other circus used humane tactics to train these wild gigantic animals they would feel no need to hide the training process from the public. They claim they use positivity to train and domesticate the animals simply for the profit the circus shows bring in. When in reality elephants are being tortured on a daily basis to perform unnatural acts. We are feeding into it by attending and giving our money to circuses and zoos, this is why the public needs to be aware of the brutality that goes on behind the scenes so that elephants can be free to roam in the wild at last.
Works Cited
Mals Fare Circus Elephants Endure Much Abuse Learning “Entertain. “The Circus — A Nightmare for Elephants.” The Circus – A Nightmare For Animals (2012): 1-4. Humane Review. 2012. Web. 28 Mar. 2015.
“Animal Care FAQ.” Animal Care FAQ. N.p., 2015. Web. 29 Mar. 2015.
Sheridan, Judy L. “Ringmaster Defends Elephant Care: Kelly Miller Circus Comes to Aledo.” Weatherford Democrat. N.p., 16 Mar. 2015. Web. 28 Mar. 2015.
The Gamer 2.0
SleepyCat
Coffee Lover 03
doglover7025
Snowman10
excellentstudent27
Gymrat
hockeyfan
holistic25
ilovebeesss
ilovemydog
The Gamer
Naturechild101
BreakingBad45
ravensfan8
temporal111
thatpersonoverthere
toetio
username1132005
Calm&Patient
webbwrestler135
Counterintuitive Spring 2024 
feedback requested.
Initial feedback provided. —DSH
I will return at your request with additional notes after your classmates have a chance to post their observations, skyblue. —DSH
LikeLike
You are making the best of a hard job, skyblue. Nobody wants to think ill of the circus, and it’s embarrassing to think we’ve been contributing to routine mistreatment by attending an entertainment. The circus has the power in this argument, while the underfunded agitators are seen as killjoys out to ruin one more thing we like about life: rich furs, hearty steaks, wholesome family entertainment.
In absence of hard proof, you’re stuck having to make claims of the “it simply must be” type. “They’re too big to persuade,” you have to claim; “therefore someone must be forcing them.” You’ve done a good job of preparing readers to hear your sources speak. In the order in which you deliver your claims and support, the sources reinforce your claims after you’ve made them, which is as it should be.
Please try to find a circus, aquatic entertainment center, or zoo spokesperson declining to open the training to the public. The language used in explaining why outsiders can’t witness the training might speak volumes.
LikeLike
You use the “Humane Review” as a source when finding evidence against the treatment of elephants in the Ringling Bros. Circus. However, how is one able to trust the judgement of them and their claims if in the essay you say that people are not allowed to watch the trainers train the animals? How would the Humane Review know how Ringling Bros. trains the animals if they aren’t allowed to watch their training methods? In this scenario, it seems like Ringling Bros. is the only source we can truly trust seeing as how they are around the animals they train daily. Of course they could be hiding something. But without a proper source that has personally witnessed these animals being trained we are only left to go along with the claims of the people who work with the animals. I recommend, if it is possible, finding personal accounts from former Ringling Bros. employees in order to properly dig up evidence against their treatment of elephants and other circus animals. They are no longer working with Ringling Bros. Circus, they have no reason to continue to cover up for them.
LikeLike
The title of your essay is, “The Nastiest Show on Earth”. I think having more material about why Ringling Bros. declines opening the training environment to the public would be very interesting and add value to your rebuttal..
LikeLike
Try and find claims about the Ringling Bros. that refute their claims about how the elephants are trained at their circus. You have evidence from other circuses and how elephants are trained there but not what actually goes on at Ringling Bros. only what they are saying. If you can find evidence against them your argument would be stronger.
LikeLike
In this post there are many claims on the trainers and the way they “supposedly” train the elephants with no evidence but hear/say to back it up. You use information from an article stating how the animal is abused mostly from being confined in small spaces when traveling because of their extremely long size making it unnatural. Although this may be true is does not support the original claim that the elephants are trained incorrectly. Maybe instead of using Ringling Bros. as a source(because they arent going to criticize themselves) you can find other articles that actually go against them, maybe another circus that has previously gotten in trouble or just a large scandal that has happened in the past, I think it could help!
LikeLike
SkyBlue does well to refute the claims made by the Ringling Bros. He does this mainly through reasoning. He says pretty early in his essay that he is unable to have any true evidence because Ringling Bros. doesn’t release their training methods. Because of this, SkyBlue must use fact-based reasoning. for example, he taks the fact that elephants cannot be trained through positive remarks and treats like a dog can, and uses it to support the reasoning that because they cant be trained positively like a dog, they must be using harsh and cruel methods to train them. He refutes many claims this way, using a fact to support a reasoning. He must use this method because, as I said, there is no evidence that Ringling Bros. are abusing their animals.
LikeLike
This article is based on both evidence and reasoning. At the introduction of the subject, the article mentions that many circuses and Ringling Bros claim that animals are fairly treated. The author used evidence from group of activists that made research on the life condition of circus animals, then refuted the claim “the animal care professionals at Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey® believe that a positive, healthy environment is the only acceptable and successful method of working with animals” made by Ringling Bos. Although the evidences were good to adress the general problem circus animals face, it doesn’t refute well the claim of Ringling Bros. The great reasoning used in the article explains how it is almost impossible to domesticate an elephant without mistreating them, but it doesn’t prove that it is definitely impossible. Ringling Bros might have methods that other companies don’t, so unless there was evidence that directly demonstrates the company maltreatment of elephants, Ringling Bros can always get out of this argument with a victory.
LikeLike
Skyblue’s refutations of Ringling Bros. claims depend on reasoning and not evidence. No evidence of this animal abuse is supported which makes the argument less believable. The allegation that Ringling Bros. is treating their animals poorly while training them is made believable in this argument through reasoning. The explanation of how it is not possible to train such a huge and wild animal only through nice positive training, helps the reasoning. Skyblue’s reasoning is more compelling because it strongly exerts the idea that Ringling Bros. are keeping this negative abusive training from us.
LikeLike
If you have the best recipe in town to make pizza, you just wouldn’t let someone go in the back and watch how you make each pie and with what ingredients, same goes for the circus. With Ringling Bros. their recipe is the training process and in return they make their profits. If they allow fans to see this proceeder then Ringling Bros. will be no different from any other circus. Now who knows if they really treat the animals with efficient love and care during this process, but the simple fact of them not letting fans see their training routine doesn’t mean there automatically abusing their animals it’s just a competitive business attitude.
LikeLike
The claims and refutations made are based heavily on reasoning. The problem with too much reasoning and too little evidence is that the story is beginning to sound like a radical take on what could be happening to the elephants, and not what is. While the Ringling Bos. could very well be abusing the elephants, the truth is that we can’t know or tell until there is solid evidence to support the claims. I will say that Barnum and Bailey saying that they are encouraging the natural behavior of the elephants is counterintuitive considering that they have to be trained to walk and do tricks. If that was natural behavior in the wild, they’d be out of business and people would watch them hop around in their natural habitat. If there is something fishy about what happens during training, we won’t know until they invite people in.
P.S. Maybe the training is trade secret, maybe elephants secretly like sardines, and thats how they’re motivated.
LikeLike
Skyblue’s takes claims that the Ringling Bros. corporation’s website. Which is helpful because the readers are less likely to misunderstand the information. The refutations to these claims involve both factual cited evidence, and persuasive reasoning. While the hard facts help to provide ‘ammo’ for a good rebuttal, the makes persuasive reasoning can make the piece for more personal for the readers and turn them in your favor.
LikeLike
The evidence is reasoning based. But that’s because it has to be. No company that large is going to admit they abuse animals. I just think there has to be better evidence than PETA and Humane Review. They just sound so bias at the core, and in fact PETA is one of those things that either you agree with, or hate. If there anything any authors say on the NYT editorials about this that aren’t so…fundamentally bias? Quotes from former employees? Evidence could be provided that the circus has to be guilty because they stopped having elephants as a part of their shows as of last month.
LikeLike
Not revealing something doesn’t necessarily mean that what’s behind the curtain is immoral or unjust. The Ringling Bros not showcasing their Elephant training is like the kid at a routine traffic stop refusing to disclose the contents of his car to a suspicious police officer, all-the-while there is nothing convicting in the car. The kid is just being a brat, or maybe there’s something is his car he doesn’t want the officer, or anyone else for that matter, to see. Everyone knows elephants are both docile and highly intelligent, it isn’t weird to be able to train them to perform actions for gratification, just as dogs and cats are trained.
LikeLike
This is a really hard topic. Finding evidence about the cruelty against animals from organizations, which say that their animals are well treated and the only animals that are out are the ones in healthy conditions, is extremely hard. Nonetheless, the reasoning gave by skyblue is pretty good. The fact that we dont get to see the training is really suspicious. In addition, is well stated that elephants are wild animals that stay together and also are the larger mammals. Therefore, is strong to think that cruelty has to be used in order to control the elephants. For instance, separate them from the mother elephant.
LikeLike