Bears Playing Hockey: How Are They Doing It?

[Mk]

How are these bears playing hockey?

 

[mgb_phys]

Since it's a Russian circus I assume lots of training involving only kindness and carefully monitored by animals safety authorities - no cruelty at all

 

[Tobias Funke]

Since it's a Russian circus I assume lots of training involving only kindness and carefully monitored by animals safety authorities - no cruelty at all

As opposed to any other circus where the animals are willing participants with great pay and benefits?

 

[Equate]

The goalies are still hibernating!

 

[mgb_phys]

The goalies are still hibernating!

One of them has been signed by the canucks.

 

[Phrak]

I don't believe it. The ice skates give it away. Bear feet are too wide for those skates. Those are orangatangs in skillfully crafted bear suits.

 

[DaveC426913]

As opposed to any other circus where the animals are willing participants with great pay and benefits?

I'm not sure what you're suggesting. Are you suggesting that all animals in captivity, in principle, are slaves?

I think that may be a misconception.

Animals that are well-fed and cared-for can to be quite happy. They thrive on routine, good food and attention.

I'm not suggesting all animals in captivity are happy, what I'm suggesting is that captivity in-and-of-itself is not the determining factor. Instead, well-cared-for animals tend to be happy, poorly-treated animals tend to unhappy.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I'm not sure what you're suggesting. Are you suggesting that all animals in captivity, in principle, are slaves?

I think that may be a misconception.

Animals that are well-fed and cared-for can to be quite happy. They thrive on routine, good food and attention.

I'm not suggesting all animals in captivity are happy, what I'm suggesting is that captivity in-and-of-itself is not the determining factor. Instead, well-cared-for animals tend to be happy, poorly-treated animals tend to unhappy.

You sound like a Talosian.

 

[DaveC426913]

You sound like a Talosian.

I pulse my temples in your general direction.

 

[Tobias Funke]

I'm not sure what you're suggesting. Are you suggesting that all animals in captivity, in principle, are slaves?

No, but not all animals in captivity are in circuses either. Circus animals are basically slaves.

 

[Mech_Engineer]

I'm not sure I'm seeing what needs to be debunked in this video... they're just trained animals.

 

[DaveC426913]

No, but not all animals in captivity are in circuses either. Circus animals are basically slaves.

How do you know? Have you asked them? Do you think they are entitled to wages?

Not all animals who work for a living would choose to be set free instead. Regular food and a caring owner can have that effect.

I think you are in danger of anthropomorphizing them - thinking that they're being kept from realizing their dreams and making their own mark on the world.

 

[Tobias Funke]

How do you know? Have you asked them? Do you think they are entitled to wages?

Not all animals who work for a living would choose to be set free instead. Regular food and a caring owner can have that effect.

I think you are in danger of anthropomorphizing them - thinking that they're being kept from realizing their dreams and making their own mark on the world.

I think you're in danger of thinking too deeply about my original remark. Many* circus animals are mistreated, here and in Russia. Isn't this common knowledge?

*I'd say most, but I haven't done undercover investigations. I do know how humans with their livelihoods at stake act though, and that means it's not looking good for the animals.

 

[Mech_Engineer]

I ask again:

Why is this in the SKEPTICISM & DEBUNKING forum?

 

[Borg]

The fight at the end was a nice touch. Just like real hockey!

 

[Phrak]

I think the slavery issue is easily decided. Open the cage door. If they leave and don't come back they are Cubans--I mean slaves.

 

[DaveC426913]

I think you're in danger of thinking too deeply about my original remark. Many* circus animals are mistreated, here and in Russia. Isn't this common knowledge?

It is well-known yes. Even here.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I ask again:

Why is this in the SKEPTICISM & DEBUNKING forum?

Not everything in here is debunkable or inexplicable. In this case, it appeears to be a case of trained animals, and not people in bear suits who are pretending to be real bears, or cgi.

 

[dreiter]

I hope no one here is seriously advocating for the continued use of animals in circus and performance acts? This recent bear hockey video is just another example of humans abusing animals for so they can have their 'fun' day at the circus...

 

[DaveC426913]

I hope no one here is seriously advocating for the continued use of animals in circus and performance acts? This recent bear hockey video is just another example of humans abusing animals for so they can have their 'fun' day at the circus...

How do you know they're being abused?

 

[dreiter]

How do you know they aren't?

And you are ignoring the fact that many (if not most) circus animals are abused, and that reason alone is enough to banish the practice...

 

[DaveC426913]

How do you know they aren't?

And you are ignoring the fact that many (if not most) circus animals are abused, and that reason alone is enough to banish the practice...

Abuse happens in orphanages too. Do we shut down all organisations where abuse occurs?

The criminals are the people, not the organisations.

 

[dreiter]

Orphans are considered people, while animals are considered property. This is why abuses occur so often, and are dealt with so rarely.

The bigger argument is that orphanages are necessary and serve a helpful purpose, while circus animals are entirely for human entertainment.

So are orphanages worth the abuse risk? Yes. Are circus animal shows? No. This is simply a question of the greater good...

 

[DaveC426913]

Are circus animal shows [worth the abuse risk]? No.

It is a subjective answer. You can only answer it for yourself.

 

[dreiter]

I feel like we are at risk of having the thread locked down, but I feel the need to respond still. :\

I agree with your statement, but I don't see how there can be any other answer than no. You believe that the suffering and abuse of thousands of animals is worth having a few laughs at their expense when you take your family to the circus? You enjoy your circus performances when you know that you are contributing to that kind of suffering?

 

[DaveC426913]

I feel like we are at risk of having the thread locked down, but I feel the need to respond still. :\

I agree with your statement, but I don't see how there can be any other answer than no. You believe that the suffering and abuse of thousands of animals is worth having a few laughs at their expense when you take your family to the circus? You enjoy your circus performances when you know that you are contributing to that kind of suffering?

Appeal to emotion may work for Palin's worshippers but you'll have to do better than that here.

...the suffering and abuse of thousands of animals is worth having a few laughs at their expense...

1] It is not a given that it occurs in the majority of circuses, certainly not a given that it is occurring any the circus I might attend.
2] "A few laughs" is deliberately diminufying the experience.
3] It is only at their expense if they are being abused. Which you haven't shown.

You enjoy your circus performances when you know that you are contributing to that kind of suffering?

You have not demonstrated that I am contributing to that kind of suffering.


I do not deny that abuse is something to be targeted. I just do not agree that a unilateral ban is the answer to anything.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Since the discussion has taken a definitive turn, I am moving this to GD.

 

[dreiter]

You are ignoring the main issue, which is that abuses occur (and yes, they often occur, whether you want to believe that or not). Going to see an animal act at a circus is funding that style of 'entertainment'. The 'non-abusive' circus you are going to will have better numbers to show off, which will be a sign for other circuses. "Hey, they have animal acts that sell well and make money, so we should to!" Then other circuses add more animal acts, which inherently increases the amount of animal suffering, simply because not all of those circuses are kind to their animals.

Also, another point. Do you believe it is right to keep animals in small cages for their entire lives? Most circus animals live in spaces less than a dozen square meters. In the case of bears, since their natural roaming environment is hundreds of kilometers, do you think this is a good thing?


Some Links:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17169-circus-captivity-is-beastly-for-wild-animals.html"

http://www.hsus.org/wildlife/issues_facing_wildlife/circuses/"

http://www.animalcircuses.com/experts.aspx"


Some notes:
"In testimony in U.S. District Court in 2009, Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus CEO Kenneth Feld acknowledged that circus elephants are struck behind the ears, under the chin and on their legs with metal tipped prods, called bull hooks. Feld stated that these practices are necessary to protect circus workers. Feld also acknowledged that an elephant trainer was reprimanded for using an electric shock device, known as a hot shot or electric prod, on an elephant, which Feld also stated was appropriate practice. Feld denied that any of these practices harm elephants.[24]

In 1998 in the UK, a parliamentary working group chaired by MP Roger Gale studied living conditions and treatment of animals in UK circuses. All members of this group agreed that a change in the law was needed to protect circus animals. Mr Gale told the BBC, "It's undignified and the conditions under which they are kept are woefully inadequate - the cages are too small, the environments they live in are not suitable and many of us believe the time has come for that practice to end." The group reported concerns about boredom and stress, and noted that an independent study by a member of the Wildlife Conservation Research Unit at Oxford University "found no evidence that circuses contribute to education or conservation."

Sweden, Austria, Costa Rica, India, Finland, Singapore, Switzerland, and Denmark have already restricted the use of animals in entertainment. In response to a growing popular concern about the use of animals in entertainment, animal-free circuses are becoming more common around the world.[27] Israel has banned any animal from performing in any circus. In 2009, Bolivia passed legislation banning the use of any animals, wild or domestic, in circuses. The law states that circuses "constitute an act of cruelty."[28]"

 

[Galteeth]

it's real

http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/05/if-bears-play-it-how-hard-can-hockey-be/

 

[Sorry!]

You are ignoring the main issue, which is that abuses occur (and yes, they often occur, whether you want to believe that or not). Going to see an animal act at a circus is funding that style of 'entertainment'. The 'non-abusive' circus you are going to will have better numbers to show off, which will be a sign for other circuses. "Hey, they have animal acts that sell well and make money, so we should to!" Then other circuses add more animal acts, which inherently increases the amount of animal suffering, simply because not all of those circuses are kind to their animals.

Also, another point. Do you believe it is right to keep animals in small cages for their entire lives? Most circus animals live in spaces less than a dozen square meters. In the case of bears, since their natural roaming environment is hundreds of kilometers, do you think this is a good thing?

You seem to have changed your point of view in this post. Dave was not saying at all that what these animals are forced to do is not viewed as cruel. He was referring to you posting that these animals in particular are abused which you have NO evidence for only your speculations and opinions. Really speculations and opinions count for nothing. Not all animals are trained through abuse and this may be a case where that's true.

Normally you can tell the difference between animals trained through abuse from animals trained through treats etc. The trainer (guy who is the ref) is constantly giving the bears treats... what does that tell about the situation? If you watch for instance Lions in the circus the trainer has a whip and the Lion is EXTREMELY aggressive and aggravated but is scared of the owner for the most part while he has the whip. What does this tell about the training of the Lion?

So you posted your opinion dave pointed out how you are wrong to make such speculations and you changed your opinion to it's 'cruel' to have animals in a circus... Sure part of the cruelty may have to do with abuses on the animals but for the most part it's because these countries view the animals as wild animals which should not be kept as pets for entertainment. Even if the circus trainer allowed the bears to live in a huge enclosure and trained them through the use of treats for a show they would still say it is cruel because it is against the animals nature. This does NOT indicate that any abuse to the animal has taken place. (mental or physical)

 

[dreiter]

I don't really see where you are making a point.

1. Circus abuses often occur.
2. Going to one animal show (humane or not) will economically motivate the creation of more shows, which will lead to more abuses, because not all of those new shows will have 'humane' trainers.
3. Therefore going to 'humane' circuses still supports abuse of animals.

Let me know if there is more elaboration that needs to be done here...

 

[Sorry!]

This recent bear hockey video is just another example of humans abusing animals for so they can have their 'fun' day at the circus...

Whatever, your original point had nothing to do with 'endorsing other abuses on animals by attending circuses that use them. Your point was quite clearly about the abuses by humans on the bears so they 'can have their fun day at the circus'. Regardless, I see how you are going to try to 'win' your point by utilizing multiple fallacies for various reasons so it's cool man. You are right.

 

[dreiter]

Bears aren't built to play hockey. It obviously stresses them.

If you actually have an argument against my previously stated comments, then go for it. However I think it's fine to leave the trivial sarcasm at home...

 

[Sorry!]

Bears aren't built to play hockey. It obviously stresses them.

If you actually have an argument against my previously stated comments, then go for it. However I think it's fine to leave the trivial sarcasm at home...

Sarcasm? I wasn't being sarcastic in my post at all. I'm glad you know what obviously 'stresses' a bear. Can you come to my place and let me know why my pet snake hasn't eaten for the last 2 weeks? I'd appreciate that, thanks. (Oh by the way, this is what is known as 'sarcasm' if hadn't the slightest clue as to what the word implied.)

 

[Galteeth]

Bears aren't built to play hockey. It obviously stresses them.

If you actually have an argument against my previously stated comments, then go for it. However I think it's fine to leave the trivial sarcasm at home...

Same goes for homo sapiens.