Complaint Seeking Action Against Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey® for Deceptive Advertising

Ringling’s False Statement to the Public:

"We have always met standards set up by the U.S. Department of Agriculture”
October 21, 2002
WEWS-ABC News Channel 5
(Cleveland-Akron-Canton, Ohio)

Federal Trade Commission
Consumer Response Center
600 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, DC 20580

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc.
Debbie Leahy, Director, Captive Exotic Animal Department
501 Front St.
Norfolk, VA 23510
Tel.: 757-622-7382
Fax: 757-622-0457

Nature of the Complaint
On October 2, 2002, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) submitted a Federal Trade Commission complaint regarding the deceptive advertising campaign by Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey® claiming, “All our newborns come with a lifetime guarantee.” We cited in that submission repeated, documented incidents of abuse to elephants and elephant deaths at Ringling. This case is still pending; however, recent official statements made by Ringling representatives to the media, prior to performances in Ohio, have compounded the problem. Ringling officials issued comments purporting that Ringling has “… always met standards set up by the USDA.” We feel it is necessary to alert the FTC to these false statements and file a supplementary complaint as evidence of Ringling’s deliberate and relentless campaign of misinformation. Ringling has also published deceptive statements in its public information package (“Feld Entertainment: Standards and Guidelines for Animal Care and Management”), which is distributed to media representatives and concerned consumers. We feel that the cumulative deceptive advertisements and misleading public relations campaign by Ringling constitutes what the FTC classifies as a “pattern of deception.”

Ringling’s Deceptive Media Statements

“In a statement released to News Channel Five, circus officials say they have always met standards set up by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.”

WEWS-ABC (Cleveland-Akron-Canton, Ohio)
News Channel 5
October 21, 2002

“Ringling Brothers told Action News they comply with all federal, state and local regulations when it comes to the animals.”

WOIO-CBS (Cleveland-Akron-Canton, Ohio)
Action News at 6
October 21, 2002

Below, we will cite noncompliant items by Ringling with the minimum standards of care established in the federal Animal Welfare Act as identified on USDA inspection reports. This extensive list testifies to Ringling’s blatant disregard of Federal regulations and disputes Ringling’s claim that it has “always” complied with USDA standards.

ANIMAL WELFARE ACT NONCOMPLIANT ITEMS BY RINGLING IN THE PAST 10 YEARS

February 21, 2002: The USDA cited Ringling for failure to dispose of expired medication, for improper feeding, and for poor sanitation.

August 20, 2001: The USDA cited Ringling for failure to provide access for inspection of animals, records, and property at its retirement center.

May 3, 2001: The USDA cited Ringling for improper food storage.

February 20, 2001: The USDA cited Ringling for improper food storage.

September 7, 2000: The USDA cited Ringling for failure to provide adequate veterinary care. The inspector wrote, “There is no documentation maintained on elephants that have minor lesions, scars, or abrasions. … Records of medical treatment were not available on the camel that recently had both rear feet caught in a train track.”

Ringling was also cited for storing the animals’ food near toxic substances and failure to maintain transport enclosures that could not be properly cleaned and sanitized.

September 6, 2000: The USDA cited Ringling for failure to provide veterinary care to an elephant named Tillie who has been diagnosed with tuberculosis. Tillie, who is owned by Patricia Zerbini, is under the care of Ringling’s Williston facility and commingled with other elephants, which puts them at risk for infection or reinfection.

July 12, 2000: The USDA cited Ringling for failure to provide adequate care in transit, failure to provide drinking water, and failure to maintain transport enclosures. The inspector wrote, “[A]nimals must be visually observed at least every four hours. … Tiger transport vehicle is inaccessible as long as train is in motion. … [I]t is not clear if the opportunity to water the tigers every 12 hours is available. … Tiger transport design has allowed excessively high temperatures during routine transport. … Vent failure pushed these temperatures to a point of immediate danger to the animals.”

July 5, 2000: The USDA cited Ringling for failure to maintain the structural strength of its tiger enclosures. Two tigers had injured themselves attempting to escape cages in which an excessive rise in temperature occurred when faulty vent doors blew shut. One tiger tore at the cage, tearing the track from the door and breaking off a tooth. A tiger in another enclosure suffered an injury above the eye caused by the same faulty vent-door problem.

June 16, 2000: USDA spokesperson Jim Rogers told the Austin American-Statesman that the agency has two investigations pending against Ringling for possible AWA violations.

February 22, 2000: Ringling was cited for failure to maintain a transport-shift cage for the tigers because it had a hole in the floor. The USDA also cited Ringling for failure to provide minimum space for the dogs and failure to identify dogs and cats with USDA tags.

November 9, 1999: The USDA cited Ringling (for the second time) for tiger cages in need of repair. The inspector noted a potential noncompliant item, that an elephant with chronic arthritis was continuously housed on concrete instead of a more comfortable surface such as rubber for large hoofed animals.

May 27, 1999: The USDA cited Ringling for tiger cages in need of repair and locking mechanisms, as well as for failure to dispose of medications that had expired as far back as February 1996.

May 11, 1999: In a letter to Ringling, USDA Deputy Administrator Ron DeHaven wrote, “We have completed our review of the lesions observed on two juvenile elephants, Doc and Angelica, during the inspection of the Center for Elephant Conservation in Polk City, Fla., on February 9, 1999. ... [W]e find that the handling of these two elephants was not in compliance with the Animal Welfare Act regulations. ... We believe there is sufficient evidence to confirm the handling of these animals caused unnecessary trauma, behavioral stress, physical harm, and discomfort to these two elephants.”

February 25, 1999: According to an internal USDA memo written by an inspector detailing injuries found on two baby elephants during a February 9, 1999, inspection, Ringling officials failed to cooperate with authorities and indicated that they expected special treatment in the form of advance notice of USDA inspections, even though inspections are supposed to be unannounced. The report stated, “[Ringling veterinarian] Dr. Lindsay was very upset and asked repeatedly why we could not be more collegial and call him before we came. I explained to him that all our inspections are unannounced. ... All Ringling personnel were very reluctant to let us take pictures [of the calves’ rope lesions].”

February 9, 1999: A USDA report indicated wounds on the baby elephants’ legs from separating them from their mothers. The report stated, “[T]here were large visible lesions on the rear legs of both Doc and Angelica (baby elephants). When questioned as to the cause of these lesions, it was stated by Mr. Jim Williams and Mr. Gary Jacobson that ‘these scars were caused by rope burns, resulting from the separation process from the mothers on January 6, 1999.’ Angelica’s lesion appeared as a pink linear scar, approximately 6” long and 1” wide on the right rear leg. The left rear leg also had a scar directly below the cloth leg tie. Both lesions appeared to have been treated with an iodine-based ointment. Angelica also had two linear healing scars on the back of the right hind leg. Doc had a pink scar on the right rear mid-leg area.” (Both baby elephants were just under 2 years old when taken from their mothers. In the wild, female elephants remain with their mothers their entire lives and males for up to 15 years.)

Tuberculosis tests for one elephant were not available for review. No treatment was instituted for another elephant with positive tuberculosis status.

December 9, 1998: A USDA inspector noted a potential noncompliant item of failure to provide adequate shade to three elephants.

October 1, 1998: The USDA cited Ringling for having a damaged transport enclosure for the hippopotamus.

August 28, 1998: Ringling was charged by the USDA with AWA violations for the death of Kenny, a baby endangered Asian elephant forced to perform in Jacksonville, Fla., despite his being sick. The USDA charged the circus with failure to provide veterinary care to Kenny, and Ringling paid $20,000 to settle the case out of court.

June 9, 1998: Ringling was cited by the USDA for failure to provide records of veterinary care for an elephant named Seetna who was euthanized because of prolonged dystocia.

March 26, 1998: The USDA issued Ringling a “strong letter of warning” for the killing of Arnie, an endangered Bengal tiger. An angry trainer shot Arnie five times with a 12-gauge shotgun while he was locked in his cage.

September 5, 1997: The USDA cited Ringling (for the second time) for improper food storage. The inspector noted that a complaint about a lame elephant could not be verified because “the circus could not allow the elephants to move freely.”

July 24, 1997: The USDA cited Ringling for unsanitary food storage.

January 21, 1997: The USDA cited Ringling for inadequate storage of animals’ food.

December 20, 1996: The USDA cited Ringling for not providing environmental enrichment for primates. The USDA inspector stated, “There is no enhancement plan developed. The primates show signs of stereotypic behaviors (rocking, weaving, shaking, and cage-bar chewing and licking). All primates are housed singly. Cages have no enrichment.” Ringling was also cited for not providing adequate space for a baboon. Additionally, the inspector cited Ringling for not providing adequate shelter for a hippopotamus. He stated, “The length of the hippo is greater than the width of the hippo pool.”

August 14, 1996: The USDA cited Ringling for not giving the elephants tetanus vaccinations, deworming, or fecal exams.

September 20, 1995: The USDA cited Ringling for not having a program of veterinary care. There was also no record of tetanus vaccinations.

February 14, 1995: The USDA cited Ringling for failure to have an exercise program for the animals, as well as for animal enclosures that were in need of repair.

November 10, 1994: The USDA observed that Ringling was storing animal food in an unsanitary manner.

October 18, 1994: During a routine USDA inspection, an elephant was being beaten by a Ringling trainer. The USDA inspector stated, “Upon entering facility, I heard yelling and the sound of someone hitting something. I observed an elephant trainer hitting an elephant with the wooden end of the handling tool to get it up.”

A USDA inspector cited Ringling for failure to handle animals in such a way that there is minimal risk of harm to the animal and the public. Additionally, the inspector reported, “Animals were also being housed by other species that interfere with their health and cause them discomfort.”

January 21, 1994: A USDA inspector cited Ringling for electrical wires hanging loose inside a lion’s cage, creating the potential for injury or death

December 29, 1993: The USDA cited Ringling for failure to provide minimum space for dogs and for inadequate lighting in the dog enclosure. The boxes were too small “for most dogs to stand, sit, lie, and turn about freely.” Ringling was cited for failure to correct previously identified violations of not providing minimum space for bears, including one bear with rub marks; failure to repair the lion cages; and improper food storage.

December 14, 1993: The USDA cited Ringling for failure to provide bears with the minimum space required by the federal AWA. Ringling also failed to provide a program for exercise.

RINGLING’S OTHER DECEPTIVE STATEMENTS IN OHIO
We have provided above an extensive list of AWA noncompliant items by Ringling. We must emphasize that these charges listed are only those documented and publicized by the USDA. In fact three animal protection groups, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Animal Welfare Institute, and The Fund for Animals filed a lawsuit against the USDA, December 21, 2001, under the Freedom of Information Act, to obtain unpublicized USDA documents concerning the USDA’s knowledge of systematic animal abuse by Ringling. These groups are still waiting for the content of these documents to be released.

The USDA citations that we have listed are just the tip of the iceberg. Volumes of legal violations and a complete record of the abhorrent abuse of animals by Ringling can be accessed at Circuses.com. In the wake of this evidence, Ringling’s recent statements in Ohio, claiming to provide the “highest standards of care,” must be addressed. Ringling, in official media statements claimed:

“The circus says it is committed to the ‘highest standards’ of care for their animals.”

WJW-FOX (Cleveland-Akron-Canton, Ohio)
Fox 8 News
October 22, 2002

“Ringling Brothers is an industry leader in the care of its animals.”

WEWS-ABC (Cleveland-Akron-Canton, Ohio)
Live on Five
October 21, 2002

“The circus responded by saying that caring responsibly for its animals is a 24-hour commitment.”

WKYC-NBC (Cleveland-Akron-Canton, Ohio)
Channel 3 News Today
October 22, 2002

Ringling also handed out media packets in Ohio (Feld Entertainment: Standards and Guidelines for Animal Care and Management), which boasted:

• humans and animals living in harmony (p .ii)
• mutual respect between these partners (p. ii)
• the promotion of greater understanding and compassion for all wildlife by Ringling (p. v)
• the endorsement of reinforcement and voluntary cooperation and the discouragement of punishment (p. 1)
• training of animals to perform extensions of natural behavior (p. 1)

Further, in the “factsheets” of these media packets, Ringling writes:

“Elephants that perform with Ringling Bros. & Barnum & Bailey® are provided with round-the-clock veterinary attention, nutritious meals, and a clean and safe home. They are stimulated by all the exciting activity around them, have time for play and social interaction with other animals, and have a chance to use their physical and mental skills every day.”

—“Facts About Elephants Performing in Circuses,”
Ringling 2002 Media Package

The actual practices and policies by Ringling toward its captive animals stand in appalling contrast to Ringling’s statements above. Animals are kept in confinement and shackled in transport for many days, and they are continually subjected to vicious training regimens which are well documented by animal protection groups. For actual video footage of routine training sessions of elephants, please refer to the Circuses.com Web site. In fact, Ringling even opposed a USDA proposal that would severely limit the use of the bullhook (or ankus) and other vicious training devices: In comments submitted to the USDA on April 17, 2000, Ringling opposes language in the agency’s “Draft Policy on Training and Handling of Potentially Dangerous Animals” that reads, “Hot shots, shocking collars, or shocking belts should not be used for training or to handle the animals during exhibition, and any such use will be closely scrutinized. An ankus may not be used in an abusive manner that causes wounds or other injuries.”

These mentally and physically abusive “training” methods can in no way be characterized as what Ringling claims is “voluntary” or “compassionate.” The forced separation or “breaking” between mother and baby elephants and the ridiculous stunts that these animals are coerced into performing can in no way be considered “extensions of natural behavior,” and the abysmal conditions that these animals live in, which have been found consistently to be in violation of the Animal Welfare Act, cannot be construed as harmonious or “mutually respectful.”

Ringling does not provide its animals with round-the-clock veterinary care. On May 22, 2000, a horse found suffering from life-threatening colic as the Ringling train was traveling through Pennsylvania had to wait three hours for treatment while employees searched for a large-animal veterinarian. And on February 22, 1999, a horse suffering from chronic asthma collapsed and died during Ringling’s animal march to the Scope Convention Center in Norfolk, Va. There was no veterinarian on duty when the horse was in urgent need of medical care. According to the necropsy report, Ringling was aware of this animal’s delicate condition yet kept him on the road anyway.

The American Zoo and Aquarium Association (AZA), not Ringling, is considered to be the “industry leader” in the care of elephants in captivity. Ringling fails to comply with even basic husbandry practices in the AZA Standards for Elephant Management and Care, which recommends that elephants not be subjected to prolonged chaining because it is harmful to an elephant’s health and well-being. Keeping elephants shackled for lengthy periods and forcing elephants to perform physically strenuous and behaviorally unnatural tricks likely explains why USDA inspection reports dated September 11, 1998; October 7, 1998; and December 9, 1998, identified numerous elephants suffering from lameness and painful arthritis. In fact, several Ringling elephants have been euthanized because of arthritis, and a Ringling elephant as young as 16 years old has been diagnosed with this debilitating condition.

Ringling also does not utilize protected contact, a safer and far more humane method of managing elephants in captivity that eliminates the use of bullhooks, punishment, and chaining. According to congressional testimony provided by Joel J. Parrott, D.V.M., director of the AZA-accredited Oakland Zoo on June 12, 2000, “The zoo profession is currently in a trend of changing to a much safer form of managing elephants called ‘protected contact.’ Protected contact has been proven effective to manage and care for elephants. … Circuses by their nature do not have this option available because it requires special facilities.”

Furthermore, Ringling stores its elephant Gilda in solitary confinement at its affiliated business, Siegfried and Roy (a casino act in Las Vegas, Nev.). The AZA Standards for Elephant Management and Care states, “It is inappropriate to keep highly social female elephants singly.” A female elephant’s most basic need for her emotional well-being and physical health is the companionship of other elephants. Keeping Gilda in isolation is barbaric and particularly cruel.

Recommendations
We have demonstrated how Ringling has continued to engage in a deliberate, methodical and persistent campaign to deceive customers and potential customers. Ringling has been exploiting the public’s concern for animals by tricking consumers into supporting an enterprise that contradicts the consumers’ most fundamental interests and values. We hope the FTC will take this complaint into consideration in conjunction with our previous submission and take action against Ringling. Ringling must be held accountable for these deceptive advertisements, and we are asking the FTC to mandate that Ringling discontinue this campaign.

Thank you,

Signed ________________________________ Date _______________

Debbie Leahy, Director, Captive Exotic Animal Department
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc.
501 Front St.
Norfolk, VA 23510
Tel.: 757-622-7382
Fax: 757-622-0457

Back to Top