Nella propaganda animalista finalizzata ad ottenere l’eliminazione degli animali dai circhi, vengono ripetutamente citati gli studi della maggiore autorità mondiale in materia, il prof. Ted Friend. Il professore ha partecipato ad una conferenza stampa in Italia, durante la quale ha documentato come i suoi studi siano stati manipolati e distorti per dimostrare il contrario di quanto accertato circa il benessere degli animali nei circhi.
Circus animals, special artists
Although circus Darix Togni hires artists who represent the excellence of the circus in theworld, in the presence of the animal beauty no one can help but be enchanted.
Gli animali rappresentano per i circensi un patrimonio affettivo e culturale, e sono parte dell’identità di chi vive e lavora in un circo. Gli animali dei circhi vivono a fianco dell’uomo dalla nascita, perchè sono tutti nati in cattività: le leggi che regolano il commercio e gli spostamenti di fauna e flora esotica (convenzione Cites) sono rigorosissime, oggi è davvero impossibile catturare un animale selvatico e portarlo in un altro continente. L’habitat circense rappresenta quindi per l’animale del circo la propria casa, e lui non desidera allontanarsene: ci è cresciuto dentro, ci vive, lì si sente sicuro e protetto. L’animale nato e cresciuto al circo, al circo sta bene: mentre in natura si può dire che “la vecchiaia” non esista, gli animali dei circhi sono più longevi e conducono una vita serena in cui cibo, protezione e affetto sono garantiti ogni giorno, ad ogni ora. L’esercizio quotidiano che viene fatto fare all’animale in addestramento contribuisce a mantenerlo attivo, non annoiato, ed è quindi benefico per la sua “Igiene mentale”. La maggior parte degli animali esotici dei circhi appartiene a specie che in natura si stanno estinguendo, perché vengono sterminati dall’uomo sia per il contrabbando di pellami etc sia perché privati del loro habitat naturale, al posto del quale sorgono città, fabbriche, strade …
The circus animal training is based on the principle of the game: the animal from his point of view plays games and is rewarded with food and affection; Let us not forget that animals are routine-bound, and for them the training becomes a source of security. Besides the obvious fact that the training consists in spending a lot of time in close contact with the animal, and develop a relationship of trust and love, let us remember that the ANIMALS REPRESENT a HUGE CAPITAL for circus enterprises: to mistreat an animal for which you have spent money on care and maintenance, time, effort and sacrifices for the training, what sense would it make? Also which trainer would put himself in the position of being hated by the animals he trains? A kick of a giraffe, the paw of a tiger or an elephant can kill a man with ease. But the circus animals LOVE their trainers, and that is why they do not attack: those who train them also feed them, care for them, spend nights alongside animals, recognize them and are recognized by them. This is what the training is based on and it could not work otherwise.
Our opinion on animal rights activists
WHAT JOB DO THE ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS DO TO LIVE?
WHERE DOES THE MONEY THAT FINANCES THEM COMES FROM?
In 2006 the contribution paid to animal welfare organizations by Nature Protection amounted to € 3,390,553; money also arrives from the provinces, regions, municipalities, local authorities, as well as by self-financing and membership recruitment.
In 2001 the recognised environmental and animal welfare organisations were 35 and shared 2 million and 200 thousand euros, the unrecognized ones brought home 90 thousand euros. Then they became 70. The statutes of LAV of 2006 contains the list of economic resources of the Association; as follows, the Association receives: A) the contributions of the members; (B) private sector Contributions); C) contributions of the State, public institutions or entities aimed exclusively to specific and documented activities and projects of support ; D) contributions to international organisations; E) donations and bequests; F) refunds arising from conventions; G) revenues from commercial activities and marginal productions directly related to the purposes of the Association; H) any other entry permitted by law in accordance with the purposes of the Association; I)The Annual Dues of members); L) pensions arising out of movable and immovable property. The major animal welfare organizations are ONLUS and enjoy significant tax advantages: they don't pay income tax, they are allowed to realize many operations without paying VAT and are they are entitled to exemption from other taxes, fewer but equally onerous; they are the beneficiary of sums gathered with the penalties as in the articles 3, 7 and 8 of the Act July 20, 2004; not to mention, finally, of 5 per thousand which these associations are entitled.
Animal welfare groups move hundreds of millions of euros every year, and there is no WAY to VERIFY that ALL THIS MONEY is ACTUALLY USED in the PROTECTION of ANIMALS. The same Statute LAV 2006, in more than twenty pages, does not report ever, even once, indications relating to the management of expenses for maintenance of animals or animal health expenses. And there's more: all these assignments of money take place on the basis of discretionary criteria and beyond checking the quality of services and the use of the sums paid. If we make a comparison with circuses the result is paradoxical: in 2010, adding each type of entry (circus activities in Italy and abroad and support equipment) all eligible funding complexes through the Fus, does not exceed EUR 2 million. While the money leaving the Fus and arriving to circuses are published in plain sight on the internet site of the Ministry per i Beni e le attività culturali, names and surnames, complex to complex, amount of the received sum, if any citizen wishing to know about environmental and animal welfare associations, like how they are composed and how much they receive as public funding, he could not find info anywhere because the data is top secret. It is not the only hard thing to understand, because of animal welfare organizations generally we do not know how many and which privileged political and media links they can take, in the light of the continuous media return they get even with the smallest event or awareness campaign, in disregard of the total lack of interest the citizens express for those campaigns - they still have a significant visibility and influence in every area where it is not observed their personal thought about the animals.
As if what the animal rights activists advocate was not objectionable, nor subject to any objections, as if their opinion (because that's what it's all about, an opinion) had the right to not follow the rules of democracy.
WHERE DOES THE MONEY THAT FINANCES THEM GO?
At this point the question is: what are all these money used for? To help animals or to invest in "advertising" to accumulate more money to put into cash? All the major animal welfare organizations have such an economic strength they can afford advertising campaigns on major media, television commercials, radio commercials, tabular pages in newspapers and magazines; In short, EXPENSIVE advertising. Not only that, because their so-called "volunteers" of animal organizations are less and less everyday: among one the most sought job figures by the animal welfare Charity we are, as revealed a dossier of Federfauna in 2012, the Eurisko there are the conversationalists and the fundraising officers, all positions with "excellent profit margins". It is no coincidence that in recent times the animalists went in Parliament to speak of "protection of animals even as employment challenge". Yes, but regarding the salaries of those "occupied" who pays them? And above all, for what we are paying? You can employ people in so many ways, even in projects that are seamless for decades as the stray, but then why these associations insist in defining their work "volunteer"? A "volunteer" who gets public money to pursue projects without liability (have you ever heard of animal welfare organizations condemned to pay damages for dog aggression or for damage to things or people from wild animals and strays?), which has the right to go to Parliament to propose to use health funds and the municipality funds to pay their staff and their veterinarians that certainly are employed, only they are paid using the money coming from taxes paid by citizens.