Beware the Los Angeles Rodeo Ordinance: A Critical Examination
Examining the Flaws and Misrepresentations in Los Angeles' Attempt to Protect Rodeo Animals
Los Angeles City Council recently made headlines by unanimously voting in favor of a proposed ordinance aimed at banning certain practices and devices used in rodeos. While this move has been hailed by some animal rights activists as a significant step towards protecting animals, a closer examination reveals that the legislation may be more of a symbolic gesture than a substantive change.
The Ordinance: What It Proposes
Introduced by Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, the ordinance seeks to prohibit the use of electric prods, flank or bucking straps, wire tie-downs, sharpened or fixed spurs or rowels, and lariats or lassos at rodeos. The intent is to prevent physical injury, torment, or suffering to animals involved in these events.
However, the ordinance includes exceptions for cultural events such as charrería, which is popular in Mexico, and other traditional equestrian events, provided they do not involve the prohibited activities. This compromise has sparked a cultural backlash among communities that view rodeos as an integral part of their heritage. Others contend this compromise further dilutes an already weak ordinance.
An Attorney's Critique
Robert Ferber, the first full-time animal cruelty prosecutor in the U.S., founder of the Los Angeles City Attorney Animal Protection Unit, and co-founder of the Los Angeles Animal Cruelty Task Force is a vocal critic of the proposed ordinance. Ferber also co-created the enforcement and prosecution guidelines used statewide in California. Notably, the Animal Protection Unit and Animal Cruelty Task Force became defunct after Ferber's retirement due to budget constraints.
Ferber labels the ordinance as "window dressing”, stating it fails to address the root causes of animal cruelty in rodeos, which often occur outside the arena, before and after the events. This includes the harsh treatment of animals in preparation for their performances, a point well-documented by numerous articles and investigations. For example, during rodeo training sessions, trainers use painful tools such as metal spurs, ropes, electric prods, and bucking straps that cause significant pain and injuries to the animals. Documented injuries include punctured lungs, damage to internal organs, ripped tendons, torn ligaments, broken bones, and even agonizing deaths.
Ferber criticizes the ordinance for its misleading presentation. "I can't recall seeing such blatant and public misrepresentation of a proposed law," he states, referring to Councilmember Blumenfield's press release that inaccurately portrays the ordinance as a comprehensive rodeo ban. Ferber emphasizes that the ordinance merely restricts certain devices and activities, while still allowing practices that are harmful to animals.
Misrepresentation and Enforcement Issues
Ferber's critique extends to the enforcement mechanism of the ordinance. He points out that the ordinance places the responsibility for monitoring and reporting abuse on the rodeo veterinarian—an individual employed by the rodeo itself. This creates an inherent conflict of interest, as it is highly unlikely that a veterinarian on the rodeo's payroll would report violations that could jeopardize their employment. "The law is, again, relying on the rodeo veterinarian to determine if something is harmful or is likely to cause harm," Ferber explains. This setup renders the law practically unenforceable and ineffective in achieving its stated goals.
Ferber also highlights the difficulty in proving that certain activities are "likely" to cause harm to animals. "Prosecutors don't have routine access to veterinarians qualified to testify as to what's illegal," he elaborates. This challenge is compounded by the biased nature of pro-rodeo veterinarians, who are unlikely to report violations. In responding to an analysis of the ordinance prepared by David W. Ramey, DVM, who downplayed the stress experienced by rodeo animals as “temporary”, Ferber warns, "He's typical of any veterinarian that will be 'overseeing' the welfare of rodeo animals”.
Historical Context and Broader Implications
Ferber shares a past experience where he successfully cross-examined a biased equine veterinarian in court, highlighting the challenges of relying on such conflicted individuals for animal welfare oversight in rodeos. "I tore him apart on the stand with the help of a good veterinarian who offered to testify for my case without payment," Ferber recalls. Without this Good Samaritan veterinarian, the case would have been lost. This historical context underscores the difficulties in achieving justice for rodeo animals under the current ordinance.
Ferber warns that ineffective legislation can be more detrimental than no legislation at all. A weak law gives the public a false sense of security, believing that animals are being protected when, in reality, the measures in place are insufficient. This complacency can hinder the passage of more robust and effective laws in the future, as legislators may consider the issue already addressed and move on to other priorities.
A Call for Genuine Reform
While the proposed ordinance is a step in the right direction, it falls short of the comprehensive reform needed to genuinely protect rodeo animals. True progress requires addressing the full spectrum of cruelty associated with rodeos, both inside and outside the arena. This includes implementing independent oversight mechanisms to ensure that animal welfare standards are strictly enforced.
Angelenos should be wary of taking this ordinance at face value. It is crucial to push for stronger, more enforceable laws that do not rely on conflicted parties for compliance. Only then can we ensure that the welfare of animals is genuinely safeguarded.
While the proposed rodeo ordinance in Los Angeles has garnered significant attention and support, it is essential to critically evaluate its provisions and enforcement mechanisms. As it stands, the ordinance may do little more than create the illusion of protection, rather than delivering the substantive change that is so desperately needed.
Call to Action
Angelenos concerned about the welfare of rodeo animals can take several actions:
Stay Informed: Keep up-to-date with the latest developments regarding the ordinance and its final vote.
Voice Your Opinion: Contact your City Council representatives to express your concerns and advocate for stronger, more enforceable animal welfare laws.
Support Animal Welfare Organizations: Get involved with or donate to organizations that are working to protect animals and push for more comprehensive legislation. Showing Animals Respect and Kindness (SHARK) is specifically focused on ending rodeos.
Attend Public Meetings: Participate in City Council meetings and public forums to make your voice heard.
Educate Others: Raise awareness about the issues surrounding rodeo practices and the need for genuine reform.
By taking these steps, Angelenos can help ensure that the welfare of animals is genuinely safeguarded and that more effective and enforceable laws are put in place. Of course, these actions can be replicated in any community where rodeos still abuse animals.
Ed Boks is a former Executive Director of the New York City, Los Angeles, and Maricopa County Animal Care & Control Departments. He is available for consultations. His work has been published in the LA Times, New York Times, Newsweek, Real Clear Policy, Sentient Media, and now on Animal Politics with Ed Boks.
Thanks, Ed, for this insightful article.
You touch briefly upon the question of cultural heritage, and I think that is an issue that needs to be grappled with. I do believe that respect for other cultures is important, but there are many cultural practices and traditions that simply need to be left in the ash heap of history- the fact that something is a traditional and part of a group's cultural heritage does not automatically mean that it should be respected and protected: bullfighting, female circumcision, bride burning in India, slavery, whaling by supposedly indigenous groups in Iceland, throwing goats out of the church steeple in some dumb little town in Spain- the list goes on. It may be that rodeo ultimately belongs in that list, even with reforms. Meanwhile, it needs to be restricted severely, without exceptions for cultural groups other than rural white America.
I'm so tired of all the "window dressings" that are prevalent when it comes to animal protection. I was going through some of my old files the other day trying to clear the paper out of my office & came across my old animal rights files. The Canadian seal slaughter, animals in "entertainment", "Empty The Tanks", needless animal experimentation, the cat & dog meat trade, cruelty in slaughterhouses & factory farming in general, & the list goes on & on. I sat down in the middle of the room pouring through all these papers, crying, utterly dismayed at the fact that most everything I've been involved in is no closer to a resolution than when I first started. Realizing how many animals have suffered & died over the years is breaking me. One thing I feel I did help with was ending greyhound racing in Massachusetts. I worked very hard on that campaign & spent as much time as I could on it. I do see change, but it just takes so long to accomplish so little. I wish we could all care as much as some of us do. The world, & life in it, would be so much better.