Veterinary Medical Ethics

Ethical question of the month — October 2019

Six horses died during the chuckwagon races at the 2019 Calgary Stampede. Injuries and occasional deaths will never be eliminated from equine competitive events. Should a threshold for injuries and mortalities be established to distinguish between competitive events with reasonable and unreasonable risks for the safety of the horses competing? Should the fact that chuckwagon races do not represent an authentic historic component of western Canadian cattle culture be considered in such a decision?

An ethicist’s commentary on hurtful rodeo events

There are a variety of events involving the use of animals within the panoply of things that have humanly historically counted as entertainment. While some of these are benign, or may be structured as benign, such as children riding horses, many involve significant pain, stress, and fear to the animals. Too many of such events allegedly celebrate western heritage. These include steer roping, calf roping, steer wrestling, and numerous variations upon these themes.

By the end of the 20th century, society had become aware that while many of these events were entertaining to people, they are often hurtful physically or cause pain and fear to the animals. Among such events are calf roping, steer wrestling, taken for granted as comprising an essential part of “western heritage.” In fact, many of these events are an outright perversion of what does count as an integral part of “western heritage.” As one of my close friends has pointed out (he runs one of the most prominent United States rodeos), hurting animals, frightening them, or stressing them are all wisely avoided by good cattlemen. In the case of calf roping on the range, the best cattle people I know will counsel treating the livestock gently, and people who violate that rule will often find themselves summarily fired. Not only does such an approach exemplify humaneness, it represents good common sense. It is not wise to develop an antagonistic relationship with an animal, which can weigh close to a ton, that you will work with throughout your life. Watch what happens at a serious rodeo like the National Western Stockshow, when an animal is jerked off its feet and the audience emits a horrified gasp.

We have neither time nor space to do a psychological analysis of what leads people to abuse animals in the name of “machismo,” we find a similar phenomenon in those who hunt grizzly bears with high powered rifles fitted with long-range telescopic sights. But whatever causes it, it is reprehensible and essentially a form of bullying.

“Chuck wagon races” are one of the most mindless of such events, often leading to serious horse injury. Anyone who works with horses knows they are prone to serious, often life-ending skeletal injury. Whipping them into a frenzy in competition with other horse-drawn chuck wagons, (i.e., food-bearing vehicles), is almost guaranteed to cause injury. One of the most interesting paradoxes in this area is that cattle people remain among the last strong advocates of good animal husbandry left in agriculture, yet that seems to vanish in the frenzy of entertainment. Some of the worst wrecks I have ever witnessed in rodeo come as a result of chuck wagon races.

There are thus prudential reasons for not engaging in that sort of activity. That is, of course, in addition to the ethical reasons. Ethical and prudential reasons combine synergistically when the general public grows ever increasingly concerned about animal abuse. If rodeo wishes to retain public (and legislative) support, one consideration that must loom large is lack of animal abuse!

For all of these reasons, it would be extremely wise for rodeo to clean up its own house. Here is a partial list of jurisdictions that have totally banned rodeo or traditional rodeo devices:

• San Francisco

• St. Petersburg

• Pasadena, California

• Baltimore, Maryland prohibits calf roping

• Fort Wayne, Indiana

• Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania prohibits the use of electric shocking devices, fixed flank and bucking straps, wire tie downs, sharpened or fixed spurs.

Outside the United States:

• United Kingdom

• Australia’s capital territories

• Auckland, New Zealand

• Germany prohibits calf roping

• Vancouver, Canada prohibits calf roping

• Cloverdale rodeo in British Columbia, Canada prohibits calf roping, team roping, cowboy cow milking, and steer wrestling.

• South Australia and Victoria have eliminated roping of small animals.

• Various jurisdictions in Brazil ban rodeos, electric prods, flank straps, and spurs.

• The Netherlands banned US rodeo.

For these reasons, it would be preemptively wise for Canadian rodeo to stay ahead of societal forces, particularly concerned with animal cruelty, that militate against the perpetuation of rodeo or at least those events perceived by the majority of society as cruel and abusive.

Ethical question of the month — January 2020

You are presented with a healthy 1-year-old crossbred farm dog with a moderate lameness in the right front leg. The dog runs loose around the farm. The dog is mildly weight-bearing on the leg but is sore on palpation. Radiographs reveal a non-displaced fracture of the radius just above the carpus. The owner is uninterested in surgical stabilization, so you cast the leg and send the dog home on pain medication. Two days later the owner returns, as the dog has chewed off the cast. You re-cast the leg and put an Elizabethan collar on the dog. Two days later the owner returns as the dog has somehow removed the collar and again chewed off the cast. The owner is frustrated over the mounting costs and repeated trips to your clinic. The owner suggests keeping the dog in a small pen in the barn without casting the leg and seeing if the leg can heal provided the dog has limited mobility. You believe this is a reasonable approach and decide to stop the pain medication to further reduce activity. You believe in situations such as this that pain serves as a natural signal to encourage resting an injury so it can properly heal. Your younger associate completely disagrees with this approach and feels denying pain medication to an animal with a fracture is inhumane and unprofessional. How should you respond?

Responses to the case presented are welcome. Please limit your reply to approximately 50 words and forward along with your name and address to: Ethical Choices, c/o Dr. Tim Blackwell, 6486 E. Garafraxa, Townline, Belwood, Ontario N0B 1J0; telephone: (519) 846-3413; fax: (519) 846-8178; e-mail: tim.e.blackwell@gmail.com

Suggested ethical questions of the month are also welcome! All ethical questions or scenarios in the ethics column are based on actual events, which are changed, including names, locations, species, etc., to protect the confidentiality of the parties involved.