Big Cat Public Safety Act

REPORT ON LEGISLATION
BY THE ANIMAL LAW COMMITTEE

H.R. 263 (Rep. Quigley)
S. 1210 (Sen. Blumenthal)

AN ACT To amend the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 to clarify provisions enacted by the Captive Wildlife Safety Act, to further the conservation of certain wildlife species, and for other purposes.

The Big Cat Public Safety Act

THIS LEGISLATION IS SUPPORTED 

I.  SUMMARY OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION

The bill would prohibit private ownership of tigers, lions, leopards, cheetahs, jaguars, cougars (a group popularly referred to as “big cats”) or any hybrid of these species.[1] Current owners are grandfathered in and required to register their animals with the government. The proposed legislation includes exemptions for universities, sanctuaries, and entities with a Class C USDA license (public exhibition license). The bill also restricts direct contact between the public and big cats (currently provided by roadside and petting zoos).

A prior version of the bill was originally introduced as H.R. 1380 by Rep. Quigley in 2017 and later reintroduced in 2019.[2] H.R. 1380 passed in the House by a vote of 272 to 114 in December 2020.[3] The Senate failed to pass the reciprocal legislation to H.R. 1380, S. 2561 (which was introduced in the Senate by Sen. Blumenthal) before the 116th legislative session ended.[4] As such, Rep. Quigley introduced the bill in the House as H.R. 263 in January 2021.[5] A bipartisan group of senators, consisting of Senators Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Burr (R-N.C.), Carper (D-Del.) and Collins (R-Me), introduced the bill in the Senate as S.1210 on April 19, 2021.[6] The Big Cat Public Safety Act would amend the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981[7] to clarify provisions enacted by the Captive Wildlife Safety Act.[8]

To date, there are 195 lawmakers in the House of Representatives, both Democrats and Republicans, who are cosponsoring the bill. [9] There are 23 cosponsors in the Senate.[10]

II.  ARGUMENT SUMMARY

The current regulation of big cats in the United States is a patchwork of state laws; it requires a federal solution in order to safeguard public safety, promote animal welfare and wildlife conservation, and combat illegal wildlife trafficking. Conservative assessments gauge that there are 5,000-7,000 privately held tigers in the United States. These privately held big cats are primarily either kept as pets by private individuals or reside at roadside and petting zoos. Privately owned big cats typically spend their entire lives in cages and receive inadequate care. They suffer from high mortality rates, long term health problems, deformities, and congenital defects. Facilities offering direct contact between the public and big cats often employ abusive practices, which result in significant physical and psychological harm to cubs.

Once cubs outgrow their usefulness, they face precarious fates including sales to another disreputable facility, euthanasia, abandonment or entry into the black market. Facilities profiting from big cat interaction opportunities fuel the rampant cycle of breeding and dumping of big cats. In addition, private ownership of big cats presents a significant threat to public safety. Between 1990-2012, there have been more than 300 reports of dangerous incidents involving privately held big cats; the real number of incidents is likely to be higher. Big cats are wild animals that cannot be domesticated. Further, private ownership of big cats does not contribute to conservation goals. On the contrary, private possession and breeding of big cats promotes illegal international wildlife trafficking and threatens to drive many wild big cat populations into extinction.

III.  BACKGROUND

The vast majority of privately held big cats in the United States are kept either as pets by private individuals or as live entertainment at roadside and petting zoos.[11] Due to a diffuse and deficient regulatory framework and irresponsible breeding practices, it is virtually impossible to precisely determine the number and location of captive big cats in the United States.[12] A majority of big cats in captivity are tigers.[13] While there is no official count, conservative assessments gauge that there are 5,000-7,000 privately held tigers in the United States,[14] while other sources claim that there may be as many as 10,000-20,000 captive tigers in the United States.[15] This far exceeds the number of wild tigers, of which there are approximately 3,200 worldwide.[16]

IV. REASONS FOR SUPPORT

a. The Current Regulatory Framework Is Inadequate.

The current regulatory framework is inadequate to protect public safety and animal welfare, necessitating a comprehensive federal solution.

There is no federal law that regulates the ownership of exotic animals. The Lacey Act prohibits import or export of wildlife in contravention of federal, state or local law.[17] The Captive Wildlife Safety Act subsequently amended the Lacey Act to ban import, export, purchase, sales and acquisition of big cats in interstate or foreign commerce.[18] However, the Lacey Act provides an exception that significantly weakens the strength of this rule.[19] In particular, it allows parties to privately own big cats as long as they are licensed by the USDA for commercial activities like breeding or exhibition.[20] The exception incentivizes individuals to engage in such commercial activities and profit from exploiting big cats. This issue is exacerbated by the ease and low cost of obtaining a USDA Exhibitor’s license (Class C), which allows private individuals to legally own tigers.[21]

The federal government also does not protect privately owned tigers through the Endangered Species Act.[22] Nearly all of the tigers kept in private hands in the United States are known as generic tigers, because they have unknown genetic backgrounds or are hybrids of various tiger subspecies rather than animals with clearly defined lineages. Since they are viewed as unimportant to wild tiger conservation, their sale and purchase across state lines have not been subject to federal oversight.[23]

The weakness, variance, and under-enforcement of state big cat laws make them inadequate to protect public safety or animal welfare. In many states, it is easier to purchase a tiger cub than to go to a local humane society and adopt a puppy.[24] In September 2018, a reporter for an online newspaper accumulated seven offers for tigers within a few hours of Googling “Buy Live Tiger.”[25] There are significant variations among state big cat ownership laws, with some states banning private ownership of big cats and other states imposing partial or no restriction on such ownership. Four states — Alabama, Nevada, North Carolina, and Wisconsin — do not have a statutory framework that directly addresses the private ownership of big cats.[26] Currently, twenty states have enacted “comprehensive bans.”[27] These bans typically classify wild cats, large non-domesticated carnivores, reptiles, and non-human primates as “dangerous animals” or otherwise prohibit private ownership of these species.[28] Thirteen states have partial bans on exotic pets, which ban specific animals by statute.[29] Fourteen states permit private ownership of exotic animals under a licensure or permit scheme.[30] These states often leave enforcement of the law as well as standards of care to counties.[31]

Even the state big cat laws that exist are generally ineffective. State bans often have loopholes or are easy to circumvent.[32] Furthermore, state governments regularly fail to meet tracking requirements and underenforce big cat regulations.[33] For example, Florida has a partial ban, which prohibits the keeping of big cats as pets and requires commercially licensed wildlife owners to register their animals and submit annual counts.[34] However, an investigation revealed that state wildlife officials did not have a current inventory.[35] Texas has approximately 2,000-5,000 tigers.[36] Although Texas passed a law in 2001 requiring the registration of exotic pets, enforcement of that law is left up to the state’s 254 counties, and fewer than 1% of tigers were registered as of 2018.[37]

Alabama and Georgia, two neighboring states, exemplify the disparity regarding big cat and exotic animal regulations. The former is one of four states with no laws regulating big cat ownership, while the latter bans big cat private ownership.[38] Since cub breeding and sales are interstate activities, inconsistent restrictions cannot adequately address public safety or animal welfare concerns and necessitate a uniform federal framework.

b. Privately Owned Big Cats Face Neglect And Abuse.

Privately owned big cats are subjected to neglect and abuse and face high mortality rates and significant long term health problems, as well as high prospects for abandonment and euthanasia.

i. Neglect and abuse of adult big cats kept as pets

By the time they are fully grown, big cats are often too difficult for private owners to manage, resulting in substantial neglect and mistreatment. Owners are largely incognizant of the resources needed to care for a big cat. Feeding and providing basic medical care for one adult tiger costs a minimum of $10,000 per year.[39] That cost does not account for the expenses necessary to build a sufficiently secure enclosure for housing the tiger.[40] The considerable costs associated with maintaining an adult tiger is one key reason big cats are regularly abandoned or killed.[41]

Big cats kept as pets are often held in very small spaces such as kennels/cages that are inconsistent with their natural behaviors.[42] Most big cat pets are left to languish in grossly substandard conditions including deprivation of adequate space, exercise, socialization, veterinary care, nutritious diet, and enrichment.[43]

Privately owned tigers have a high mortality rate, with experts estimating that up to 90% die within the first two years.[44] Most private owners are simply unable to provide sufficient care to tigers due to the cost and complex significant physical and psychological needs of these animals. Accordingly, private ownership of tigers is opposed by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums.[45] When cubs and tigers can no longer be managed by their private owners, a lucky very few might make it into bona-fide sanctuaries, where they will be able to live their lives out with adequate care.[46] Others become breeders, are put on display at poor quality roadside zoos, or are dumped or killed.[47]

ii.   Neglect and abuse of cubs at roadside zoos

Only a small minority of privately held tigers in zoos (approximately 350) live in facilities accredited by the Association of Zoos & Aquariums, with accompanying standards of care set forth by animal care professionals.[48] Instead, most tigers live in sub-standard conditions in roadside and petting zoos offering visitor interaction with cubs. Venues that offer interactions with cubs are enormously profitable, with tax records for one Indiana venue showing annual revenues of $1 million to $1.27 million in recent years.[49] These venues are harmful and unsafe for cubs; cubs at such venues face poor long term health outcomes and precarious fates once they outgrow their usefulness for public interaction. This bill would serve to shut down the unscrupulous facilities that profit from cub interaction opportunities.

Cubs in roadside zoos are regularly deprived of appropriate nutrition, shelter, medical care, socialization, and exercise.[50] In 2016, researchers at New York University identified 77 facilities offering public contact with baby animals, typically big cat cubs at roadside zoos.[51] Big cats at roadside zoos are typically confined to small, dirty cages.[52] Although facilities open to the public are required to obtain licenses and undergo periodic inspections by the USDA, standards are nominal and enforcement is poor.[53] Additionally, already poor USDA enforcement has further declined during the current administration.[54] Low standards and poor enforcement result in roadside zoo operators’ inhumane practices going unchecked.

Cubs are often also subjected to inhumane practices and physically abused in an attempt to control or condition them to tolerate direct physical contact with humans. Handlers commonly use extreme physical coercion that results in trauma, physical injury and in certain circumstances, death.[55] Moreover, cubs in roadside zoos are regularly subject to inhumane body modification such as defanging and amputation of cubs’ toes, which can leave cubs with lifelong lameness, pain, and psychological distress.[56]

Abuse also stems from the excessive handling of big cat cubs at roadside zoos. Current regulations prohibit exhibitors from allowing “rough or “excessive” public handling of cubs.[57] These public handling standards are vague since exhibitors are left to make subjective determinations regarding “rough” or “excessive.”[58] Moreover, this standard does not account for the fact that even minimal handling of cubs is detrimental to their health and disrupts their sleep cycle and immune development.[59] Furthermore, enforcement of existing minimal standards is poor.[60] Cubs are regularly forced to sit still for a parade of customers even if they are tired or sick.[61] And transport required for travelling exhibitions offered by some petting zoos is particularly arduous and perilous for cubs and represents a leading cause of premature death.[62]

Another widely employed injurious practice by roadside zoos is separation of mother cats from cubs in order to use cubs for public exhibits and maximize docility to humans.[63] This practice, condemned by animal care experts, disrupts the mother-cub bonding process and taxes cubs’ underdeveloped immune systems.[64] It causes long-term physical and psychological harm including malnutrition, increased vulnerability to disease, and premature mortality.[65] The separation also adversely impacts big cat mothers, who have been documented emitting mournful calls for weeks after being forcibly separated from their offspring.[66]

In 2016, the USDA announced new regulations for newborn tigers 28 days or younger, which would require preventive and responsive veterinary care as well as adequate housing and nutrition.[67] To comply with the new regulations, neonatal cats under 28 days may not be exposed to any form of public contact, including public feeding and handling.[68] The new rule, while a step in the right direction, remains a bare minimum, and is still far behind the care neonatal cats would receive in AZA accredited zoos. It is also inconsistent with previous interpretations of existing laws. The commonly understood APHIS regulatory framework holds that the public may not interact with cubs below 8 weeks of age or over 12 weeks of age– the “8 to 12 week policy.”[69] And although the eight week floor is regularly evaded by exhibitors, the new USDA rule jeopardizes further lowering the floor for public contact with cubs.[70]

Not surprisingly, given the profitability of cub-petting venues, such venues have proliferated and generated tiger mills.[71] Cub-petting attractions drive the vicious cycle of breeding, trading, and dumping of tigers.[72] Commercial breeders must provide a constant supply of tiger cubs, because by the time cubs are only three months they have become too big and dangerous to pet. The resulting tiger surplus is too large to be absorbed by AZA accredited zoos or bona-fide sanctuaries.[73] Some tigers become breeders or are sold to another disreputable facility.[74] Some are killed for their skins and bones, while others are killed simply to reduce inventory.[75] By banning public contact with big cats, the proposed legislation would serve to shut down roadside and petting zoos, which generate the systemic breeding and dumping of big cats.

iii.  Deformities and congenital defects 

Many privately-owned tigers are genetically inbred — the result of mating between closely-related animals — and hence are far more likely to suffer from genetic defects.[76] Inbreeding programs employed to produce certain characteristics in tigers have horrific results.[77] Only one in thirty cubs is likely to be healthy.[78] The vast majority of cubs suffer from significant deformities, vision problems, long term health issues, and high mortality rates.[79] Similarly, offspring of inbred tigers suffer from various defects such as lower reproductive rates, hip dysplasia, cleft palates, and severe mental health problems.[80] In a recent Washington Post report on captive tigers, a veterinary ophthalmologist was documented operating on a sedated tiger in a small garage.[81] The tiger was suffering from a congenital eye defect, a likely result of inbreeding.[82]

White tigers are a prime example of deformities stemming from human breeding. The white tiger is so rarely seen in the wild that only twelve white tigers have been confirmed in the wild in the past 100 years.[83] White tigers are artificially selected through an inbreeding process created purely for human enjoyment.[84] Numerous exhibitors in the United States have purposefully bred white tigers, with some holding dozens of white tigers in their inventories.[85] All white tigers in captivity in the United States today are descendants of a single, anomalous Bengal named Mohan, captured in 1951 and bred with his daughter. The inbreeding of their descendants continues today “to disabling effect… one frequent defect is severe strabismus or crossed eyes, which hampers vision and coordination.”[86] White tigers in captivity have significant vision and depth perception problems as well as kidney disorders, club feet, and tendon ailments.[87] Because of resulting genetic defects from inbreeding the American Zoological Association (AZA) barred member zoos from breeding white tigers (and select other inbred Big Cats) in 2011.[88] Unfortunately the vast majority of tigers and other big cats live outside of AZA accredited zoos.[89]

c.  Public Safety

The private ownership of big cats presents a serious risk to the safety of the public and law enforcement agents.[90] No amount of training or discipline can make big cats safe as human companions.[91]

Big cats are wild animals and retain their natural instincts to hunt and attack, regardless of how they are raised. Unlike companion animals, who have been domesticated over centuries, big cats always maintain their natural instincts to hunt and attack.[92] Big cats cannot be domesticated due to their unremitting prey-drive and territorial instincts. “An exotic cat is an evolutionary marvel of reactions and instincts, together with a strong will. They can never be tamed in the sense we normally associate with that word.”[93] Big cats respond strongly to any source of stimulation and it takes only a fraction of a second for them to revert to instinctual behavior.[94] They are extremely attuned to their environments and may turn aggressive and violent in response to even minute changes in their surroundings imperceptible to humans.[95]

According to the Humane Society for the United States (HSUS), there have been more than 300 dangerous incidents involving big cats in 44 states between 1990 and 2012.[96] Four children were killed and dozens of others lost limbs or suffered other traumatic injuries.[97] Sixteen adults were killed during that time period, and scores have been mauled.[98] The full death and injury tally showed a total of 306 incidents in 44 states, resulting in 20 human deaths, 244 human injuries and 125 animal deaths.[99]

The information in the HSUS report only includes attacks reported in the media or by animal welfare organizations. The actual figure is likely to be higher since no government agency tracks big cat attacks and injuries often go unreported.[100] For example, eight former roadside zoo employees who had been bitten or clawed reported that they had been discouraged from seeking medical assistance to conceal the incidents from the public.[101] They also reported receiving little to no training in handling big cats, amplifying their risk of injury.[102]

The media has documented some of the more news-worthy tiger attacks. In late December 2018, a 22-year-old intern cleaning an enclosure was attacked and killed by a lion.[103] The attack took place at a privately-run wild-animal menagerie in North Carolina, which purports to rescue animals but has no credentials as a sanctuary. Law enforcement shot and killed the lion in order to retrieve the young woman’s body. In 2008, seven underfed tigers under the care of James Garretson tore off the arm of a 35-year-old volunteer who subsequently bled to death.[104] In 2005, Haley Hilderbrand was attacked and killed by a 550 pound Siberian tiger. The tiger was restrained only by a leash during a school photo shoot at a roadside zoo in southeast Kansas. Law enforcement subsequently fired upon the tiger several times in order to kill it.[105] And in December 2003, ten-year-old C.J. Eller was attacked by relatives’ pet Bengal tiger in North Carolina. The boy’s uncle shot the tiger but C.J. died before reaching the hospital.[106]

Even an owner who lives with a seemingly docile big cat for many years remains in danger. A case in point is Antoine Yates, who kept his pet tiger in a fifth-floor apartment in Harlem.[107] Yates suffered no serious injuries from the tiger until he brought home a stray domestic kitten. Yates was seriously injured when he shielded the kitten from the tiger’s attack.[108]

d.  Private Ownership Does Not Contribute To Conservation Goals And In Fact Undermines Them.

i. Private ownership does not contribute to conservation.

The captive predator breeding industry operates on the pretext that captive breeding contributes to conservation. However, this assumption is false, since captive big cats have never been successfully released back into the wild.[109] Most large captive-bred carnivores die if returned to their natural habitat, as they lack the natural behaviors critical for success in the wild.[110] Captive-born carnivores are more likely than their wild-bred counterparts to starve to death and succumb to viruses and diseases.[111] When raised in captivity, animals face changes in various environmental conditions, such as diet, nutrition and cognitive stimulation. These changes lead to modification of external, morphological traits.[112] Captivity can also cause changes in soft tissues and organs, with research revealing variances in the size and shape of the brain and digestive system.[113] These changes lead to decreased survival prospects for confiscated big cats, requiring that they be placed in other captive environments.

ii. Unmonitored breeding and private possession of big cats stimulates their illegal trafficking amid high demand.

Large volumes of unmonitored and untracked captive tigers in the United States become easy targets for black market sales.[114] The United States’ lack of federal tracking of big cats and fragmented, lax, and inconsistent state regulatory system means that there is no way to ascertain how many privately owned big cats exist, let alone their location or their method of death.[115] State efforts to ascertain the number of tigers in their jurisdiction are further hampered by the unknown number of tigers abandoned or killed by owners once they outgrow their usefulness for public display or become too financially burdensome to maintain.[116]

And there is evidence that lion and tiger parts have been illegally exported from the United States to Asian markets.[117] There is currently no way to know how many US-born big cats are exploited and killed for the black market trade.[118] A report by TRAFFIC, the wildlife trade monitoring network, found that at least 30% of the tiger-related customs seizures between 2012 and 2015 were reported to have come from captive breeding facilities, up from just 2% between 2000 and 2003.[119]

There are large markets for illegal big cats (particularly tiger) products in Asia as well the United States, Europe, and other parts of the world.[120] While tiger cubs can be found for as little as $200, adult tiger parts can be sold for upwards of ten times that amount.[121] South Africa has almost doubled its export of lion bones, from 800 to 1,500 skeletons per year.[122] Tiger skins, bones and whiskers are in high demand for traditional Asian and Chinese medicine.[123] Tiger and leopard skins are used to create luxury carpets or sold as finished skins for home decoration.[124] In China tiger meat has become a fashionable delicacy, despite being illegal to consume.[125]

iii. The trade in parts of captive tigers threatens wild tigers.

The trade in parts from captive tigers has significant implications for the conservation of wild tigers.[126] The illegal trade in products derived from captive tigers stimulates demand, especially for tigers in the wild, which are cheaper for poachers to kill than to buy captive animals from breeders.[127] The greater the demand for captive-bred tigers, the more wild tigers will be poached.[128] Chinese tiger farming is thought to be the main factor driving the massive increase in illegal wild tiger poaching in Asia.[129] According to one prominent international wildlife investigator and tiger conservation advocate, selling products from farmed and captive tigers will pave the road for the wild tiger’s extinction.[130]

The need for conservation of wild-living big cats is a matter of the utmost urgency. In the past century, the wild population of tigers decreased by 97 percent.[131] Three out of the nine tiger subspecies that existed during the 20th century are now totally extinct, and one of the six remaining subspecies exists only in captivity.[132] The wild population, once as high as 100,000 in the early 20th century, has declined dramatically since the late 1990s, when the estimated number of wild tigers was approximately 7,000.[133] Tiger conservation experts currently estimate that only 2,500-4,000 tigers remain in the wild.[134] The proposed legislation enhances efforts to prevent extinction of big cats in the wild, an increasingly pressing concern.

iv. There is a strong link between wildlife trafficking and human trafficking, and drugs and weapons trade.

Curbing activity that generates wildlife trafficking also benefits humans. There is a strong link between wildlife trafficking and human trafficking and drugs and weapons trade.[135] According to the State Department, the same criminals that traffic wildlife also traffic drugs, guns, and people.[136] In 2019 leaders from 80 countries signed a declaration identifying this link and recognizing wildlife trafficking as organized crime and an imperative matter that must be tackled collaboratively.[137] Wildlife trafficking generates tens of billions of dollars a year for transnational organized criminal networks.[138] Based upon the connection between wildlife trafficking and other proscribed activities, in addition to protecting big cats the proposed legislation would have cascading social benefits.

v.  The federal regulation of captive big cats would enhance US credibility abroad.

The Big Cat Public Safety Act would help the United States establish credibility needed to help reform management of captive big cats around the world. State Department efforts to end cruel tiger farming are impeded by the existence of a big cat crisis in our own backyards. Wildlife trafficking experts contend that the United States’ thousands of privately owned tigers undermine its stance against tiger farming in China.[139] By taking a stand, the United States can positively impact the conservation policies and practices in other countries. Shortly after the United States banned the sale of African elephant ivory, China, Hong Kong, Singapore, and the United Kingdom revised their nation’s ivory policies.[140] Similarly, after the United States destroyed six tons of confiscated elephant ivory in November 2013, China followed suit in January 2014.[141] The proposed legislation would help the United States lead by example.

V. CONCLUSION

For the reasons above, the New York City Bar Association’s Animal Law Committee supports the proposed legislation.

Animal Law Committee
Christopher Wlach, Chair

Reissued July 2021