Wild Hearts to Set Free

If you spent any amount of time online at the beginning of March, chances are you either saw or heard something about an eccentric private zoo owner in Oklahoma called Joe Exotic and some lady down in Florida named Carole Baskin. The Netflix documentary Tiger King: Mayhem, Murder and Madness provided some much-needed relief from the goings-on in the world with a cast of larger than life characters, and an interesting yet depressing insight into America’s fascination with keeping and exploiting wild animals as pets and tools for profit. But just how big is the problem?

While there are several Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) accredited establishments across the United States, if you did indeed see the Tiger King documentary, you will be well aware that there are many ‘roadside zoos’ not held to such welfare standards. Although it is thought that current estimates of pet big cats in the United States are overblown, the exact number is unknown as a detailed census has not been conducted for over a decade, and not every individual is registered. Often, the numbers have been said to be as high as tens of thousands but in reality, the US tiger population is more conservatively estimated as under 5,000 (including the 2,000 or so kept in accredited facilities). While most wild animal owners keep tigers, there are also reportedly large numbers of pet lions, leopards, and ligers/tigons (lion-tiger hybrids) as well as primates and large reptiles.

Thankfully, the UK’s appetite for exotic pets is far lower. Animals that are usually registered include ostriches, wild boar and smaller creatures, though at last count there were 13 tigers and two lions registered. While not outlawed, it can be difficult to obtain a dangerous animal license as per UK legislation. Keeping tigers as pets and for show, however, is not a new phenomenon. Tigers and other big cats were kept by the Romans primarily for entertainment and often forced to fight other animals and humans. More recently, big cats were trained and kept for performing in circuses. Perhaps shockingly, despite years of protests, the last big cat act performing in circuses in the United Kingdom was only pulled in 2013, and it was not until 2019 that wild animal circuses were fully banned.

In the United States, public opinion also appears to be changing. After the retirement of circus animals following the closing down of two of America’s biggest animal circuses, there has also been a push to ban travelling wild animal acts entirely, following suit from the UK and many other countries. However, the bill (Travelling Exotic Animal and Public Safety Act) has not yet passed fully. Circuses were (often, but of course not always) a breeding ground for poor animal welfare, with cramped and inadequate conditions for the animals, cruel training regimes and animal abuse. Many of the wild animals kept in private zoos and as pets experience the same sort of life.

Yet, people continue to visit these menageries, either blissfully unaware or unwilling to care about what goes on behind the scenes. Many of these ‘private zoos’ offer a unique selling point: close encounters with wild animals. These often allow people to, for example, play with tiger cubs. Typically, these types of experiences can be relatively cheap, around $80 to $100, but, as in the Myrtle Beach private zoo featured in the documentary, these can be upwards of hundreds of dollars. Not only is this stressful for the young animals (which, drawing parallels to tiger photo opportunities at Asian tiger temples, older cubs may be sedated or declawed for), it also sets a dangerous precedent of people enjoying the interaction and then going away thinking that exotic animals would make a good pet.

A 2011 study drew attention to this phenomenon: where wild animals are paraded in such fashion, or placed into more human situations, people care less about conservation and instead would rather keep the animal themselves. To make matters worse the Covid-19 pandemic is still raging, and this can lead to infection being passed from human to tiger, as has been documented in the Bronx Zoo, where close contact is likely minimal. One could imagine that where there are dozens of people playing with and having close contact with stressed cubs daily, there is a high likelihood of infections spreading through the captive tiger population and causing possible mortalities. Many roadside zoos do not have an on-site vet or do not even use veterinary services in order to cut costs.

In many states, no laws are governing the buying and ownership of big cats and sometimes they may be easier to obtain than dogs. The prices for such animals can be shockingly quite affordable. Both tiger and lion cubs are often sold as pets in the US for under $5,000. These costs are just the tip of the iceberg. Veterinary personnel who have experience with tigers and lions are few and far between, and their expertise is not cheap. Bills can be in the tens of thousands of dollars each year. Adequate nutrition is also expensive, and for a tiger or lion, can be $2,500 a year or more. Even with the costs of maintaining these animals, cute cubs do not stay cute cubs for very long. So, then what?

For those who purchase big cats as pets and are not prepared for when the cat reaches maturity, the reality is that the cat if lucky will be given to an accredited rescue establishment. If the cat is unlucky, it may either be dumped or given to someone who will exploit it further, usually via breeding for-profit and not always to a member of their own species. Ligers and tigons (hybrids of tigers and lions, with the father species making up the first half of the portmanteau) are often paraded as special attractions at roadside zoos but with having no real conservation benefit to either species, breeding them has been considered bad practice by accredited establishments for several years now.

Of course, all of this is dependent on whether the cat ever reaches maturity. Many do not even make it two years as pets. Where cubs outgrow their usefulness as money-makers in private zoos, further exploitation tends to be their fate. They often will be returned to the mill to churn out more baby tigers, lions, tigons and ligers (and even third-generation mixes), and the cycle continues. Cub-petting events are not even limited to these private zoos either, as seen in the Tiger King documentary, cubs were taken on the road, to anywhere that would let their handlers make money off them. Unfortunately, the profits made from the cubs, either through selling or petting events fuels further breeding and thus exploitation and cruelty.

Many of you will have seen or heard of Joe Exotic’s role in tiger breeding, exploitation and distribution, and though his antics throughout the programme may have endeared him to many viewers, his blatant disregard for animal welfare and killing of healthy tigers due to overcrowding –for which he was charged and was part of the reason he is serving 22 years in prison – absolutely should not be forgiven. Over the years he was one of the largest breeders and exporters of tiger cubs in the US, even transporting cubs over state lines, made illegal in 2003 by the Captive Wildlife Safety Act which aimed to prevent wildlife smuggling and sale of exotic animals between states.

While this has been a good start in tackling the issue of exotic animals in captivity, it is often poorly enforced hence it took authorities so long to investigate cat owners and breeders such as Joe Exotic. Despite the attention on his arrest and animal cruelty offences, the way he was portrayed in the documentary has seemingly encouraged people to visit his former zoo and become part of the problem by paying to interact with tiger cubs. While Joe's popularity and thus indirect encouragement of further big cat exploitation and perhaps ownership were not intended by the documentary, one could argue the portrayal of his main rival Carole Baskin as a ‘crazy cat lady’ certainly was. The documentary spent a great deal of time looking into what happened to Carole’s ex-husband and perhaps implicating her. Although their marriage appeared to be quite unhappy, there has never been any solid evidence linking her with his disappearance and police have never believed she was responsible. However, in the viewer’s eyes, this portrayal almost paints her as the antagonist of the story, overshadowing her work and campaigning for tightening of legislation relating to big cats.

Carol Baskin started, as many current proponents of a ban on keeping big cats as pets did, keeping and breeding her own animals in the early 1990s. Times were different then and purchasing exotic animals was easier, more commonplace and perhaps less frowned upon than it is now. Her change of heart came upon her realisation that breeding them was not saving them from extinction and that she was part of the problem. By 1997, she ceased breeding and opened Big Cat Rescue in 2003, a non-profit organisation which takes in unwanted and abandoned animals. She and her current husband have advocated for many years for adding to the current Captive Wildlife Safety Act and have been important in pushing for the introduction of new legislation. The Big Cat Public Safety Act is the proposed amendment to current legislation which would ban private ownership of big cats (except zoos and accredited sanctuaries), force existing pets to be registered with the relevant authorities and would also prevent interaction of big cats with the public, outlawing cub petting and other such events. One can certainly see the advantages of such a law being passed, particularly for animal welfare, combatting the wildlife trade and also perhaps cutting demand for young animals. Penalties for breaking this law include a hefty fine of $20, 000 (around £15, 635 or €17, 160 at time of writing), or five years jail time.

However, the law is still yet to pass. It has gained traction, however. At the time of writing the Big Cat Public Safety Act has 230 signatures from representatives. It is still currently in the introductory phase, and must pass the House, then the Senate, and then must be made into law by the president. It still has a long way to go but there is every chance that it could be pushed through these stages in the not-so-distant future.

Tiger King: Murder, Mayhem and Madness is an insider’s view into the world of private animal ownership, the heated battle between those which believe in keeping wild animals as pets and for profit, and those which seek to end it. Although wild animals as pets is still a large problem in the US, numbers are often overblown by the media. there is hope that a change in public opinion over time will see fewer big cats and other exotic animals being kept as pets and creating further pressure on governing figures to pass new legislation. If you have already watched the documentary, you likely have your own views on everybody involved, but it is hard to deny that Joe Exotic is almost given anti-hero status due to his crazy antics overshadowing his crimes, whilst Carole Baskin is painted in an unfavourable light, despite nearly two decades of work to help people’s unwanted animals, and campaigning against big cat ownership and exploitation. It could be argued that the documentary has done more harm than good for America’s pet tigers, because of Baskin's portrayal and subsequently, people finding themselves rooting for Joe Exotic, eclipsing and undermining Baskin and what she has set out to achieve for animal welfare.

As mentioned earlier, more people have visited Joe’s former zoo – in the midst of a pandemic, no less – and played with cubs due to the Tiger King effect, an unfortunate result of depicting him as some sort of legendary figure. However, it would be hoped that the majority of viewers would have been swayed in the opposite direction. If you are yet to see the documentary, it is simultaneously enjoyable, unbelievable, and sad, well worth the watch as long as it is recognised that it is not without its biases. Although the Tiger King documentary focuses on the rivalry between Baskin and Joe Exotic, it does have times where it exposes the rampant animal cruelty and profiteering present in private ownership. One would hope that no matter how viewers felt about everyone involved that the animal welfare aspects of private big cat ownership have been the most eye-opening, and the message that is taken away from the whole series.