All joking (aside): Time for West to change perspective on rodeo

Posted 4/9/13

This was true to an extent in California (yes, I’m back to this hack gimmick), where rodeos and horse races exist as niche sports. But it’s much more prominent here in Park County, where by traveling east, I’ve found myself to be living in a …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in

All joking (aside): Time for West to change perspective on rodeo

Posted

The resumption of Northwest College’s rodeo season and my close proximity to the self-proclaimed rodeo capital of the world got me thinking, humans rely an alarming amount on animals for entertainment.

This was true to an extent in California (yes, I’m back to this hack gimmick), where rodeos and horse races exist as niche sports. But it’s much more prominent here in Park County, where by traveling east, I’ve found myself to be living in a place much more in the true spirit of the West.

That would seem like a point of pride for the area. And in most ways, it is. But some traditions of the wild west should have gone the way of the buffalo (except without the regret of decimating one of the most awesome and American of species).

The degree to which animals are used as forms of amusement is one of the few aspects of Park County that I cannot, as a resident, take pride in.

I’m going to do my best to not come off as a hippie. You should know I don’t play hacky sack, wear tye-dye or smell like patchouli oil. And I’m not a full-on animal-lover. I eat meat and am jealous of guys who can pull off leather jackets.

So at the very least, I’ve thought about this rationally.

Isn’t it strange that in 2013 we can’t find something better to do than sit around and watch someone try to remain upright on an angry bull?

Sure, it’s just a sport. And unlike some other animal-centric sports, the animals in rodeo aren’t grossly mistreated. From what I’ve gathered, rodeo respects the bull as a necessary and valuable element of the sport, and provides it with generally good care.

Then why I am speaking out against rodeo? Why not an activity that routinely ends in the death of animals, like hunting?

Because I don’t have nearly as much of a problem with hunting as I do with rodeo.

Hunting, at the very least, can serve a purpose. Personally, I don’t hunt nor have the desire to ever do so, but I do believe hunting can be justified relatively effectively in some cases. Sometimes hunting is necessary for population control, and it can provide food and other animal products to those with the know-how and to those in need.

But rodeo seems to supply little more than cheap thrills.

In fact, I’d say rodeos (and horse racing, while I’m at it) are glorified displays of high stakes animal cruelty.

(Make sure to pick up Thursday’s Tribune for the story about the incredulous gasp that I just heard echo throughout the county.)

Cruel? Seems mighty strong, right? That depends on your perception of cruel.

Rodeo is cruel because it subjects animals to a physically distressing activity they would obviously not be engaged in without human provocation.

Most subjugation of animals is cruel to some extent, but there’s clearly many different degrees and intents of subjugation and cruelty. Leashing a dog during a walk or caging it on the way to the vet is on the lowest end. Skinning that same dog alive is at the high end.

That spectrum indicates cruelty isn’t always obvious. Animal cruelty can be something more subtle we don’t notice – often because we’ve grown so used to it.

Professional football player Michael Vick claimed he didn’t know running a dog fighting ring in which dogs were routinely killed – at times by his own hands – was wrong, because he was raised in a community where it was a generally accepted activity.

Rodeo is clearly less cruel than dog fighting. It’s not even close, and I’m not comparing what occurs in rodeo with the egregious and overwhelming brutality of pitting two dogs against each other in a ring. What I am doing is comparing the mindset of thinking dog fighting is OK with the mindset of thinking rodeo is OK.

So is rodeo OK? You tell me.

The burden of proof should fall upon those engaging in the practice causing undeniable harm. Prove to me it isn’t cruel. Good luck proving to me that lassoing a calf, flipping it over and tying its legs together is not cruel.

Bonding experiences between animals and humans shouldn’t actually involve physical bondage.

If you still haven’t reconsidered your stance on rodeo, let me ask you something. Have you considered the feelings of the animals?

I know, I know. I will provide aspirin to those of you who just rolled your eyes so hard it gave you a migraine.

It’s completely understandable. Most people in this world don’t even like to consider the feelings of other humans, let alone those of an animal.

Personality and feelings are two things humans like to project on to animals. Humans like to think they know what an animal is thinking. And people generally like to think an animal shares their same dumb human thoughts. Human-animal communication is a strictly enforced one-way street.

And I think that’s what irks me about rodeo more than other, more violent sports like football and boxing. The participants suffering injuries (from minor to career and life-threatening) in the latter sports are consenting human adults.

Animals have no vocal say in the violent and chaotic activities they participate in during a rodeo.

Rodeo isn’t evil. Nor are the people who participate in it. In the grand scheme of things, rodeo isn’t high on the list of things demanding major reform. But its elevated status in Park County makes it an inescapable issue.

Is the entertainment value provided by a bucking bull worth the potential suffering and distress it causes to animals and overly sensitive writers?

Buck no.

Comments