Justice For Captive Wildlife Worldwide
Over the last week there has been an influx of articles regarding the problems associated with captive wild animals being used for entertainment and profit. This rush of attention was preceded by the fatal mauling at the Marakele Predator Centre in South Africa. Not fatal for the human involved, but fatal for the male lion, Shamba, who carried out the attack. Part of the attention garnered by the incident can be attributed to the fact that it was captured on video by a tourist. After dragging the park’s owner, Michael Hodge, into the brush, Shama was shot and killed by other workers after he refused to leave Hodge’s side.
With a salacious video that includes the screams of horrified women, and a live action mauling that meets the public expectation of what The Ghost And The Darkness would be like in real life, the story was bound to go viral. Which, considering the state of lion conservation is not entirely a bad thing. However, the disproportionate level of definitive criticism offered toward Hodges and his Marakele Predator Center, when laid out beside the comparatively ambivalent reactions to the human-fatal mauling that took place at Kevin Richardson’s sanctuary just a few months ago, is brow-raising at the very least.
Despite having been critically injured, and ending up in the hospital, Hodges and his wife have suffered death threats so serious in nature that the Marakele Predator Center has now been closed, their website and social media pages deactivated. In sharp contrast, after the fatal mauling of Megan Van der Zwan at the sanctuary of famed Lion Whisperer, Kevin Richardson, thousands of fans lavished support on Richardson, even offering to start fundraisers for him, and the lion responsible for the fatality.
While the comment section of Richardson’s Facebook post about the mauling at his sanctuary was jammed with assertions that it was the fault of the dead young woman, not Richardson, that his lion killed someone–even though Richardson had removed the lion from its enclosure knowing that two young women were present at one of the bush camps at his facility–the public reaction has been much, much different toward Hodges.
The below quotes are from Richardson’s Facebook post regarding the fatal mauling that occurred at his facility:
“I cannot help but feel anger at the arrogance and stupidity of any human that would think it’s ok to get out of your protective vehicle”
“I don’t feel you could have done anything different to avoid this.”
“she died because of her own transgression”
“Please folks, instead of adding insult and accusation, try giving Kevin some much needed support and kind words to help keep his spirits up. Let him know that we continue to support him and his efforts.”
And here are some of the reactions toward Hodges:
"Know your place, we are not the Kings of any jungles.”
"You murdered an innocent being, due to human ego and error.”
"He was bred, caged and exploited for profit from birth by a greed-driven individual with a god-complex who thought that 'his' lion wouldn't attack him."
The lay members of the public aren’t the only ones to offer a lopsided response to the not-so-different mauling incidents.
While exceedingly few experts within the field of conservation gave any formal opinion to news outlets regarding the death of the young woman at Kevin Richardson’s facility (and if they said anything, they carefully avoided naming Richardson) there’s been no shortage of judgement passed on the incident which took place at Hodge’s Marakele Predator Center. This article put out by News24 contained sharp disapproval dispensed by recognized experts.
"Whether they have been bottle fed from birth or not, lions are wild animals and deserve to be treated with respect, with no human interaction,” – Blood Lions campaign.
"Furthermore, we strongly discourage wildlife interactions as this could result in the same display of behaviour, putting the public at risk as well as compromising the animal's well-being and possibly resulting in their unnecessary death”. – Martie Rossouw, manager of the NSPCA Wildlife Protection Unit.
"The lion's behaviour shows why habituated lions such as this one, apparently bottle fed since birth, can never be released back into the wild. They have lost their 'wildness' and the boundary between prey and playmate is blurred,” – Audrey Delsink of the Humane Society International.
Delsink goes on to state that experiences involving captive born and raised lions offer no conservation value and were not supported by the predator conservation or scientific community.
If these are the genuine positions of experts within the conservation community, then why the gross disparity between reactions to the two incidents?
Both Richardson’s and Hodges’ lions were hand-raised by them from cub to adult.
Both Hodges and Richardson worked with the lions on a daily basis.
Both Richardson and Hodges are attributed with having a “special bond” with their lions.
Both Hodges and Richardson utilized their lions in order to “raise awareness” about lion conservation.
Both Richardson’s and Hodges’ facilities allowed guests to stay overnight, and both offer “up close” experiences.
Hodges’ lion, Shamba, was renown for leaping onto the bonnet of the caged truck containing guests offering photo opportunities for guests.
Richardson’s lions were memorably photographed sitting on the bonnet of a Mercedes Benz G Class vehicle for a car ad.
While Marakele breeds lions and predominantly functions off the revenue provided by guests, Richardson’s facility charges thousands of dollars to people who wish to “volunteer” there, as well as hosting guests in its bush camps. Unlike Hodges, however, Richardson also hires his lions out to make movies, and commercial advertisements. While Hodges breed his lions and Richardson does not, Richardson did orchestrate the procurement of several lion cubs specifically for the purpose of then teaching children to interact with the cubs as they grew to adulthood in the process of making the movie Charlie The White lion.
Photo credit Andrew Van Ginkel
Taken from the Instagram of the director of the upcoming Charlie The White Lion. The ultimate irony, is that this photo showing children who have been trained to interact with lions by Kevin Richardson was posted almost exactly one month after one of Richardson's lions fatally mauled a young woman not unlike Daniah, pictured here.
And yet, for some intangible reason Richardson–who actually spent an entire decade being paid to raise lions for canned hunting organizations before he began making movies of himself playing with his own lions, which had been purchased from the lion farm where he worked–is seen as an important figure in conservation, while Hodges is seen as a blight on it. The truth is that Richardson is merely the reverse face of the same coin in captive wildlife exploitation. The only real difference between the two is in how they present themselves.
Hodges peddles his lions with all the flare of P.T. Barnum, embracing the exploitation he engages in with cavalier hat-tipping confidence. Everyone knows that the majority of what they get from Barnum is fake but they enjoy the show anyhow, as long as it goes according to expectation.
Richardson, meanwhile, keeps his exploitation subverted by the mystique of his contrived persona, hiding it in plane sight like David Copperfield making airplanes and train cars disappear right before the eyes of enraptured onlookers. Viewers often start out dubious, but end up captivated, and subsequently convinced that he’s the “real deal” even though he bills himself as a magician.
At their core, the two are both nothing but illusionists with differing performances. One show might be better than the other but that doesn’t mean they aren’t both shows. It’s high time that the conservation community removes its rose colored glasses and addresses the exploitation of captive wildlife worldwide for what it is.
Exploitation.