[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sta,—I am very glad
to see the letter on " Woes of the Caged,' and your comment on it. It is the travelling menageries and the idiotic tricks which wild animals are made to perform, rather than zoos proper, that need suppression. I have never forgotten my horror on seeing a caged puma in one of the former long ago in Devonshire. As you doubtless know, the puma in its natural state is one of the sunniest-tempered
animals that exist (it has never been known to attack a human being unprovoked, and in capitivity is almost always as friendly as can be). This particular specimen, however, was described by the proprietor as being the " most savage- tempered animal in the collection." It looked it—and well it might. Its cage was about five feet long, and it could not stand upright.
Re eagles (to which you refer in your comment). When I first became a F.Z.S., about a quarter of a century ago, I took advantage of the fact to protest to the late Superintendent (R. I. Pocock) about the " inhumanity " of keeping these birds in captivity : to me it seemed a piteous thing to see them perched at the top of their posts, staring up into the sky. His reply (and I believe it to be perfectly true) con- vinced me that the cruelty was only apparent. He said that in nature the eagle sits all day long on the loftiest crag it ean find, and scarcely ever moves except to pounce upon its prey. He added that if they provided cages for them as big as cathedrals, the result would be exactly the same— they would fly up to the topmost branch, and never move except to come down for their food.—I am, Sir, &c., A BRITON IN TURKEY.
Previous page
