The Chimpanzee Collaboratory227 Massachustts Ave., NE (Suite 100)

Washington, DC 20002202.546.1761

www.chimpcollaboratory.org

Serving a Life Sentencefor your viewing pleasure!

The case for endingthe use of great apes in film

and television

1

In the late 1960s, Washoe, a female chimpanzee, was taughtAmerican Sign Language under the care of Drs. Allen andBeatrix Gardner. The Gardners hired a young researcher namedRoger Fouts to work closely with Washoe, and Fouts would

later write about his remarkable experience in the book, Next ofKin: What Chimpanzees Have Taught Me About Who We Are.

In the following excerpt, Fouts describes an incident involvingWashoe and a volunteer researcher named Kat. Capitalized wordsand phrases are used to indicate the signs exchanged by Washoeand her human friends.

“In the summer of 1982, Kat was newly pregnant, and Washoedoted over her belly, asking about her BABY. Unfortunately, Kat hada miscarriage, and she didn’t come in to the lab for several days.When she finally came back, Washoe greeted her warmly but thenmoved away and let Kat know she was upset that she’d beengone. Knowing that Washoe had lost two of her own children, Katdecided to tell the truth. MY BABY DIED Kat signed to her. Washoe

looked down to the ground.Then she looked into Kat’seyes and signed CRY,

touching her cheek justbelow her eye. When Kathad to leave that day,Washoe wouldn’t let hergo. PLEASE PERSON HUG

she signed.”

This report is dedicated toWashoe and all great apeswho, for better or worse,are now reliant on theirhuman cousins for protec-tion and survival.

“PleasePerson

Hug”

Fri

en

ds o

f W

ash

oe

/Fo

uts

32

Acknowledgements

The Chimpanzee Collaboratory is a partnership of attorneys,scientists and public policy experts who are working to makesignificant and measurable progress in protecting the lives andestablishing the legal rights of chimpanzees and other great apes.The Collaboratory gratefully acknowledges the following individualsfor their contributions to this report:

Jane Goodall, Ph.D., C.B.E., whose more than forty years ofwork with wild chimpanzees brought a wealth of knowledge tothe writing of this report;

Carole Noon, Ph.D., who directs the world's largest captivechimpanzee sanctuary (The Center for Captive Chimpanzee Care)and offered valuable observations gained through her hands-onwork with hundreds of chimpanzees;

Liz Clancy Ross, Chair of the Chimpanzee Collaboratory’s PublicEducation Committee, who contributed to and oversaw the writingand editing of this report;

Roger Fouts, Ph.D. (author of Next of Kin) and Deborah Fouts, M.S.,who added scientific expertise and insight gained through their co-directorship of The Chimpanzee and Human Communication Institute,Central Washington University, and at Friends of Washoe;

Doug Cress, whose experience as a professional Hollywoodmake-up artist, combined with his leadership of the Great ApeProject, contributed significantly to this report's creation;

Eyewitnesses, whose identities must remain anonymous, whodirectly observed the abuse of great apes on film and televisionsets, and in training compounds as well;

Bruce Wagman, Esq., for his legal expertise and advice.

The Chimpanzee Collaboratory also thanks The Glaser ProgressFoundation, The Arcus Foundation, and Messengers of HealingWinds, whose contributions made this report possible.

An openletter tomembersof theHollywoodcreativecommunity

Dear Friends,

I would like you to consider an aspect of your work that you may not have

thought about before: the true cost of using chimpanzees and other great apes

in entertainment and advertising.

As a performing artist, writer, director, producer, or industry executive, your

work may involve the use of chimpanzees and other apes now or at some time

in the near future. As you may know, I have studied chimpanzees in the wild for

more than forty years. During that time, I have developed a great appreciation

for these remarkable creatures who are capable of thoughts and emotions so

similar to our own. Because of what I have learned, I am increasingly concerned

about their use for our “viewing pleasure.”

Through this report, I would like to share information with you regarding the

training of chimpanzees, their treatment when they become older, and how such

use harms them irreparably and in ways that may not be immediately apparent.

Once you’ve had time to digest this, I hope you will join me and a growing

number of your colleagues who are refusing to act with, write for, or cast great

apes in their productions. The time has come to move beyond the misuse of crea-

tures who are vulnerable to our exploitation (intentional or not) precisely because

they are so like us.

Thank you, in advance, for reading this report and for your earnest

consideration of my request.

Sincerely,

Jane Goodall, Ph.D., DBE

Member, Chimpanzee Collaboratory

United Nations Messenger of Peace

Founder, The Jane Goodall Institute

54

What Were They Thinking?Without question, film and television have the power to advance theways we look at our world. From “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner”to “Antwone Fisher,” from “All in the Family” to “Will & Grace,”Hollywood’s creative community has demonstrated time and againits ability to help us look inward and see our higher selves.

By the same token, Hollywood’s archives also contain works that onlyperpetuated outdated and destructive attitudes, even if this wasn’timmediately apparent at the time. Take another look, for example,at Frank Capra’s much-heralded comedy “It Happened One Night.”Describing the woman he hopes to marry, Clark Gable’s charactergruffly declares, “What she needs is a guy that’d take a sock at her oncea day, whether it’s coming or not.” At the time, that jaw-dropping snip-pet of dialogue dropped no jaws – in fact, the film was rewarded withfive Oscars, including Best Screenplay – but then again, that was 1934.Times change, understanding deepens, and as we watch this film (andothers like it) today, we can only wonder, “What were they thinking?”

Which has led us to wonder: what will audiences think years from nowas they look at the films and television programs of our era –particularlythose that put great apes on display for public amusement? As timepasses and understanding of the terrible suffering endured by theseindividuals increases, will audiences look back at films such as “Planetof the Apes” or episodes of “Lancelot Link” and wonder, “What werethey thinking?” We believe they will, and we believe you will havesimilar thoughts as you read through this report and follow the livesof typical captive chimpanzees from birth to retirement.

A word of warning: their story is disturbing. To provide a steady streamof performers for an industry that must constantly churn out newproduct, chimpanzees (and other great apes) are bred in captivity indeplorable conditions. Often separated from their mothers within weeksof birth, these infants suffer irreparable psychological harm, and thisdamage is only compounded by a training process that brutalizes themboth physically and mentally. When their brief career in front of thecamera is over, many are forced to live the rest of their lives in sub-standard zoos and roadside attractions, and this can mean as manyas fifty years of isolation in an undersized cage.

In short, the life of these captive apes is no life at all. It is a lifesentence, served for our viewing pleasure. For contemporary televisionand film audiences, ignorance of this ongoing abuse is bliss.

Caro

le N

oo

n

76

A Life Sentence BeginsSeparated from their mothers in infancy, captive chimpanzees

often suffer severe psychological damage that irrevocably

condemns them to life in human hands.

By human standards, chimpanzees born in the wild enjoy extraordinarilyclose relationships with their mothers. Infants are held almost constantlyfor the first two years of life as they cling to their mother’s stomach andsleep with her in a nest at night. Typically weaned around age four, wildchimpanzees are considered infants until age five and don’t begin toexert independence from their mothers until age eight. During theseformative years, young chimpanzees learn how to forage, avoid danger,and acquire the life skills that will help them smoothly integrate into thelarger community (often numbering around one hundred).

The first two years of a captive chimpanzee’s life stand in sharp anddisturbing contrast. For decades, chimpanzees destined for placementin the entertainment and biomedical industries were abducted from thewild. Seeking infants (who would be easier to handle, transport, andtrain), hunters tracked mothers with their young still clinging to them.Brutally shot out of trees, the chimpanzee mothers would fall to theirdeaths, sometimes crushing their offspring in the process. Thoseinfants who survived were taken from their dead mothers and sold tothe highest bidder.

International law now recognizes wild chimpanzees as an endangeredspecies and has virtually eliminated this type of procurement for theentertainment industry. Consequently, captive chimpanzees used inentertainment today generally come from two sources: breeding andpurchasing. (Interestingly, chimpanzees who were in captivity as ofMarch 12, 1990 and their progeny are considered only “threatened”under federal law and are not accorded the same level of protectionas their “endangered” wild cousins.) If an animal trainer owns manychimpanzees, adults of reproductive age may be housed together toproduce offspring. Once an infant is born, the trainer may remove theinfant from the mother after sedating or completely anesthetizing her.(Sedation may not be necessary for mothers who are losing a child forthe first time – i.e., they don’t realize the child is never coming back,

so they may actually hand over their babiesvoluntarily–but after a chimpanzee mother haslost one child, she will be extremely unlikely towillingly hand over another infant to a trainer.)Trainers who don’t have breeding chimpanzeesmust purchase infants from outside sources

b i r t h t o t w o y e a r s

The mischievous chimpanzee who bounds from one adventure toanother across screens large and small appears healthy and happy.What’s more, chimpanzees and orangutans are seen frequentlyenough that audiences perceive their species must be healthy aswell. Such depictions are deceiving on two fronts: the apes performon cue because in many cases they have been brutally beaten–suffering their own version of a “sock a day, whether it’s comingor not”– and their species may face extinction unless current trendsare reversed.

A public outcry for change is unlikely because audiences do notperceive a problem, and the cost of educating them is prohibitive.Although networks and studios have alternatives to animal performers(e.g., actors in suits, computer generated images), these are moreexpensive, and a cost-cutting mentality dominates. Even providedwith evidence of abuse, some production executives have simplylooked the other way or hidden behind agencies such as theHollywood Unit of the American Humane Association, even thoughits monitors have largely failed to offer truly effective protection.

If a change is to come, it will begin with individuals within theentertainment industry who read this report, who recognize a practicethat is inhumane and unnecessary, and who decide that it is time wemoved beyond it.

Individuals, we hope, like you.

About This ReportThis report was prepared under the supervision of The ChimpanzeeCollaboratory. Assertions about the psychological development ofgreat apes, their treatment in training and on sets, and their life after“retirement,” have all been verified by the experts listed in theAcknowledgements unless otherwise cited.

In addition, to relieve readers from constantly tripping over theinelegant “him or her” construction when referring to chimpanzeesand other great apes, we have arbitrarily elected to refer to all greatapes as females.

Additional copies of this report can be downloaded atwww.chimpcollaboratory.org.

Caro

le N

oo

n

98

Trained to FearTo prepare captive chimpanzees for life on the set, trainers may

punch them, beat them with heavy objects, and do whatever they

deem necessary to establish physical dominance.

By nature, young chimpanzees are active, rambunctious, and easilydistracted – qualities diametrically opposed to what trainers need ifthey are to deliver specific behaviors on cue. Consequently, manytrainers rely heavily on physical domination and fear to ensure constantattention and compliance from their performers-in-training. Eyewitnessaccounts have documented the fact that some trainers pummelchimpanzees with their own fists, beat them with hammers, metalrods, and mop handles. Electric devices also may be used to shockthem into submission. This calculated abuse turns the chimpanzeesinto fearful individuals who will pay attention and cooperate if onlyto avoid further abuse.

Starting as early as age two, captive chimpanzees are trained to behavemore like humans and less like the wild creatures they are. In one oftheir earliest – and frequently most painful – lessons, they are taught notto bite, which would be a normal part of their playful behavior in thewild. Trainers sometimesrespond to bites by biting thechimpanzee back, or they mightplace their fingers around thecheeks of the biting chimpanzeeso that the chimpanzee bitesdown on her own cheek. Thetrainer may also hit the chim-panzee with a fist or otherobject when she bites. Otherinstinctive behaviors that arecompletely normal and naturalin the wild, such as vocalizingand self-grooming, also may beharshly punished.

This domination and fear-basedtraining continues through thenext phase where commandssuch as “No,” “Come here,”“Leave it,” and “Give me yourhand” are introduced.

t w o t o t h r e e y e a r s

such as research facilities, roadside attractions, primate dealers, or viathe Internet. (An infant female can cost as much as $55,000; an infantmale, as much as $50,000.) Chimpanzees in these facilities may also beremoved from their mothers soon after birth and usually live either aloneor with a group of other infants. When they are sold to trainers, they areremoved from the only family they have ever known. The actual removalis an extremely traumatic event for the infants. They will scream in fearand attempt to defend themselves by biting the person trying to removethem. If the infant is housed with other chimpanzees, the others alsomay attempt to defend the chimpanzee being taken.

All of these scenarios – abduction in the wild, breeding, and purchase–break the mother-infant bond at a critical time in the chimpanzee’spsychological development. Clinical research has clearly demonstratedthat when a mother and infant chimpanzee are separated, no matter howwell the infant is cared for afterwards, the result is serious emotionalstress that is likely to create long-term wounds. Similarly, primates whowere forcefully separated from their mothers and raised in barren cagesfrom an early age in laboratory experiments showed self destructivebehaviors, overly aggressive behaviors, and “stereotypies,” i.e., abnormal,compulsive, repetitive behaviors such as rocking back and forth, pacing,slapping, and self mutilation.

Young chimpanzees who have been separated from their mothers mayalso lack even the simplest of exploratory and play behaviors becausethey are so paralyzed with fear and anxiety. Even the sight of anotherprimate can be terrifying for them. Some will never successfully interactwith other chimpanzees, and the hope of bonding with another individualmay be lost.

For many captive chimpanzees used in film and television, the firsttwo years of life– a critically important time that would have been spentclinging to their mothers – are instead largely spent sitting in a cage.Because they often are housed alone or without an adult companion,these chimpanzees don’t have the opportunity to learn normal behaviors.They also don’t have a mother figure to comfort and reassure themwhen they are frightened. As a result, they often are left with profoundproblems that are not easily remedied. One study of previously deprivedchimpanzees that provided twelve years of enriched recovery found thatextreme psychological, maternal, sexual and social deficits still existed.

And for those captive chimpanzees who will eventually perform oncamera, the problems are only beginning.

TheThousand

MileStare

“[Jane Goodall and I]saw chimpanzeeshoused alone inmachines calledsolettes. These weresmall metal andPlexiglas boxes withventilators on top. They were about the sizeof a very small refrigera-tor. I'll never forget themoment we saw our firstchimpanzee in one ofthem. The young chim-panzee was clinging indespair to the bottom ofthis small container.When we opened thedoor she turned her headtoward us. But when shelooked at us she seemedto look right through us.She was mentally gone.Jane called it ‘the thou-sand mile stare’ that shehas seen in young chil-dren starving to death inAfrica. This chimpanzeehad given up. She wasno longer a chim-panzee.”

Dr. Roger Fouts,describing a tour ofa biomedical lab

Mich

ael N

ichols, N

ational G

eograp

hic Im

age C

olle

ction

1110

chimpanzee likes the jellybean, she is likely to clap again, and the train-er will repeat his reward-command response to reinforce, or “cap-ture,” this particular behavior. Soon, the chimpanzee will make theassociation between the verbal commands and doing the behavior(which includes the tasty reward), and at that point the behavior issaid to be “on cue.”

Unfortunately, young chimpanzees don’t always respond to positivereinforcement alone. Just like their human counterparts, two andthree year-old chimpanzees have short attention spans and plenty ofenergy. Sometimes the prospect of a raisin or jellybean won’t beenough to make them sit down and concentrate, especially if they’renot hungry or if the behaviors being sought aren’t interesting to them.Chasing after a bird that flies by or checking out a new toy may befar more interesting than being forced to sit still and perform mundanerepetitive tasks. And as the behaviors required of them become morecomplex, positive reinforcement can become even less reliable. Ajellybean simply isn’t enough of an inducement to make a chimpanzeewant to do a handstand or a back flip.

In high-pressure situations likefilm shoots, trainers cannotafford to lose the interest oftheir chimpanzee “actors”.Consequently, if a chimpanzee’sattention drifts during a positivereinforcement training session,the trainer may take strong andsometimes brutal measures toregain her attention, includinggrabbing her, hitting her, orkicking her. Once this sort ofconduct becomes part of thetraining session, it ceases tobe “affection training.” The sadfact remains that punishmentoften is a regular part of train-ing. If it weren’t, chimpanzeessimply would not be willing toperform. It is not in theirnature.

The “No” command is sometimes associated with a physical beatingso that the chimpanzee learns to freeze up (or suffer physical abuse)whenever the command is given. These day-to-day commands will beused throughout their lives.

Because many of their future jobs will require captive chimpanzeesto hand items to a human actor, it is very important to trainers thatthe chimpanzees learn to willingly release anything they might have.This means that if a trainer notices infant chimpanzees becoming tooattached to an item such as a blanket or toy, he may immediately takeit away from them. Since the chimpanzees don’t have a mother tocling to, they often seek solace in objects, so this learning processcan be particularly stressful.

Over time, chimpanzees are introduced to more complex behaviorssuch as performing handstands or riding skateboards. As both thecomplexity of the tricks and the strength of the chimpanzees increase,the fear and domination tactics of the trainer become even moresevere. Larger items (broomsticks, mallets, hammer handles, shovels,rakes, water hoses, and metal pipes) may be used to hit the chim-panzees, and beatings often become more severe and frequent.

“A training technique sometimes called ‘the two-by-four technique,’ isused by trainers in various forms,” according to Dr. Fouts. “They hit thechimpanzees for no reason whatsoever, just completely out of the blue.Since the chimpanzees never know when they are going to be hit, theyhave to watch the trainer all the time. So the trainer avoids the problemof the chimpanzees’ attention drifting, and when they give them a com-mand, the chimpanzees will see it and obey it.”

The Myth of “Affection Training”

Confronted with accusations of abuse, animal trainers will oftenclaim to use “affection training” or “humane training” to develop thebehaviors that will eventually be used on set. Whatever the terminology,these techniques rely on the same initial theory: positive reinforcement.If a trainer wants to teach a young chimpanzee to clap on cue, forexample, he will give the chimpanzee a reward (such as a jellybean)when the chimpanzee randomly claps on her own. As the reward isgiven, the trainer will give a verbal command, such as “Clap!” If the

LifeInside the

CageOne of the first tricksthat chimpanzees learnis “smiling.” This facialexpression – mouthwide open, teeth clampedtogether and exposed –exists in natural chimpan-zee behavior but usuallyexpresses extreme fear.To teach this behavior forperformance purposes,trainers may begin byshouting, “Smile!” andgiving a hand signal. Theyoung chimpanzee has noidea what this means, sothe trainer will physicallycompel the behavior bysticking his thumb andindex finger into the infant’smouth and forcefully push-ing the edges out into agrin. As one can imagine,this is a confusing andfrightening process for thechimpanzees, so eventuallythey may begin to involun-tarily grimace in fear. Whenthis occurs, the trainer willoffer a small reward suchas a jellybean or raisin.Since making a full opengrin is an involuntaryresponse which youngchimpanzees can’t easilycontrol, the process oflearning to “smile” oncommand is long and stress-ful, requiring several fiveto fifteen minute sessionsper day over a minimumof six months.

Smilefor the

Camera!“[A young chimpanzee]tried to bite me when Ientered the enclosure,so the trainer who wasalready inside the enclo-sure threw a tool at him.It was a large rubbermallet, and it hit himpretty hard. The traineralso threw the malletat another youngchimpanzee in theenclosure to keep himfrom getting in the wayof the trainer’s work.Later, when I had towork by myself in theenclosure, the trainerhanded me a metalhammer and said thatif I had any trouble, Ishould hit them ‘withthis’ and pointed tothe handle end of thehammer.”

Eyewitness description ofan incident at a trainingfacility.

As a member of theperforming MarquisChimps, Susie rodea unicycle to fame onthe Ed Sullivan Show in the 1960's. She isnow 43 years old andpartially blind

Mic

hae

l N

ich

ols

, A

pe

rtu

re

1312

Since its earliest days of monitoring film production, the AHA hasbeen guided by the following overarching principles (according to theAHA’s web site):

• No animal will be killed or injured for the sake of a film production. • If an animal must be treated inhumanely to perform, then that

animal should not be used. • Animals are not props. If an animal is used off-camera as

background or to attract the attention of an animal being filmed, the same humane guidelines must apply to that animal.

• "Animal" means all sentient creatures, including birds, fish, reptiles and insects.

Today, the association reviews scripts and procedures that includeanimals in television and advertising productions as well. In additionto the broad principles above, AHA monitors have a 28-page bookletentitled “For the Safe Use of Animals in Filmed Media” to guide them.The booklet includes chapters on Basic Principles, General Guidelines,Veterinary Care, Technical Guidelines for Production, and SpeciesSpecific Guidelines.

The Species Specific chapter covers dogs, cats, birds, fish, insects,horses, livestock, exotics, apes and monkeys, reptiles, and wildlife.The section on horses, which is the most detailed, extends for eightpages. Most of the other sections are one to two pages each. Thesection on apes and monkeys takes up about three quarters of apage and consists of just eight bullets:

(The following text is a verbatim excerpt from the booklet. Italicshave been added to call attention to certain problematic phrasesthat are open to interpretation, essentially rendering the guidelinemeaningless.)

• Stages should be checked by the animal handler for escape routes and potential hazards. Because apes and monkeys can quickly climbheights and are capable of opening and closing doors, drawers, andother objects, any products containing harmful chemicals or sharpitems must be removed from the area. Props used on set should bechecked by the animal handler.

• Human contact with apes and monkeys should be limited tothose persons necessary for filming. People with colds or othercontagious viruses should remain at a distance from apes ormonkeys.

Disquiet on (and off) the SetThe familiar “No animals were harmed…” advisory is not a reliable

guarantee of safe treatment and may, in fact, belie severe physical

abuse suffered by chimpanzees during their performing years.

In the 1978 film “Every Which Way But Loose,” Clint Eastwood’sscene-stealing sidekick was a mischievous orangutan named Buddha.Tragically, this movie would be his last performance. Near the end offilming, Buddha was caught stealing doughnuts on the set. Back attheir compound, Buddha’s trainers allegedly beat him so severely withan axe handle - nicknamed the "Buddha Club" - that the orangutaneventually died of a brain hemorrhage.

“Project X,” a film depicting the U.S. Air Force's experiments onprimates, became infamous when, according to a report filed inOctober 1987 by the Los Angeles Department of Animal Regulation,“At least six animal trainers employed by Twentieth Century Foxphysically and/or mentally abused a number of chimpanzees duringthe production of this motion picture.” The department eventuallyfiled criminal complaints on 18 felony counts of cruelty against thetrainers involved with the film.

How were such abuses possible when the production of televisionprograms and feature films was (and continues to be) monitored by theAmerican Humane Association, an independent nonprofit organization?A closer look reveals that the AHA’s guidelines for monitoring thetreatment of great apes are woefully insufficient.

Insufficient Guidelines

Protection for animals in the film industry began in earnest in 1939after the public expressed outrage at the sight of a horse leaping offa 70-foot cliff during the filming of “Jesse James.” The horse died

during the shot, and the Motion PictureAssociation of America lobbied the HaysOffice on Censorship to establish mini-mum standards for the treatment ofanimals during filming. After the HaysOffice was abolished in 1966, the primaryresponsibility for animal protection fell tothe American Humane Association.

t h r e e t o s e v e n y e a r s

“[The commercial] wasfor a suntan product andI played “Tarzan”, andI had a loincloth on andeverything. And the…chimpanzee, was sup-posed to spray suntanoil on my back, butaccidentally he keptspraying my eyes, mychest and everything.The trainer was furiousand came up to him andconfronted him and said,‘What are you, a wiseguy? You know howwe handle a wise guy?Come with me!’ So hetook him in the back.I didn’t see any brutalitybut I heard a whack andthen whimpering andthen a whack again and[more whimpering] andthen after a couple ofminutes he led thechimpanzee out and thechimpanzee seemed verysubdued, and he did thejob. And that’s all therewas to it.”

Howard Mann, actor

WhatOne Tarzan

Heard

Ch

imp

an

zee

Co

llab

ora

tory

In the “Veterinary Care Guidelines” section it says:

• “If an animal is injured, sick or becomes incapacitated it shall be treated immediately. Such animal shall not resume work until it has been determined by the animal trainer or the veterinarian that the condition has been corrected”

In short, the animal trainers have the authority to assess whethertheir charges are well enough to perform, and if they decide that achimpanzee, who may appear fatigued to an AHA monitor, is readyto continue, the monitor has no real basis for intervening.

In the “Costumes, Makeup, Rigging, and Props” section it says:

• “Tie-downs shall not be used on animals not properly trained to wear them, or if the animal struggles or resists. Animals shall not be tied down any longer than what is necessary to accomplishthe shot.”

Instead of prohibiting or at the very least defining a length of timeallowable, this gives the production team carte blanche to tie animalsdown for as long as it wants. Under this rule, a chimpanzee couldbe tied to a chair for an hour (or longer) while the filmmakers get their shot.

In the “Special Effects”section it says:

• “Carbon dioxide and artificialsmoke is hazardous tocertain animal species. Thesesubstances should not beused around animals unlessfirst consulting with theanimal handler and the AHArepresentative.”

Again, there is no prohibition ofthe use of harmful chemicals;simply the suggestion that theanimal handler and AHA repre-sentative should be consulted.

15

• When apes are to be used in productions for two or moreconsecutive days, care must be taken to ensure adequate rest. Animal handlers must know each animal’s capabilities fordealing with workloads.

• When an ape is working on set for more than three consecutivefull days (six or more hours per day), a play area, empty room,or private park where the ape may exercise and relax must be provided.

• Working apes after sundown is discouraged and should only occur when the ape has been conditioned to work after sundown.

• Clothes used on apes must be loose fitting, easy to take on or off(Velcro is preferred), and may not obstruct the ape’s ability to walk, hear or see.

• Prior to filming, apes must be introduced to characters or moving objects that are frightening or otherwise unnatural. For example, apes should be familiar with any animatronic objects or costumed persons such as clowns or beasts.

• Stages should be kept cool around apes. Apes should not be on set for reasons other than filming, rehearsing, preparing, orotherwise becoming familiar with objects, persons, or otheranimals that will be in the scene. Apes should not be used as stand-ins or for lighting adjustments.

These few and brief suggestions are the only guidelines specificallyapplicable to productions using apes or monkeys on set, and theambiguity of the language allows productions to circumvent manyrules without actually violating them. “Adequate rest” is called for,but there is no explanation of what “adequate” means or who shouldmake this determination. “Working apes after sundown is discour-aged” but not forbidden. “Otherwise becoming familiar with objects,persons, or other animals” is a condition that can be an open door topermitting the presence of apes on the set at all times, even thoughrest periods are essential.

Other general guidelines elsewhere in the booklet provide gapingloopholes for abusive behavior: (again, italics have been added)

14

Captive chimpanzees onsets often appear to haveextremely close, lovingrelationships with theirtrainers. They may beobserved hugging orkissing their trainersor simply holding theirhands. In truth, thesemay be signs of abusiverelationships and mayactually reflect the fearthe chimpanzee is feeling. By remaining close toher trainer, a chimpanzeeis much less likely to gethit than one who straysaway. Paying closeattention to what thetrainer is saying and doinghelps the chimpanzeeanticipate what willhappen next and behaveaccordingly. Paradoxicalas it may seem, theabused chimpanzee(much like a battered wifeor child) ends up seekingreassurance from the onlyperson who can provideit: the abuser.

But She Seems So

Happy

Mich

ael N

ichols, A

pertu

re

17

When a production is completed, the AHA will award it one of fiveratings based on the production’s adherence to the guidelines:acceptable, believed acceptable, questionable, unknown and unac-ceptable. Most films released by major studios are deemed to meetAHA standards and receive the familiar "No animals were harmed"credit alongside the AHA seal in the end credits. In fact, the authorsof this report were unable to obtain documentation of any formalcomplaint filed against a movie studio or production house by the AHA.

The relative ineffectiveness of AHA monitors on sets is also largelyattributable to the fact that the association seldom monitors thetraining of great apes used in films. This allows apparently harmlessactions on the set to mask abuse that has already transpired. Forexample, if a chimpanzee is beaten during training with a rubber hosefilled with rocks and sand - as was alleged to have occurred with oneof the trainers on “Project X” - the chimpanzee would only needto see a regular hose on the set to behave. The AHA monitor, quitenaturally, would have no idea that the empty hose he sees representssomething much more menacing.

(It is also worth noting that the AHA lacks jurisdiction outside theUnited States, preventing it from acting on abuses in training orproductions beyond our borders.)

16

Lack of Independence

While the AHA’s Film and TV Unit has been the official monitorfor animal welfare since 1980–when the Screen Actors Guild andthe Motion Picture Association voted to extend the AHA a formalcontract –many believe the association is ineffective for reasonsbeyond its ambiguous guidelines and lack of authority off the set.A Los Angeles Times article entitled, “Questions Raised About GroupThat Watches Out for Animals in Movies,” included this stunningstatement:

“Since the ‘80s, the major studios have directly paid for the AHAfilm unit’s budget. Concerned about the appearance of improperinfluence, film companies changed the arrangement in 1993 bydepositing money into a fund jointly overseen by producers andthe Screen Actors Guild. This fund now doles out about $1.5 milliona year to the AHA.”Los Angeles Times, February 9, 2001

Ultimately, the article concludes that,“The unit…lacks any meaningfulenforcement power under the SAG contract, depends on major studiosto pay for its operations and is rife with conflicts of interest.” Afterchimpanzees were severely abused during the filming of “Project X”in 1985 and 1986, the AHA issued a press release claiming to haveconducted an in-depth investigation that turned up no hard evidenceof abuse. According to an internal memorandum dated October 30,1987 and issued by Kenneth Williams of the Los Angeles districtattorney’s office, however, “There was no in-depth investigation

conducted by AHA” and “There is information which is sufficient tosubstantiate some of the allegations of abuse to the chimpanzees.”

Given both the toothless language of its guidelines and the AHA’srelationship with the companies it is supposed to oversee, it is littlewonder that abuses continue. And a reasonable observer wouldbe hard-pressed to look to the trainers to police themselves morevigorously. One substantial movie assignment can pay a trainer’s billsfor the whole year. With so much on the line, a trainer can’t afford tohave anything go wrong on the set. The trainer’s focus is on gettingthe chimpanzee to behave, and he may use any means necessary.For all intents and purposes, no one is watching him.

“The few chimpanzeesI’ve met in entertainmentare very different from thechimpanzees I know, andalso free living chim-panzees. They seeminhibited and cowed.Also, if there’s a suddenmovement they react to it.This means that they’reconstantly in a defensivestate, in preparation forsomething bad to happen,which is not good. Andyou can see the trainerjust has to look at themand they straighten up.”

Dr. Roger Fouts

Waiting for Something

Bad to Happen

Ch

imp

an

zee

Co

llab

ora

tory

19

The Long, Sad GoodbyeRetired at an age when an independent life in the wild would just be

beginning, captive chimpanzees can survive until age sixty, spending

decade after decade in deplorable conditions.

Most great apes are judged "unmanageable" by their trainers whenthey reach eight years of age. Given that chimpanzees can live as manyas sixty years in captivity, this presents a problem for their owners.Providing for their long-term care is expensive: an adult chimpanzee,orangutan or gorilla can cost as much as $10,000 per year to keep incaptivity. Few animal trainers are willing to earmark such funds for apeswho no longer generate revenue. As a result, many apes whose actingcareers have ended are either sold or traded to breeding centers, road-side zoos, or private collectors. (Laboratories, a buyer at one time, areless interested in acquisition these days given both a lack of funds andthe glut of captive-bred chimpanzees available within the biomedicalindustry.)

Some primate training facilities will continue to house chimpanzeeswho are no longer working. These chimpanzees are often ignored andgiven minimal care by their trainers since they have ceased to be usefulor lucrative. Females can be housed with single males and used forbreeding more chimpanzees into the industry, beginning the entirevicious cycle once again. The males, who become harder to handleas they grow larger and stronger, are usually removed after a femalebecomes pregnant.

Having likely spent tens of thousands of dollars to purchase a chim-panzee and invested thousands more caring for her, trainers arereluctant to donate their apes to a sanctuary without something inreturn. Most ethically managed sanctuaries will not buy (or even take)chimpanzees since accepting older animals into their care effectivelyopens another space back at the trainer's compound, and this spacewill be filled with another young chimpanzee, perpetuating a destruc-tive cycle.

Consequently trainers turn to the kinds of places that will do businesswith them: shabby roadside attractions such as the JungleLand Zoo inKissimmee, Florida; Suncoast Primate Sanctuary (formerly Noell's ArkChimp Farm) in Palm Harbor, Florida; and the Amarillo Wildlife Refugein Texas where “Chubbs,” who starred in Tim Burton’s “Planet of theApes,” now resides. Poorly maintained menageries like these may call

18

themselves “sanctuaries,” but they are little more than substandardzoos that often actively breed their chimpanzees for fundraising pur-poses (i.e., baby chimpanzees attract the viewing public), the enter-tainment industry, other substandard zoos, or the exotic pet trade.(Currently, there are no government regulations that would compelsuch businesses to function more responsibly.)

While there are some legitimate sanctuaries in the U.S. that can offeradequate long-term care for captive apes, there remain large hurdlesfor entertainment chimpanzees seeking a safe haven. Most of thesesanctuaries are full, understaffed and under-funded, and taking even asingle chimpanzee or orangutan can pose tremendous hardships. Inaddition, chimpanzees recently retired from the entertainment industrybring with them a host of psychological traumas. Many have beenhoused alone or with a small number of other chimpanzees. With alltheir training and learning to imitate humans, they never really learnhow to be chimpanzees. They cannot be easily introduced into largergroups of other, less damaged chimpanzees because they often donot know how to behave in this type of community.

Their experiences have taught them how to behave only with domi-nating humans. Due to this history, some chimpanzees live out theirlives alone in small cages, deprived of human or chimpanzee interac-tion of any kind. Others may be group-caged in small, overcrowdedenclosures that do not allow for normal movement and social interac-tion. The sad fact remains that there is currently no effective systemfor the retirement of apes who formerly worked in entertainment.

e i g h t y e a r s a n d b e y o n d

“Cheetah and Otto aresome of the menagerie ofanimals at the SuncoastPrimate Sanctuary, whichis the new and improvedversion of the storiedNoell's Ark Chimp Farm.The decades-old roadsideattraction was closed tothe public about fouryears ago after state andfederal officials found thatit kept animals in under-sized and outdated cages.Federal officials chargedthe Chimp Farm with usingcages that were rusty,small, dirty and hadjagged edges; keepingincomplete records aboutthe animals; improperlystoring food and bedding;and housing animals inuncomfortable condi-tions.”

The St. Petersburg Times,December 9, 2002

Life on the Farm

In mid-2002, the AnimalActors Guild (AAG) waslaunched to address someof the long-term welfareissues of apes formerly usedin entertainment. The non-profit organization is headedby Gini Barrett, the formerdirector of the AmericanHumane Association's Film &Television Unit, and NerissaPolitzer, an animal trainer.The AAG is seeking to raisefunds through a 20% "with-holding tax" on each apeperformer’s salary, as well asthrough public appearancesby "retired" apes. With mostworking chimpanzee “actors”earning less than $1,000 perday–and few work more thana day or two on any particularproject–the funds are unlikelyto provide permanent care. Inaddition, the AAG has statedit will not run its own retire-ment facility; rather, it willendeavor to place ex-actorsin designated sanctuaries, anoutcome that is also unlikelydue to overcrowding and costconstraints. In all likelihood,many of these apes will endup in substandard facilitieswhere they will be bred toproduce fresh fodder for theindustry. Most galling of all,the AAG solicits as a charityto send chimpanzees andother apes to true sanctuarieswhen it is essentially a groupthat uses animals, pocketsthe profits, and then asksthe concerned public to useits limited charitable fundsto care for the industry’scast-offs.

No Help Here

For the average male, it would belike living in a 7’x 7’ x 11’ cage.

Federal standards allow chimpanzees tobe kept alone in 5’ x 5’ x 7’ cages for theirentire lives.

Wanted: A New Way of Thinking

For generations, we have looked to define and affirm our humanitythrough qualities that separate us from the animals who share ourworld. When it comes to distinguishing humankind from other greatapes, however, such definitions become blurry.

Experts said that humans were singular because we use tools. Andthen Jane Goodall observed chimpanzees in Africa “termite fishing”with slender stalks from which they had carefully removed leaves.Tool using, in other words.

Experts said that humans were singular because we use a complexlanguage that allows us to communicate a depth of knowledge andfeeling unique to our species. And then a chimpanzee named Washoelearned American Sign Language, and her companion, Dr. RogerFouts, discovered depths of thought and feeling that he could onlycompare to his own.

Experts said that humans were singular because we have culture,consciously transmitting knowledge to generations who will succeedus as stewards of this planet. And then several scientists (mostrecently an international team publishing an article in the journalNature) observed communities of chimpanzees and orangutans thatdisplayed all the earmarks of culture.

Clearly, a new way of thinking is in order. How much more might welearn about ourselves if we focused instead on what connects us toour brethren in the animal kingdom, starting with our fellow primates?At the very least, we could stop thinking of chimpanzees and othergreat apes as wild animals who must be physically dominated, asproperty to be bought and sold, as instruments of amusement.

And, as always, Hollywood has the unique opportunity to shape thatthinking. It cannot be accomplished, however, with half-measures.No degree of “reform,” no amount of “tightening of existing regula-tions” can adequately protect great apes once they have been placedagainst their will on the performer’s track. Only by completely ceasingthe use of great apes in film and television productions can thecreative community end a process that is not only destructive andcruel, but demeans us all as well. By sentencing great apes to life inour care, we unwittingly cast ourselves in the role of jailers, consign-ing both human and ape to life in a prison of our own design.

2120

What are the Alternatives?With rapid developments in the sophistication of animatronics,costumes, and computer generated images (CGI), there are manyviable alternatives to using live chimpanzees and other great apes infilm and television. “Greystoke: Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes,”“Gorillas in the Mist,” “Instinct,” and “Mighty Joe Young” are just afew of the film and television productions that have taken advantageof such alternatives.

Production executives will argue, however, that these alternativesare far too costly to be considered in most cases, and on a dollar-for-dollar basis there is no question that live animals are cheaper. Whenthe costs for alternatives are considered against a production’s entirebudget, however, they do not appear to be unreasonable.

According to executives at some of Hollywood’s leading makeup,special effects, and computer animation companies, the cost forhiring two or three live chimpanzees (plus trainers) can be as littleas $2,000 per day. If a production company wants to rent a realisticanimatronic gorilla or chimpanzee, on the other hand, producers willspend approximately $11,000 per day. If the company chooses tobuild its own version, the capital cost alone escalates to $200,000,and then there are still the daily rates for the suit performers andpuppeteers who bring the animatronic creature to life. Computeranimation is even more expensive. The cost of simply “building” acharacter in a computer ranges from $100,000 to $250,000, and theper-shot costs (for each new angle on the character) can run as highas $80,000.

When the average budget for a studio movie is nearly $60 million,though, the differential in using animatronics or CGI can representa small addition in the film’s total cost – as little as 1-2%. Producersmay still maintain that “the real thing” looks better on screen thanany of the alternatives, but advances in computer technology androbotics are steadily blurring these distinctions. And the essentialethical question remains the same: can the decision to use liveanimals be justified in light of the cruel practices that make theirexploitation possible?

“I think it would beresponsible for eachperson who’s eventhinking about writinga chimpanzee into ascript… to just do alittle investigationbefore you say yes tothat. I think that wouldbe a huge first step.”

Callie Khouri,Director/Screenwriter, “Divine Secrets of theYa-Ya Sisterhood”

Chimpanzees areour closest livingrelatives, sharing atleast 98.4 % of ourDNA. Chimpanzeesare more closelyrelated to humansthan they are to gorillasor orangutans.

1.6º ofSeparation

A Writer’s First Step

You can join our effort

to end the cruel and

unnecessary use of

great apes in film and

TV productions right now

by signing the statement

of support on page 24.

Add your name to the

growing list of creative

community members who

have vowed not to act in,

cast, direct, produce,

write for, or be involved

in any way with a film or

TV production that uses

great apes. You can also

visit The Chimpanzee

Collaboratory web site

(www.chimpcollaboratory.org)

for more information on

this campaign.

And if you’d like to doeven more, please contactLiz Clancy Ross, Chair-person of The ChimpanzeeCollaboratory PublicEducation Committee,202.546.1761 (or via email,liz@ddal.org.)

WhatYou Can

Do

2322

Born in a remotejungle location, farremoved from otherchimpanzees, she isentirely dependenton her mother, ridingon her stomach orback during the dayand sleeping in hernest at night.(Birth to 24 mos.)

Infancy continues.

By observing motherand siblings, shebegins to learnforaging, “termitefishing,” and otherbehaviors.

Weaning of infantbegins.

Sibling is born.Chimpanzee is nolonger dependent on mother’s milk,travels independent-ly, and may nowsleep alone.

Early adolescence:males start toexhibit aggressivebehavior, femalesremain close totheir mothers.

Late adolescence:males spend timewith other maleswhile femalesremain close to their mothers butstart to show someinterest in males.

Females begin toraise own offspring;males focus onraising social statuswithin their group.

Gradual slowingof activity; tendencyto withdraw fromintensive socialinteraction.

Born in a breedingfacility, she is takenfrom her motherwithin days of birthand placed in anincubator whereshe will be handled2 or 3 times a dayby humans.

Moved to a smallcage, the infantcontinues to remainin isolation withbottle-feedingand occasionalhandling by humancaregivers.

Chimpanzee isseparated fromher peers andtransferred tothe care of ananimal trainer.

Training–andregular beatings –begin. Chimpanzeenow lives in smallenclosure with agroup of otherchimps. Performingmay begin atthis age.

As chimpanzeegrows stronger,severity of beatingsincreases. Chimp-anzee may bemoved to solitaryhousing to helptrainer maintaincontrol.

End of performingyears as chimpanzeebecomes too strongfor trainer to control.May be sold toroadside zoo orother substandardfacility.

Abandonmentcontinues. Malechimpanzeeslikely to be kept inisolation, femalesused for breeding.

Females may besold to breeder orused as breederby current trainer.Infants will mostlikely be removedfrom the mother,and the cycle of “a life sentence”will begin foranother generationof captivechimpanzees.

Life in substan-dard conditions,frequently inisolation, continues untilapproximatelyage 60.

The chimpanzeecan now be movedto a larger cagewhere she willjoin other infantchimpanzees. Noadult chimpanzees,however, will bein this group.

b i r t h 6 m o s . 1 2 m o s . 2 y r s . 3 y r s . 5 y r s . 7 y r s . 8 -12 y r s . 1 2 -15 y r s . 1 5 -3 3 y r s . 3 3 y r s . – d e a t h

A Li

fein

the

For

ests

of

Afr

ica

A Li

feSe

nte

nce

Mich

ael N

ichols, N

SG

PE

TA

Mich

ael N

ichols, A

pertu

re

2524

Statement of SupportI understand that the use of great apes in film and televisionproductions perpetuates cruel treatment and is irreparably harmful,and I believe it should be ended immediately.

I am also aware that the entertainment industry is unlikely to voluntarilyend practices that permit such abuses, and that no degree of “reform”to existing protective measures can alter one indisputable fact:removing great apes from their mothers during infancy and trainingthem to perform “on cue” causes psychological and emotional damage so severe that these individuals will never know how to actlike true chimpanzees, or how to bond naturally with others of theirown species.

Given these conditions, I pledge never to act with, cast, direct,produce, write for, or in any way participate in a production for filmor television that uses great apes as performers.

Signed:

Please print name:

Contact information (direct or through a representative) to help usverify your participation in this campaign. All information will be keptconfidential by The Chimpanzee Collaboratory.

Phone:

Email:

Representative Name:

(if applicable)

Please detach and mail this Statement of Support to:

Liz Clancy RossChair, Public Education CommitteeThe Chimpanzee Collaboratory227 Massachusetts Avenue, NE (Ste. 100)Washington, DC 20002

✁