Cockfighting conflicts with animal protection in Puerto Rico

Para Español

On December 20, 2018, the federal government amended the Animal Welfare Act to ban cockfighting in Puerto Rico and the entire United States. Cockfighting enthusiasts, and Puerto Rico’s government, responded by challenging the ban in federal court. Puerto Rico legislature also enacted a law to further regulate the sport in spite of the ban. According to the legislature, it has a “right to cockfight” to preserve its cultural identity and economic sustainability. Since cockfighting continues in spite of the federal ban, the U.S. government and animal protection groups may consider engaging with the cockfighting community to assist in moving past a practice that conflicts directly with Puerto Rico’s current beliefs and laws on animal protection.

This blog post covers:

• Initial federal prohibitions on animal fighting and Puerto Rico’s cockfighting law
• Further federal restrictions on animal fighting, culminating in a complete ban in 2018
• The cockfighting community’s attempt to challenge the ban in court and Puerto Rico’s 2019 legislation further legitimizing the practice
• Cockfighting as a symbol of nationalism and cultural identity and a brief history of the first cockfighting ban in 1903
• Puerto Rico’s beliefs on animal protection, the birds as participants in the fights, and reevaluating traditions based on animal cruelty
• Economic interests as justification to continue cockfighting and the risk of avian influenza
• The possibility of the federal government and animal advocacy groups providing support instead of creating distance

Federal Animal Welfare Act prohibits animal fights

The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) sets forth minimum welfare standards for certain animals used for food, exhibition, research and experimentation. Since 1976, AWA has prohibited interstate transfer of animals for use in animal fights. AWA has also prohibited exhibiting or sponsoring an animal that was transported between states for use in an animal fight. Animal fights could not be promoted or advertised via the federal postal service. The Act provided an exception for fighting between live birds in states or territories where the practice was legal. This allowed for cockfighting in Puerto Rico.

Puerto Rico’s Gamecocks of the New Millennium Act

In 2007, Puerto Rico enacted Act 98, Puerto Rico’s Gamecocks of the New Millennium Act. The Act recognized cockfighting as an official sport under the jurisdiction of the Department of Recreation and Sports. In general terms, the Act sets forth the standards for fights. The Act also attempts to establish cockfighting as a cultural right under the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Federal government further restricts animal fighting

Between 2002 and 2014, Congress amended AWA’s animal fighting provisions various times. These amendments chipped away at the exception that allowed for fights between birds. In 2002, Congress prohibited sponsoring or exhibiting a bird for use in a fight when the bird had crossed state lines. Congress created a “Special Rule for Certain States.” In jurisdictions that permitted live bird fighting, it was only prohibited to sponsor or exhibit a bird in a fight if the animal was transported across state lines.

In 2007, Congress prohibited the selling, transport and use of sharp instruments attached to birds. Congress extended its prohibitions in 2008 to include buying, selling, possessing, and training animals for fighting. In 2014, Congress banned attending an animal fighting event, or causing someone under the age of 16 to attend. Throughout these years, Congress also increased the penalties for violating any of the provisions on animal fighting.

The Farm Bill bans cockfighting

In December 2018, the US enacted the Agriculture Improvement Act, or the “Farm Bill.” Section 12616 of the Farm Bill removed the “Special Rule for Certain States” provision, thereby making it illegal to fight all animals, with no exceptions. This new rule was effective December 2019. By this time, all US states had already banned cockfighting, Louisiana being the last to do so in 2007. The sport was still legal in the territories of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands and the Virgin Islands. The Farm Bill did not, and has not, discouraged cockfighting in Puerto Rico.

Puerto Rico challenges the cockfighting ban in court

On May 22, 2019, groups and individuals within the cockfighting community filed a petition challenging the constitutionality of Section 12616. Puerto Rico’s House of Representatives, the Senate and the Mayors’ Association filed motions joining the constitutional challenge.

These groups argued that the federal government had exceeded its powers by not allowing local government to determine the legitimacy of the sport. They argued the prohibition did not sufficiently affect interstate commerce to give the federal government jurisdiction. They also argued that territories were not subject to the ban, and that the ban violated numerous constitutional provisions. The petitioners stressed the cultural and economic significance cockfighting had to Puerto Rico.

On October 28, 2019, the federal district court of Puerto Rico denied the petition. I will not go over each of the reasons for the denial. For anyone interested, this article, written by attorney Christian Gonzalez, is a good summary. For the purposes of this post, it is sufficient to say that the court found that cockfighting sufficiently affected interstate commercial activity so that the federal government could legislate the activity. The court also found that the federal government could treat Puerto Rico the same as other states. Finally, the court confirmed the constitutionality of the ban. The court did not entertain the petitioner’s cultural or economic concerns, as these are not legal arguments. It did make note that if cockfighting was so profitable for the island, it must affect interstate commerce to some extent.

The petitioners appealed the district court’s decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. This court upheld the decision. The petitioners then requested the United States Supreme Court review the decision. In October 2021, the Supreme Court denied the request, ending the challenges in court.

Puerto Rico enacts Act 179 to further legitimize cockfighting

On December 18, 2019, less than two months after the district court’s decision, Puerto Rico enacted Act 179 of 2019. The new law was meant to reinforce the legitimacy of cockfighting in Puerto Rico.

In Act 179’s Statement of Purpose, the government stated that cockfighting is part of Puerto Rican folklore and culture. The Act states that animal welfare and animal protection are issues of local concern, and that Puerto Rico will maintain the practice for social, cultural and economic reasons. It also mentions preserving gamecocks for their value to biodiversity.

Cockfighting symbolic of nationalism and cultural identity

As the district court stated in its decision on the constitutionality of the federal ban on live bird fighting, the government does not recognize a “right to culture.” Additionally, the United States never ratified the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights referenced in Puerto Rico’s cockfighting law. However, this does not make the cultural significance any less valid to those who feel it is real.

It is not the first time Puerto Rico appeals to culture, tradition and nationalism to advance cockfighting. In Cockfighting Nationalist: Blood Sport and the Moral Politics of American Empire and Nation Building, professor and American Studies scholar Janet Davis provides a brief history of cockfighting in Puerto Rico, Cuba and the Philippines. Davis describes how the federal government banned the sport in the 1900s. Yet it continued illicitly, much as it does now.

The first cockfighting ban in Puerto Rico

It is believed that Spain originally brought cockfighting to Puerto Rico. It has been regulated since the 1800s. In 1903, the United States, intertwining morality with American nationalism and democracy, banned cockfighting throughout the territories it had recently acquired after the Spanish-American war. This included Puerto Rico. Animal advocacy groups pushed for the ban as well. They looked to spread their message regarding compassionate and humane treatment of animals.

To Puerto Rico, the ban represented forced assimilation, and a imperialistic move to erase its culture and practices. Just as the United States appealed to a sense of nationalism, respect and “togetherness” to impose the ban, Puerto Rico appealed to the same concepts to justify its defiance.

Puerto Rico continued to cockfight in spite of the ban. In 1933, in the middle of the Great Depression, Puerto Rico’s governor Robert Gore, repealed the ban. Supporters of the repeal argued that legalization would make Puerto Rico more attractive to American tourists. In the end, and against the wishes of animal advocacy groups, US economic interests overrode moral imperatives.

Today Puerto Rico continues to want to assert its identity and cultural autonomy through cockfighting, an activity that the federal government and animal advocacy groups consider “barbaric” and “savage”. This says a lot about the relationship between the Puerto Rico and the US– a relationship that, in many ways, remains unchanged and combative.

What has changed, especially in the last few years, is Puerto Rico’s beliefs and laws on animal protection.

Puerto Rico’s beliefs on animal protection

Puerto Rico’s Act 154, Animal Welfare and Protection, enacted in 2008, recognizes animals as sentient beings. Comparatively, Oregon is the only US state to recognize animal sentience in its legislation. Then, in 2020, Puerto Rico amended its Civil Code to declare that domestic and domesticated animals are “sensible” beings. More importantly, the amendments also declared that these animals are not property.

Admittedly, there are many exceptions to this provision. For example, animals used in entertainment are still property. Birds used in cockfighting would fall into this exception. However, the amendments to the Civil Code indicate that, in general, Puerto Rico recognizes that animals have feelings and interests. Puerto Rico also wants to be considered a society where animals’ interests and lives are appreciated as separate from the interests and lives of the people that exert control over them.

How then can Puerto Rico justify continuing the practice of cockfighting under an appeal to culture? During their entire lives, the birds are not considered individuals. In the fight, they are subjected to torture by their own kind. Admittedly, while there can be some degree of camaraderie between animals and their trainers or breeders, this does not appear to be the case with cockfighting. At least not anymore. After reviewing a website addressing issued in cockfighting and generally promoting the sport, I could not find the name of any animals given recognition in the sport. Instead, the animal is simply a tool, a symbol, or an economic resource for whoever controls them.

The birds as participants

Cockfighters say that it is in the gamecocks’ nature to fight. Indeed, there are certain breeds of chickens that are more aggressive than others. But certainly not all fowl, even those that are more aggressive, will not want to fight all the time. Nor will they all want to continue to fight after receiving serious injuries. This is apparent from the sport’s regulations themselves.

Regulation 7424 for the administration and for the fighting of gamecocks, regulates what happens at the sporting event.

Before a judge will call a fight, the animal has to make it more than apparent they do not want to continue fighting. The judge will call a fight if a bird is being attacked by their opponent consecutively for an entire minute without fighting back or if they are lying down or in a kneeling position for a without fighting back. A bird has to attempt to escape the pit three times in a row before a fight is called.

In some circumstances, a bird that will not fight undergoes a “test” with another bird. According to this account from a spectator, owners tease the birds before the fight, and bang the walls of the pit during the fight to provoke the animals. This causes confusion and aggravation, and consequently will lead to more aggressive behavior.

According to Puerto Rico’s Department of Agriculture, the island registered 107,340 gamecocks between 2016 al 2017. Yet the Department does not publicize any regulations or guidelines for breeding or keeping these animals. Nor does the Department set any requirements for what is to be done with an injured animal that loses a fight.

Reevaluating traditions involving animal cruelty

Countries whose traditions have involved violence against animals are reevaluating whether to carry on these practices. This is in large part because the people are becoming more conscious of the suffering of different species.

The Faroe Islands is questioning whether to continue its four-century-old yearly tradition of hunting white-sided dolphins. The 2021 hunt was especially bloody, resulting in the slaughter of approximately 1,400 whales. A subsequent poll showed that over 50% of the population opposed continuing the tradition. Polls from both France and Spain demonstrate the majority of each country’s population no longer support bullfighting. Canadian provinces and states throughout the U.S. have banned rodeos and similar activities that involve corralling and taking down cattle.

As for cockfighting, the Humane Society of the United States claims to have the results of a June 2017 poll of 1,000 registered Puerto Rican voters. A majority of poll respondents supported banning the sport. The poll also shows only a third of the respondents had ever attended a cockfight.

Economic interests as justification to continue cockfighting

Aside from its cultural significance, Puerto Rico’s government also claims that banning cockfighting will devastate the economy and result in job loss for thousands of Puerto Ricans. According to the government, 88,300 fights took place during the year 2019, with 344,000 people assisting. Cockfighting generates $65 million dollars a year and directly or indirectly provides jobs to 11,134 people.

Prohibiting cockfighting will affect Puerto Rico’s economy. Prohibiting any animal exploitation will affect an economy that has depended on that industry. However, how real are these numbers? Economists have noted it is hard to quantify how much of an positive impact cockfighting has on the economy. Many participants do not report their earnings or expenditures. It is unclear how many people actually depend on the industry as their main source of income. Additionally, could continuing to cockfight actually pose an economic risk to Puerto Rico?

The risk of avian flu

During the same years the federal government began increasing penalties for engaging in cockfighting (2004-2008), new outbreaks of avian influenza had appeared in the Americas, Asia, and Europe. These outbreaks caused the death of hundreds of people, and the extermination of billions of birds. According to reports, some of people were exposed to the virus through gamecocks. Last year, when dismissing the challenges to the cockfighting ban, the federal courts mentioned discussions in Congress about the possible spread of avian influenza.

Late December 2021, in what was called the “worst blows to wildlife in Israel’s history,” thousands of birds died after an outbreak of avian flu at a egg-laying hen farm. Another outbreak in the United Kingdom at the end of 2021 resulted in the slaughter of over 500,000 birds.

I cannot deny that it is more likely that an outbreak of avian flu in Puerto Rico would come from the using birds in agriculture than in fighting. However, the federal government permits and promotes animal agriculture. It does not condone cockfighting. cockfighting. Puerto Rico assumes the risk of continuing to transport and fight birds.

Providing support instead of creating distance

If it is true that some of the population depends on cockfighting for employment, why not expend resources into creating alternative employment?

The US government, with assistance from large animal advocacy organizations like the Humane Society of the United States, or smaller organizations like Animal Wellness that campaign against cockfighting, may consider identifying those individuals who legitimately depend on cockfighting to support their family, and cooperate with them to 1) provide better welfare for the birds that are currently fighting or have been injured in fights; and 2) find alternative employment. The journal article Tensions in contemporary Indigenous and animal advocacy struggles, presents a case for assisting, instead of penalizing, marginalized groups that depend economically on animal exploitation. The federal government (and animal advocacy groups) can work directly with the people that are most impacted by a ban, instead of choosing to distance themselves from the activity.

And rather than fighting to get their “exception to the rule” back, Puerto Rico would do better to eliminate the practice on its own terms. In fact, the government seems to at least have considered going this route.

At the same time it enacted Act 179 of 2019, Puerto Rico’s House of Representatives and Senate also approved Senate Joint Resolution No. 459. This resolution ordered the governor and Puerto Rico’s resident commissioner to request that U.S. Congress allow a period of five years to transition into full compliance with the ban. This would include finding employment for people who rely on the industry for income.

Conclusion

It is unclear what happened to Resolution No. 459, and if there will be any follow-up. However, if the federal government’s cockfighting ban evoked such sentiments of oppression for Puerto Ricans, that sentiment will not go away by insisting on a “right” to oppress someone else (the birds). With assistance from the federal government and animal advocacy groups, Puerto Rico would do better to proactively take steps to eliminate an industry that conflicts with its values and beliefs on animal protection.

Thank you for reading!

If there is an issue that you think I need to cover, contact me and let me know what it is and tell me why you feel so strongly about it. Until next time!

This entry is available in Spanish.