Last week G Adventures launched a collection of wildlife-focused trips endorsed by the Jane Goodall Institute for their level of animal welfare. News editor Johanna Jainchill spoke with G Adventures founder Bruce Poon Tip about his increasing focus on animal rights and how Goodall, whose institute promotes great-ape conservation, helped shape G Adventures' animal-rights policy.
Q: You've been very focused on helping people around the world. What prompted the decision to focus on animals?
Bruce Poon Tip
A: Admittedly, for the first 23 years of our existence, we didn't look at animal welfare issues. We didn't take people to dolphin encounters and things like that, but quite often we did elephant riding, for instance, on a lot of tours all over the world.
But we started looking at those things about two years ago. Animal groups were starting to criticize all of us as an industry in sustainable travel. I used to say, our thing is about poverty, creating jobs, all of these great things that we do. I'd say, we don't donate to cancer or MS or AIDS education; those just aren't our causes. Then we realized that [animal treatment] was important. And we started polling our customers and got more data and realized it mattered to our customers, too.
Q: What kinds of changes have you made?
A: Once we started, it was a bit of a hornet's nest, and we realized what a big project it was. It took two years to create a set of guidelines that were really moving targets until we asked Jane Goodall to endorse our policy. She changed a lot of it. For her to endorse it, she said we have to go further in a lot of cases. Now we verify when we're working in any animal-encounter program that it's a rehabilitation program: It's OK to go to an elephant orphanage if the elephant is being rehabilitated to go back into the wild. If they are going to live the rest of their life in captivity, it's not OK. It's not about not using donkeys, it's verifying the humane conditions and how they're being treated. We do still use horses for carrying gear, but we're more careful about making those decisions. Now we have set criteria.
Q: Has the change been difficult for the company?
A: Yes, because it's been so widespread. There are arguments on both sides. The employment issues, for elephant-riding specifically. It's also a culture thing. Bullfighting in Spain, that's part of their culture; [by opposing it] we're saying that their culture is not right. That's a very slippery slope for us, judging their culture when their history is in bullfighting. Who are we to say we don't approve of bullfighting all of a sudden? Because at the same time we're trying to create authentic cultural experiences. So who are we to judge?
There were a lot of debates and arguments from me, I have to say. I did the Running of the Bulls myself in about 2009, and I got criticized for it. I joined Twitter that morning, and my first posts were from the Running of the Bulls. And I argued and said we're a company that creates authentic culture, and this is an authentic culture experience for the Spanish. And we promise this all over the world. Where do you draw the line?
Q: The industry has really gone in that direction. Was the "Blackfish" documentary a big part of it?
A: Yes, it was huge. Just like in 2000 when Al Gore did "An Inconvenient Truth" it changed the game with climate change. People are starting to look at captive animals. The Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus has even gone elephant-free.