“Outrage Erupts as LSU representatives responds after PETA Calls It ‘Idiotic and Archaic’!” Controversial Live Mascot Decision for Alabama games
The national animal rights group PETA, which stands for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is publicly challenging Louisiana State University (LSU) over its recent decision to bring a live tiger to Saturday’s football game against Alabama. This decision reverses LSU’s 2016 policy to discontinue the use of live mascots at games, a practice it halted after the death of the previous mascot, Mike VI. PETA has called LSU’s move “a step backward” and is urging the university to reconsider.
The idea to reintroduce a live tiger mascot at LSU games has garnered support from Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry, who has been vocal in advocating for the tradition’s revival. In recent weeks, Landry helped arrange for a tiger to be transported from a wildlife refuge outside the state, making the animal available for this weekend’s event. Meanwhile, Mike VII, LSU’s current mascot, will not make an appearance in the stadium; instead, he will remain housed in his specially designed 15,000-square-foot habitat, which is located across from the stadium. LSU officials have stated that Mike VII’s spacious enclosure offers a healthier, more stable environment, though this measure hasn’t quelled the debate over bringing another live tiger into such a public, high-stimulation setting.
PETA’s Associate Director of Captive Wildlife Research, Klayton Rutherford, issued a strongly worded statement condemning LSU’s decision to yield to Landry’s push for a live tiger display. “It’s deeply disappointing and starkly out of step with the modern understanding of respecting wild species that LSU has decided to yield to Governor Landry’s demands, all to entertain the crowd,” Rutherford remarked in a recent PETA release. He stressed that LSU had made an ethical choice nearly a decade ago in ending this outdated practice, showing awareness of the potential harm done by exposing a sensitive big cat to the overwhelming noise, bright lights, and general chaos of a packed football stadium. In Rutherford’s view, reinstating this tradition undermines years of progress in animal welfare advocacy.
In response to LSU’s decision, PETA has mobilized nearly 50,000 supporters who are demanding that Governor Landry and LSU cease efforts to involve big cats in school sports events. Rutherford added that the transport and display of tigers for entertainment contradicts the values of reputable animal care facilities, many of which work to keep wild animals in calm, familiar environments. “No reputable sanctuary would place a tiger in an environment this chaotic,” Rutherford added, pointing out that wild animals in captivity already face challenges in adapting to enclosures, even without being subjected to intense stimuli like stadium crowds. The stress of such an event, he noted, could have serious psychological and physical impacts on a tiger’s well-being.
LSU’s decision has sparked renewed debate over the use of live animals as mascots in American sports. While live animal mascots were once a common sight at college and professional games across the country, many institutions have moved away from the practice, acknowledging that such displays often come at the expense of animal welfare. The Atlanta Braves, for instance, ended their live mascot program, citing a shift in public sentiment toward a more humane approach to animal treatment. Some experts argue that, although animals may be symbols of strength and pride for sports teams, their use in high-stress public settings can have serious, lasting repercussions on their health. Studies on captive wildlife have shown that animals exposed to excessive noise and unfamiliar environments can experience heightened anxiety, manifesting in signs of stress like pacing, loss of appetite, and other behavioral changes.
LSU has a long history of association with live tiger mascots, dating back to the 1930s. For decades, tigers like Mike VI were brought into the stadium to add spectacle to LSU games, cementing their image as a central aspect of the university’s sports identity. However, public perceptions about the ethics of keeping wild animals in captivity, particularly in high-stress environments, have evolved substantially in recent years. In 2016, LSU decided to halt the practice after consulting with animal welfare experts who raised concerns about the impact of such events on the animals’ mental and physical health. This move received widespread support from animal rights advocates, who viewed it as an acknowledgment of the rights and dignity of animals to live without unnecessary disturbance.
In the days leading up to the game, PETA has amplified its message through social media campaigns, calling for a halt to the use of live animals as props for entertainment. In addition to sending letters to LSU’s administration, PETA has mobilized nearly 50,000 supporters to urge Governor Landry and the university to discontinue the reintroduction of live tigers in their football program. The organization argues that LSU, as a major academic institution, has a responsibility to set an example in adopting modern, ethical practices, rather than clinging to a practice they believe is both outdated and harmful.
So far, LSU representatives have not issued an official response to PETA’s appeals, leaving questions about the university’s stance on animal welfare in this context unanswered. As Saturday’s game approaches, the clash between advocates of tradition and proponents of animal rights has drawn national attention, adding LSU to a growing list of institutions forced to confront the ethical implications of live animal mascots. For PETA and its supporters, LSU’s decision to bring in a live tiger for a single game exemplifies a broader issue in society’s relationship with wildlife—a reminder of how complex and contested the idea of tradition can become when measured against evolving ethical standards.
