Question: How do the Peter Laufer books Forbidden Creatures and No Animals Were Harmed differ in their focus on animals?

The Dangerous World of Butterflies: The Startling Subculture of Criminals, Collectors, and Conservationists is a 2009 book by Doctor of Philosophy Peter Laufer.  It is the first book in his untitled animal trilogy, preceding "Forbidden Creatures" in 2010 and "No Animals Were Harmed" in 2011.  The book explores the presence of the butterfly in the fields of organized crime, ecological devastation, species depletion, natural history museum integrity, and chaos theory. <SEP> No Animals Were Harmed: The Controversial Line Between Entertainment and Abuse is a 2011 book by Peter Laufer.  The book explores what those who work with animals believe to be the line between using animals for entertainment purposes and abusing them.  It is the third book in his untitled animal trilogy, following "Forbidden Creatures" in 2010 and "The Dangerous World of Butterflies" in 2009.  Meanwhile, the author recounts how his own opinions changed about that line when he talks to the different people about their beliefs. <SEP> Forbidden Creatures: Inside the World of Animal Smuggling and Exotic Pets is a 2010 book by Doctor of Philosophy Peter Laufer.  The book explores the lives of those that either own exotic animals or have been captured for illegally smuggling them, with a strong focus on Travis, the chimpanzee who attacked Charla Nash in 2009.  It is the second book in his untitled animal trilogy, following "The Dangerous World of Butterflies" in 2009 and preceding "No Animals Were Harmed" in 2011. <SEP> The prohibition "do not feed the animals" reflects a policy forbidding the artificial feeding of wildlife (wild or feral animals) in situations where the animals, or the people doing the feeding, might be harmed.  Signs displaying this message are commonly found in zoos, circuses, animal theme parks, aquariums, national parks, parks, public spaces, farms, and other places where people come into contact with wildlife.  In some cases there are laws to enforce such no-feeding policies.  However, some people (such as some of those who enjoy feeding pigeons in cities) openly and strongly oppose such laws claiming that animals such as pigeons can be an amenity for people who do not have company such as friends or family, and say that the laws prohibiting feeding animals in urban places must change.  In some countries, such as Greece, feeding the pigeons in cities is a widespread practice.  Cultural hostility to feeding animals in cities and laws that ban the practice raise concerns about how humans relate to other living beings in the urban environment.  Politicians have also protested laws that ban feeding feral pigeons in cities.  Feral pigeons in cities existed for thousands of years but only recently in some countries humans started seeing them as a nuisance and became hostile to them.  In India, feeding feral animals in cities is considered a noble act.  Academicians say that how humans treat animals is related to how humans treat each other and thus raise concerns about the cultural shift from seeing feral city pigeons as harmless in the 1800s to seeing them a undesirable in some countries in the 2000s.