Thought this would be interesting to post. IDA just released its list for 2014. The zoos are: 1. Natural Bridge Zoo (Virginia) 2. San Antonio Zoo (Texas) 3. Six Flags Discovery Kingdom (California) 4. Buttonwood Park Zoo (Massachusetts) 5. Bronx Zoo (New York) 6. Buffalo Zoo (New York) 7. Wildlife Safari (Oregon) 8. Milwaukee County Zoo (Wisconsin) 9. Rosamond Gifford Zoo (New York) 10. Disney's Animal Kingdom (Florida) Dishonorable Mention - Woodland Park Zoo (Washington) Hall of Shame Addition - Edmonton Valley Zoo 2014 Ten Worst Zoos for Elephants - - In Defense of Animals- In Defense of Animals I have mixed feelings when it comes to these lists. On one hand, I agree when it comes to those with poor exhibit quality (in this list's case Milwaukee, Buffalo, Six Flags); some of the cases where it's poor decision making on the zoo's part (like Rosamond Gifford); and the conditions and activities the elephants live in (like Wildlife Safari and Natural Bridge). On the other hand, I feel IDA sometimes really exaggerates on the poor conditions (for example here's Buffalo's response to the list: http://www.buffalonews.com/city-reg...bit-blasted-by-animal-advocacy-group-20150112); doesn't see some of the good parts of the zoo in focus (like Bronx's outdoor habitat or the care programs that some of these zoos may have); or doesn't really understand that not all elephants are the same and can have certain behavioral problems (San Antonio's Lucky and Bronx's Happy being good examples).
You have to remember that this group does the elephant sanctuary's campaigning for them, they are pretty much on the record (even if they haven't said it directly, I don't think) that they and their cronies are the only ones who should have Elephants, and that really no one should have Elephants at all. You have to look for ulterior motives.
“We meet the current standards,” she replied. “Should they make some other changes in the standards, we would have to look at that.” Really Ms. Fernandes? In a couple of years you MUST have a third elephant. It looks like the zoo is going to drag their feet until they are threatened to lose their accreditation again over it.
This list is partially correct (e.g. Milwaukee, San Antonio), partially nonsense. DAK has one of the best outdoor exhibits for zoo elephants in the world (the stalls are just functional, but they spent most of their live outside anyway). And the outdoor exhibit at Bronx Zoo is a nice wooded area with a lot of shade. Something other zoo elephants can only dream of. Or do they mean just the indoor conditions (that I don't know because they are off show)?
This controversial list always rankles certain zoo nerds but my quick take on it is that 7 out of the 10 zoos deserve to be on any "worst" list. Disney's Animal Kingdom, Rosamond Gifford and Bronx are the 3 zoos that should never be included in the annual total.
As someone very familiar with the Rosamond Gifford Zoo it is quite laughable that we are on this list, maybe 6-7 years ago yes we could be one of the worst but ever since the elephant pavilion was built we have been one of the best. Just the fact that we are expecting two new babies is reason alone for the success of RGZ. If they are able to go thru with their master plan it will be even better with more space and the much needed pool. Their excuse of sending Indy was also funny, a male who spent 27 years in Syracuse is sent away to breed with new elephants is a bad thing apparently, wouldn't want the species to have more genetic diversity or anything.
there's nothing on the link to say one way or the other, so I'm assuming their opinion encompasses only the USA and Canada? Are elephants kept in any other countries?
Keep in mind that elephants from AZA institutions are not easily available. And elephants from other sources, IF available may bring their own issues. You can't just order one from Amazon
I agree with you. I just wish they would acknowledge it and say they are working on it. It makes it sound like, we meet the standards and we don't see any immediate issues getting in our way. Seneca Park Zoo in Rochester, NY has acknowledged the new standard and said they are trying to obtain another elephant. Also, because of the situation, I almost think they should accept that they cannot properly house elephants per modern standards and they should be relocated.
I'm sort of ticked off about their criticism of DAK moving several of its Elephants to Fellsmere. Its not as if they transferred that pregnant female a long way while she was heavily pregnant, she must have been moved before she was less than halfway through her pregnancy and the distance between DAK and Fellsmere is less then two hours. And its not as if they were moved for no good reason, if I heard right the idea was to make it easier for one of their young males to leave the group. I wonder if part of this has to do with the fact that the AZA now has its own facility (or at least one that is likely to seek accreditation if they don't already have it), comparable in several ways to places such as paws and hohenwald to send excess/old/unwanted Elephants and they are angry about it because it means that animals might be less likely to be sent to them and more likely to stay with/ be sent to the AZA.
The list honestly isn't that surprising to me. I'm actually surprised however for once to not see St. Louis on there considering they are a frequent target of IDA and a bit upset to see WPZ receive a "dishonorable mention" considering their difficult decision to phase out their program and constant attack from IDA and other organizations/activists. I also did some thinking regarding the US elephant collection of both Africans and Asians. I'm no studbook keeper or curator but here are a few of my thoughts regarding possible movements I found favorable for both the animals and facility. 1) Buffalo. I do admire and acknowledge their work on expanding their indoor quarters but considering the cows do not get along and aren't housed together and in all honesty and practicality they are likely not to receive another animal unless they surprise us with bringing in an old cow from ALS. Therefore I would suggest moving both females out with also considering the severity of Buffalo winters. I can see Surapa doing great in a facility like Tulsa with 2 other cows and a bull and Jothi (Jody?) in a facility like San Diego where like the old females they currently have, her disorder can be closely monitored and treated. 2-San Diego. This plan is also a stretch but I would not be surprised if it were put into play. Of coarse no one wants old female elephants and every new upcoming facility is wanting to establish breeding herds but that sad truth of it all is that THERE ARENT THAT MANY ELEPHANTS. Therefore i wouldn't be surprised if they split the "herd" keeping the asians and sent the Africans to Fresno for their new exhibit and Fresno in return send their 2 asians to San Diego. 3-Topeka. Here is another flawed facility whose decision to house Asians and Africans together will unfortunately result in the inevitable separation of the animals. I would like to see Sunda (Asian) Sent to either of the following 1-Dickerson park Zoo (my thoughts about this facility to come) 2-Tulsa again as this facility will soon expand in the master plan. or 3-OKC. As for Tembo, I see it in her best interest to be sent to Sedgwick county zoo to be paired with Cindy, their lone female. SCZ has begun construction on what will be the 3rd largest facility in the US. Topeka however has released concepts and plans for their elephant exhibit in their master plan but I wouldn't expect any action/construction any time soon.I would apply the same suggestions to the Louisville who also also house a female African and Asian together. 4-Bronx Zoo. Bronx Zoo has announced and made it known for a long while now that they will be phasing out Elephants. Suggestions for these ladies 1-Tulsa only because they are post reproductive and shouldn't take up space in a facility elsewhere. Sneezy is a big AI contributor so the facility would still be capable of contributing to reproduction via AI . Or 2-Columbus. 5-Dickerson Park Zoo. Moolah to OKC after a possibly breeding attempt and pregnancy with Kunchorn. Patience to remain and paired with more females? Or see the facility to transition into a strictly facility. I don't see this facility giving up elephants any time soon either even considering recent occurrences such as connie's death and the death of their elephant manager by Patience due to the fact that the have a "new" barn which is surprisingly nice. 6-Tacoma Unsure. Couldn't see them going to Oregon due to the fact that they aren't reproductively viable unless they are just wanting a full collection for Elephant Lands. 7-St. Louis I can see this facility wanting to soon free up some space population wise to bring in another breeding bull to breed Maliah and Jade, possibly even Rani and Ellie as well. It would be cool to see Tucker form Houston sent here (if he isn't bound by a Have a trunk will travel contract). Or possibly even a bull from the SEC in Florida. I know they have a list of 4 young bulls they need sent out for space but i also know many zoos will NOT work with the SEC. Therefore I would see in the zoo's best interest to rehouse Sri and Donna as neither are reproductively viable to clear up space for breeding again. The zoo has expanded its facility with Elephant Woods but i'd love to see them combine two of the smaller 3 yards to add more space. As for San Antonio being on the list i have lost all hope that Lucky might be rehoused and integrated into a multi elephant herd/facility despite the animals best interest. Again this is just a list of thoughts. I would not be surprised however too see a lot of moving around and transfers in 2015 considering AZA's new rule regarding elephant population size effective as of 2016 with consideration of the amount of time it takes to (crate) train elephants and transport them. I am very optimistic and excited to see what will happen, as well as nervous. I am sure that facilities we have come to love will be lost in the future and that only the best of the best will be left standing. Questions/comments?? I would love to hear some feedback from my rant.
There reasoning is that it is because they are in an amusement park atmosphere with thousands of tourists each day and that it is not natural for them. However considering they have an extensive amount of space out of view and they do very well breeding them it kind of disproves that they are bothered by crowds. Also wild elephants in game parks and reserves in Africa see tourists as well just in a different setting.
I'm not a huge fan of animal theme parks or elephant captivity, (I'm not outrigt opposed to elephant captivity, I just have high standards) but from what I've seen, DAK looks pretty good. It seems the facility made it on the list for some bad things that happened to a few elephants. But honestly, I can't help but think that there are worse places. I've seen lists like these before, and it seems that most of them put a few big, high profile, high quality facilities every year, I guess as a way of saying "Elephant captivity is bad no matter what facility it's at!".
I can't believe the group seems to ignore zoos with legitimately improper elephant exhibits like in Louisville, Kansas City, and Topeka while zoos with great reputations that occasionally have little "hiccups" (for lack of a better term) such as bad decisions in terms of movings and deaths are berated and slandered. Also, Natural Bridge Zoo has reopened, but not without controversy. My stance is that the elephant needs companionship in the form of other elephants. The rides, I think, are questionable.
There are some well-thought ideas here, not at all a rant. Here are a few observations: * I wasn't at all surprised to see WPZ get a dishonorable mention despite closing its exhibit. Nothing reveals IDA's complete agenda of getting all animals out of zoos more than complaining that Seattle chose OKC and not a sanctuary. Comparing WPZ to a "petulant child" exposes them as the bullies they are, furious a not being "obeyed." * Jothi in Buffalo is unlikely to do well in a herd setting. She has been housed with an elephant before, but she's moody and somewhat unpleasant now, in addition to (because of?) the seizure disorder. It would be somewhat unfair to force her co-mingle when she really may not want to. I'm less sure about Surapa, because she seems lovely, although I'm assured the one thing she does not want is to be around Jothi. There are certain zoos like Phoenix that house "problem" elephants who must live separately, and some exception is made for their circumstances. With two elephants content to be alone, moving them to another zoo to be alone achieves nothing. And adding a third elephant may adhere to the letter of the new law, but again, if she too would live alone, why does it have to be in Buffalo? * I think it's unconscionable for the Bronx Zoo NOT to be using its vast acreage for elephants. Bronx has about 4 times the acreage of many zoos, almost double that of big zoos like NZP and SD. For a species that most zoos simply don't have room for, I think Bronx has an obligation, especially with such an endangered species. For that reason, I'd like their elephants to stay in NYC. They could live another decade, and I hope that, in time, perhaps they could realize this and reverse their decision. Totally apart from this reasoning, my gut says that Surapa and Happy would be a good fit, personality-wise. Surapa likes to be recognized as the dominant, but has a sweet side that would prevent any of the abuse she has taken from Maxine and Patty. * Speaking of San Diego's Elephant Odyssey! Let me say that they not only have an incredible habitat, but have proven themselves again and again to be team players willing to help others. In 2010, they sent Jewel and Tina to LA so that their incredible new exhibit wouldn't open with only male Billy. Just recently, they opened their doors for Chai and Bamboo whose trip to OKC was interrupted midway by dangerous weather. It would be absolutely like them to split their herd so that Fresno's exhibit could be unified. Plus, it's wonderful to see a zoo willingly take on the role of retirement facility for the increasing number of senior citizen elephants. But SD's excellence in every way makes everyone--and seemingly AZA--from overlooking the fact that their retirement herd is mixed. They've flown under the radar on this front because their herd is so large, but will they too be expected to unify the exhibit to just one species? * I think the 2 exhibits with one Asian and one African, Topeka and SCZ, should be allowed to keep those animals until one dies. The bonds they've established should be important enough to be grandfathered in. * Dickerson Park Zoo should be granted breeding status again. They were banned by AZA from breeding after the death of Nisha. Now, however, we know that it isn't necessarily a place that carries the EEHV virus, certainly not after seeing EEHV kill many more young elephants in Houston and St. Louis, among others. They have improved their barn, have faithfully served as a male housing facility before Denver opened its newer version. and have a strong breeding past. DPZ also has bull Khun Chorn, who, despite being bred from half-siblings, is nevertheless the last living son of the legendary Packy. If Ringling becomes willing to loan cows once its 13 performing elephants return to FL in 2018, DPZ should be among the first to be offered one. * Ditto for Tulsa and LA Zoo. LA Zoo has a gleaming new exhibit and impressive bull Billy, and Tulsa has space and breeding bull Sneezy. Both bulls are wild-born and eminently worth breeding. After the tragic death of Sneezy's only living offspring a few days ago, neither of these bulls are represented in the gene pool. These should be top on the list for available females. * I don't see the AZA breaking up the 3-generation St. Louis herd by sending Donna and Sri away. It would make more sense for the AZA to ask St. Louis to loan one or two of its four young girls to DZP, Tulsa, or LA, perhaps after a first successful pregnancy. Maliha and Jade are old enough to be bred now; perhaps they could test the dynamic with one of the bulls at the 3 zoos without females by sending Maliha for a brief 3-week visit to breed, the same way Ringling just sent Asha to Tulsa to breed with Sneezy. If she could then move on conditional loan to one of these zoos, St. Louis could be given a new bull. I agree that Tucker would be a good candidate gene-wise. Long ago, I remember seeing the printed contract/offer from HTWT to Houston, listing a price of $400,000 to buy Tucker and Tess outright. I know Portland purchased Tusko and Lily outright from HTWT, but I don't know what the current status of Tucker and Tess is. Bodhi, son of Phoebe and Calvin, would also be a good genetic match for this group of girls. * Tacoma has indicated that they will eventually close their elephant exhibit. I don't think Portland should use its herd space for two more non-producing animals. Tulsa and DPZ both have two aging females and will eventually have lone cows when one dies. Adding the two Tacoma females to one of these herds could make the final years of four aging females richer and more stable. * I don't see US zoos getting enough elephants to make a significant difference in captive births without the import of elephants the way San Diego obtained the herd from Swaziland. Issues are more complicated in Asia and import prohibitions still remain, but there have to be ways to achieve this for the sake of the population. One idea: NZP has four elephants who all came from the Sri Lankan Pinnewala Elephant Orphanage in 1976; the orphanage currently houses 70 orphan babies--and surely there must be a few who have injuries that would prevent them from being released back into the wild. Why couldn't the US request those elephants along the same lines as San Diego did with the Swaziland cull? Pinnewala orphans may not be under threat of being killed, but they are, after all, orphans who are there presumably because they can not live in their prior homelands. International law prevents the importation of endangered animals from the wild, but Pinnewala is an organization, and transfers from zoos and parks abroad have been permitted. I know that paperwork can take forever for such transfers, so I hope that someone can start to explore this.
Honestly this list is just a bunch of zoos that may have received bad PR during the year, or they just find something a zoo did that they didn't like if their initial list isn't long enough. No real analysis has gone into the creation of the list - so its not worth debating it.
Agreed. As for Bronx's elephant situation, I would be very surprised if they were to phase out the species. Bronx and the WCS has made a huge push for elephant conservation in the past few years and has now held two runs to raise money for them. I can't see a zoo so focused on their conservation allowing themselves to lose the species. Personally, I sort of agree with Ambika that Bronx should build a larger complex. I know they may not have the money right now, and other things such as an African Plains renovation are higher priorities, but the zoo should really add a larger breeding complex for elephants to its master plan (and preferably build it to allow year-round viewing). ~Thylo
Agreed. There are muuuuuch worse places for elephants than some of the zoos on this list. The writers of most of these types of articles probably just type in something like "zoo elephant" and look for recent controversies rather than do some actual research. It's like, why not just write an article about controversies in elephant captivity?
