Brookfield Zoo - African elephants

Major zoos that have traditionally kept elephants can certainly seem diminished without them, but I would strongly argue that MANY zoos should be without elephants--for reasons of climate, space, staff expertise, budget and collection focus.

Brookfield has essentially acknowledged that their current facilities for elephants are not optimal. It would make more sense--in the long run--to go without elephants until they can build their planned state-of-the-art elephant exhibit--which will be much easier to do if they are not trying to "build around" an inhabited facility (one of the many complicating issues in LA).

@redpanda + reduakari: I totally agree with you two, and Brookfield's outdated, dusty paddock is not appropriate for any number of elephants, let alone the single female African that they currently have.

@BlackRhino: If Cleveland can go 3 years with no elephants as they build a multi-acre facility then Brookfield could easily do the same. Also, the Detroit Zoo recently broke their all-time attendance record and they sent their elephants (Wanda and Winky) to a sanctuary many years ago. A zoo without elephants is not less popular, and cold climate zoos should seriously consider letting the zoos in warm climates carry on the tradition of showcasing elephants.

Thats easy for you to say, but elephants are one of my all time favorite animals, and the fact that Detroit doesn't have elephants is a major reason why I wouldn't rate that zoo very high. I don't think climate should be a problem. I visited Cleveland Zoo yesterday and it was 20 degrees with the wind chill, yet the black rhinos were outside running around along with the zebras and giraffes. If these animals can go out in the freezing cold there is no reason why elephant can't. In fact when we still had elephants, our elephants would frequently go outside in the winter. One of our elephants, Moshi, loves playing in the snow.This completely disproves the climate argument.

Anecdotal evidence based on isolated cases can never COMPLETELY disprove any argument. Hard facts are sometimes required from a large sample size

Thats fine, but I see no reason why Cleveland should not have elephants if they enjoying being out in the snow.

So what you are saying is that, because they are my favourite animal, any zoo without red pandas would suffer a notable decline in visitor numbers. It is simply ridiculous to suggest that because you - one visitor - are fond of elephants, all zoos should keep them in what are clearly outdated exhibits. And, as CZjimmy has already pointed out, you seeing assorted hoofstock (none, if you look at it taxonimically, very closely related to elephants I might add) running about in the snow does not justify maintaining elephants outside all year round. Not only does this go against common zoological practices, it also does not take into account the difference in climate between Cleveland and Chicago.

First of all, I never said that because they are my favorite animal a zoo without them would suffer a decline in visitors. Elephants are one of the most popular animals in zoos, and are definitely an animal many visitors expect to see. For me, personally, I rather visit a zoo that has elephants than one that doesn't.

Elephants are actually more cold hardy than the aforementioned hoofstock by the way.

Christy the 29 yo female African elephant has died.

Brookfield elephant dies :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Metro & Tri-State

Well you seemed to think that the lack of elephants would affect your rating of a zoo and I was merely exaggerating this in my analogy (I believe your exact words were "a major blow"), but apologies if this was unclear. The message of my post is, however, the same - we must not let our personal preferences stop us from seeing what is before our eyes.

In answer to your second point, perhaps visitors do expect big animals at zoos (elehants, tigers, lions, giraffes, bears etc.), but considering most probably don't know the difference between them I hardly think visitor numbers would drop enough to have an impact if elephants left the collection, an opinion backed up by the recent success of the Detroit Zoo despite having sent away their pachyderms. Furthermore, in a more environmentally conscious world I'm sure that professionally-made graphics about the reasons behind, and benefits of, the elephants' departure would garner a lot of respect from the public who sees a zoo which is striving to improve animal welfare, rather than one which is just out to make money (and, of course, please you Mr Blackrhino).

And finally, although I never brought up the climate debate I still see that I am being drawn into it. Despite your assurances (could I have some sources to back those up please, I don't trust anyone who calls this exhibit adequate) that they love the cold-weather, it is still the case in the vast majority of zoos that elephants are locked up at night and in the winter. Whether correct practice or not, this is unlikely to change anytime soon so in colder areas, maintaining elephants is - to say the least - not ideal.

To accommodate for winter nights Cleveland is building a heated night range. I don't know how you prove if an elephant likes the snow, but I would assume if they go out and roll around in it even when the door to a heated barn is left open, I would assume they like it.

Brookfield's exhibit is adequete, not ideal, but adequete. The elephants are being provided for and they have a lot of elements that encourage an active elephant such as the sand pile and mud wallow.