Bronx Zoo Questions about why the Bronx Zoo is closing their elephant exhibit and what it means

DavidBrown

DavidBrown

Well-Known Member
15+ year member
@anyone who is interested in the elephant exhibit at the Bronx Zoo and wants to discuss it: It fascinates me that one of the most popular species at one of the most popular zoos in the world is so difficult to see and not even on exhibit for a large chunk of the year.

Why has the Bronx Zoo made their elephants practically invisible for a large portion of their audience (i.e. those who don't want to pay to ride the Wild Asia monorail or who visit when it is closed)? Even if you do ride the monorail it is impossible to really watch the elephants for any meaningful amount of time because the monorail zips past them for only a couple minutes.

Why was the Bronx Zoo elephant exhibit designed this way, and is this viewed by zoo design folks and managers as a major design flaw? I personally think that the Wild Asia exhibit concept is great, but as someone who loves watching elephants the way that they are displayed seems very problematic. I realize that this subject will be moot in the relatively near future when the whole elephant exhibit is closed down.

That raises the question of whether zoo goers will ultimately care if there are no elephants at the Bronx Zoo. Several major zoos have closed their elephant programs (London, Philadelphia, Detroit, etc.), but those decisions seemed to be made largely on the basis that there were not adequate space or resources to build a new elephant exhibit. Given the Bronx Zoo's size and resources presumably neither of those factors would be limiting if they wanted to keep elephants, so what lead them to decide not to have elephants any longer? Do the people of New York City not care about seeing elephants?

Does this decision have any larger meaning for how zoos engage in elephant conservation? WCS is a major player in elephant conservation. One of the major arguments for why zoos exist in the 21st Century is that their resident species serve as ambassadors for their wild relatives. Bronx Zoo/WCS has arguably developed this idea to its greatest lengths to date with gorillas and the Congo Gorilla Forest. Why have they decided not to do this for elephants? Is it possible that they could do this for elephants even if they don't actually have elephants on exhibit? Arguably they have tried to do this already for African forest elephants through their conservation displays and experiences in the Congo Gorilla Forest. Does it work as well (or better) than actually having live elephants on display and trying to convey an elephant conservation message through them?
 
Arguably they have tried to do this already for African forest elephants through their conservation displays and experiences in the Congo Gorilla Forest. Does it work as well (or better) than actually having live elephants on display and trying to convey an elephant conservation message through them?
Click to expand...

I can't see it happening, but it's a great pity that no-one is seemingly interested in setting up a programme for African forest elephants. A collection that re-homed Asiatic elephants for the former really would be telling a story, because that's probably the elephant at severe risk in the wild.
 
I personally think that if the Bronx Zoo did a new African elephant exhibit with their African Savanna they would easily be the greatest zoo in America. They have so many conservation ties with African elephants and they have the space so it seems logical. I would also love to see black rhinos here. The exhibits around the zoo center work perfectly, and they are such a critically endangered species. I agree though I wish there was another way to view the elephants besides just the monorail.
 
I was talking to a keeper there this past summer and she said they are getting white rhinos to go in the main zoo building in the center.
 
The opening says "given the Bronx Zoo's size and resources..."

Size, yes, but resources, not so much these days. Do not forget that they lost most of their state funding and had to shut down a couple exhibits (nocturnal house and I forget what else). The current elephant mandates from the AZA require that almost every zoo that is going to keep them has to build a massive new exhibit. In New York, this would likely cost tens of millions of dollars, as it did in California (Los Angeles and San Diego), due to construction costs. Lower economy states like mine in Arizona get by with much lower costs than those expensive coastal states. (Our exhibit is costing 9 million and although I am obviously biased I think it will blow away both Los Angeles and San Diego).

Of course the Bronx did pull of the costly Congo Gorilla Forest, so they are certainly capable of major projects like this. But that was presumably in better economic times and I guess they were just not willing to try to fight for the funds to do it. A handful of other zoos (Philadelphia, San Francisco) have chosen likewise. The surprising thing to me is not that a handful of zoos chose not to do it, but how many zoos (around 50) actually did commit to build multi-million dollar elephant exhibits.
 
Arizona Docent said:
Of course the Bronx did pull of the costly Congo Gorilla Forest, so they are certainly capable of major projects like this. But that was presumably in better economic times and I guess they were just not willing to try to fight for the funds to do it. A handful of other zoos (Philadelphia, San Francisco) have chosen likewise. The surprising thing to me is not that a handful of zoos chose not to do it, but how many zoos (around 50) actually did commit to build multi-million dollar elephant exhibits.
Click to expand...

You make an excellent point re: current funding situation and how this affects decisions. This may well be the cause.

What does stand out to me about the Bronx's decision is that they are arguably the leading zoo in the country and have decided to let go of elephants. This seems like it might be the equivalent of the San Diego Zoo saying "no more elephants", but perhaps not. Elephants are always on exhibit at San Diego and very prominently featured at the zoo and WAP, whereas they are effectively invisible at the Bronx Zoo unless you pay an additional fee to see them and come at the right time of year.

When the economy hopefully comes back and new large-scale exhibits become possible, it will be interesting to see if there is ever any thought of a new elephant complex along the lines of what BlackRhino suggests.
 
I guess climate is a factor here as well. NYC gets such severe winter weather compared with southern and south western states which I imagine adds a lot to the potential price tag of any new developments. Given how things look at the moment I think it is best for them to give them up.

I do think the Bronx Zoo could do some great things with its woodlands for other species with fairly minimal structural effort though.
 
I think the bronx zoo is capable of building a new exhibit right now. I think they are planning on a new african exhibit that will be unvieled in the next year. This is because the bronx zoo has recently aqquired species such as white rhino and kudu.It will probabaly be in the now closed antelope yards near the nyala. The bronx zoo was planning a african exhibit before the finnanchal crisis so they are probabaly resuming this. Building an exhibit for the elephants would waste resources and anyway most people do not see the elephants.
 
ISIS lists 366 African elephants in zoos, which is over 4 times as many as are needed to act as a reserve stock for the wild population. The Bronx Zoo is a large zoo, but when I visited it I remember some of the smaller animals, such as the slender-tailed cloud rat, proboscis monkeys and hoatzins. I agree with Ian Robinson (It's a great pity that no-one is seemingly interested in setting up a programme for African forest elephants). There is only one individual in captivity, so a breeding programme is long overdue.


There are still many visitors who expect to see elephants at London Zoo, even though the enclosure at Whipsnade is far better for elephants and has allowed ZSL to breed elephants for the first time in its history. Bronx Zoo could be used to breed African forest elephants and hopefully release some into the wild.
 
Dassie rat said:
ISIS lists 366 African elephants in zoos, which is over 4 times as many as are needed to act as a reserve stock for the wild population. The Bronx Zoo is a large zoo, but when I visited it I remember some of the smaller animals, such as the slender-tailed cloud rat, proboscis monkeys and hoatzins. I agree with Ian Robinson (It's a great pity that no-one is seemingly interested in setting up a programme for African forest elephants). There is only one individual in captivity, so a breeding programme is long overdue.


There are still many visitors who expect to see elephants at London Zoo, even though the enclosure at Whipsnade is far better for elephants and has allowed ZSL to breed elephants for the first time in its history. Bronx Zoo could be used to breed African forest elephants and hopefully release some into the wild.
Click to expand...

If breeding for eventual release were the goal, then the Bronx Zoo -- which is an arm of the Wildlife Conservation Society -- would do better to create a program in Africa (if a secure area could be found).
 
If breeding for eventual release were the goal, then the Bronx Zoo -- which is an arm of the Wildlife Conservation Society -- would do better to create a program in Africa (if a secure area could be found).
Click to expand...

Having attended a talk at London Zoo a couple of years ago on African forest conservation given by a scientist who had had the dubious privilege of working in Central African Republic, a secure area certainly won't be found there any time soon.
 
Dassie rat said:
ISIS lists 366 African elephants in zoos, which is over 4 times as many as are needed to act as a reserve stock for the wild population
Click to expand...

How did you manage to come to that conclusion? The number of actively reproductive animals is a fraction of that!
The numerous factors which determine the minimum population to maintain maximum genetic diversity vary by species. I wouldn’t have thought there is anyone who considers elephants to be a self sustaining species (for the time being at least).



IanRRobinson said:
Having attended a talk at London Zoo a couple of years ago on African forest conservation given by a scientist who had had the dubious privilege of working in Central African Republic, a secure area certainly won't be found there any time soon.
Click to expand...


Who said anything specifically about CAR?** There are plenty of politically stable counties within the range of L. cyclotis.

**A good friend of mine (we studied Zoology at the same University) has been working there on and off for two years without problem

There are also an unknown number of this species in the Middle East. I have personally seen a young pair and know there are more.
 
Dicerorhinus said:
How did you manage to come to that conclusion? The number of actively reproductive animals is a fraction of that!
The numerous factors which determine the minimum population to maintain maximum genetic diversity vary by species. I wouldn’t have thought there is anyone who considers elephants to be a self sustaining species (for the time being at least).






Who said anything specifically about CAR?** There are plenty of politically stable counties within the range of L. cyclotis.

**A good friend of mine (we studied Zoology at the same University) has been working there on and off for two years without problem

There are also an unknown number of this species in the Middle East. I have personally seen a young pair and know there are more.
Click to expand...

Charmless as ever, arrogant as ever, possessed of privileged information that us mere mortals don't know about. Truly, your posts are a joy for us all to look forward to.

Dassierat (I'm sure) will be able of responding to you, but I will respond to your point.

NOBODY said anything about CAR being the ideal place. I merely repeated what had been said by someone who had worked there, and I did make it clear that the anecdote was based upon an encounter some time ago.

If CAR is a better place now than it was then I'm pleased to hear it. And if
(t)here are also an unknown number of this species in the Middle East
Click to expand...
then it doesn't exactly suggest that they're being actively managed to play a part in any possible captive breeding programme.
 
Here is some info regarding their decision to phase out the elephant exhibit.

Bronx Zoo Plans to End Elephant Exhibit - New York Times
Elephants have never lost the capacity to astonish and delight. But in New York City in the not-so-distant future, they will not be doing their astonishing and delighting at a zoo.
The Bronx Zoo, the only zoo left in the city that keeps elephants, said yesterday that it planned to shut down its exhibit after the death of two of its three elephants, or even one.
The current generation of children need not despair: The zoo's three elephants — Patty, Maxine and Happy — are in their mid-30's and could live for decades more. But if one elephant dies, the remaining two may not get along. And if two die, officials say it would be inhumane to sustain an exhibit with a single elephant.
In either case, the zoo will not replenish the group. And then, except for the occasional circus visit, the five boroughs will be without a resident elephant for the first time in more than 100 years.
"I'm happy for the elephants. I'm sad for me," said Peter Rhall of Valley Stream, N.Y., as he clutched his 2-year-old daughter Sophie in yesterday's frigid wind at one of the zoo's entrances.
It's a shift occurring around the country. While once every zoo worthy of the title would boast an elephant, facilities in San Francisco, Detroit, Santa Barbara, Calif., and Lincoln Park in Chicago have either closed their elephant exhibits or decided to phase them out. The Philadelphia Zoo's board, citing financial reasons, has abandoned plans to build a $22 million, 2.5-acre savanna for its four elephants, and is mulling what it will do about a current corral that critics have called cramped, said Andrew Baker, senior vice president for animal programs. In New York, the Central Park and Prospect Park Zoos stopped exhibiting elephants in the 1980's.
The reasons behind the shift are complex and involve both the distinctive personality traits of pachyderms and America's changing standards when it comes to confining animals.
Keeping elephants happy in captivity can be a delicate balancing act, said Steven Sanderson, president and chief executive of the Wildlife Conservation Society, which operates the Bronx, Central Park, Prospect Park and Queens Zoos as well as the New York Aquarium. Elephants prefer living in herds at least a half-dozen strong, need a lot of space to roam, are prone to arthritis and foot diseases, and can become distressed when new elephants are introduced into their enclosures.
The Bronx Zoo, Mr. Sanderson said, has a two-acre corral in which the elephants can move about, and its zookeepers monitor the stumpy feet of its elephants daily, but he would prefer to give them more company. Elephants may show their discomfort with a new arrival by the equivalent of a hunger strike.
"These are really social animals built around a matriarchy," he said. "The senior females have a lot to say about the size of the group, reproduction, etc. They do a lot of communication and are not open to newcomers."
The zoo has kept elephants for more than a hundred years. In 2002, Tuss, the matriarch and pot-stirrer of its Asian elephant group, died in her 50's, leaving the other elephants without a leader and an institutional memory. Last week a fourth female elephant, Samuel R., who had been named after a benefactor's father, died at 14 of kidney failure. Rather than replenish the herd, the zoo decided to close the exhibit.
Breeding elephants in captivity has proved difficult; not even artificial insemination or the introduction of a bull has been helpful. The Bronx Zoo has not had a live birth in more than 20 years. Laws intended to clamp down on the illegal trade in animals have also made it more cumbersome for zoos to import elephants from the wild. Given those factors, Mr. Sanderson said, the society would rather steer its money toward preserving elephants in the wild in Africa and Asia, where it already spends $2 million a year.
Animal-rights groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals have been trying for years to close down zoos. "PETA opposes captivity in zoos for all wild animals. However, there can be no doubt that some species are less suited for captivity," said Lisa Wathne, a specialist in captive exotic animals for PETA. "Elephants are suffering horribly."
She said that half of the 45 elephants that have died since 2000 in the 210 accredited American zoos did not live to reach 40.
But Mr. Sanderson denied that animal activists played a role in the decision. "We were on this issue 20 years ago," he said.
Yesterday morning, Patty and Maxine (yes, they and a third elephant who died, LaVerne, were named after the Andrews Sisters, though Maxine's name does not quite match her namesake's, Maxene) lumbered around their dirt pen. Patty, roughly 10,000 pounds and identifiable by her smaller head, scratched the hide of her skull against a tree trunk while Maxine, at 11,000 pounds, sprayed dirt on her back. Both swallowed apples and bananas that Joseph Mahoney, the zoo's supervisor of mammals, lobbed at them.
Mr. Mahoney, who has worked with elephants for 25 years, has gotten to know their personalities. "Patty is more of a planner, and Maxine carries out the plan," Mr. Mahoney said, looking sad. "Patty will lead Maxine to a log, and Maxine will push it around."
Click to expand...

Reading that it almost seems that the zoo is responding to the larger issues at hand with an aging Asian elephant population that doesn't seem to be reproducing itself.
 
@Anyone interested in the status of wild African elephants:
Here is the best information on the planet about how wild African elephant populations (savanna and forest) are doing in the various regions of Africa. It is the African Elephant Database put out by the IUCN African Elephant Specialist Group. It is THE authoritative source on how elephant populations are doing. It is compiled every 5 years with the most recent edition being in 2007.

Breeding forest elephants in zoos would primarily be of conservation benefit if zoos wanted to maintain a population of forest elephants as ambassadors for their wild relatives. Wild elephant habitat still exists in sustainable amount in some places in Africa (see Gabon especially) but it does need to be protected and needs the attention of anyone interested in elephant conservation.

African Elephant Database and African Elephant Status Reports
 
DavidBrown said:
@Anyone interested in the status of wild African elephants:
Here is the best information on the planet about how wild African elephant populations (savanna and forest) are doing in the various regions of Africa. It is the African Elephant Database put out by the IUCN African Elephant Specialist Group. It is THE authoritative source on how elephant populations are doing. It is compiled every 5 years with the most recent edition being in 2007.

Breeding forest elephants in zoos would primarily be of conservation benefit if zoos wanted to maintain a population of forest elephants as ambassadors for their wild relatives. Wild elephant habitat still exists in sustainable amount in some places in Africa (see Gabon especially) but it does need to be protected and needs the attention of anyone interested in elephant conservation.

African Elephant Database and African Elephant Status Reports
Click to expand...

Agreed entirely. That's why in an ideal world I would like a zoo population of forest elephants to happen - it's an animal that has a remarkably low public profile. As I said, I don't see it happening any time soon.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dassie rat
ISIS lists 366 African elephants in zoos, which is over 4 times as many as are needed to act as a reserve stock for the wild population

Dicerorhinus: How did you manage to come to that conclusion? The number of actively reproductive animals is a fraction of that!
The numerous factors which determine the minimum population to maintain maximum genetic diversity vary by species. I wouldn’t have thought there is anyone who considers elephants to be a self sustaining species (for the time being at least).

I can't remember where I heard about the figure of 80 genetically diverse captive individuals being needed to provide a reserve to save a species from extinction. Obviously, the actual figure for each species varies. The passenger pigeon, for example, required very large populations to be viable. Large, long-lived animals, such as elephants, could perhaps be saved with a few captive herds and this is better than keeping isolated individuals or single sex herds, which was very common until a few years ago. When London Zoo's females were sent to Whipsnade to join a herd that included a male, ZSL had the first elephant herd in its history. Several zoos are now breeding elephants and with 366 African elephants in captivity, there should be enough actively reproductive animals to maintain maximal genetic diversity.

I am not talking about having no African elephants in zoos, but the idea of sending captive African elephants to occupy suitable habitat in Africa becomes less viable each year. Not only is there the cost of sending a very large animal over thousands of miles, there is also the problem of the stress in removing that animal from its captive herd and the fact that the suitable habitat is being increasingly destroyed.

I think that we need to wake up and realise that we can save more species, but that many large species are increasingly precarious in the wild and there isn't enough suitable space in which captive individuals could live naturally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top