Is the "10 Worst Elephant Zoo" list helpful at all?

DavidBrown

DavidBrown

Well-Known Member
15+ year member
Hi all,

I don't want to post the In Defense of Animal (IDA) 2011 worst elephant zoo list (Help Elephants (IDA) - Top Ten Worst Zoos for Elephants - 2011) to start yet another discussion of whether elephants should be at zoos. I think it is safe to say that majority opinion on the website (including mine) is that elephants DO have a role in modern zoos if they are in good exhibits that have some meaningful education and conservation value.

My question rather is does this list that IDA puts out have ANY value at all? Does it put positive pressure on the zoos on it to upgrade their exhibits or improve their elephant programs?

My gut feeling about IDA is that they are not really concerned about wild elephant conservation. I do not know what their actual motives are. They seem to want to shut down elephant exhibits and beyond that I guess they don't really have an elephant agenda. I find their methods counterproductive because they do not offer a positive vision of elephant conservation. Nonetheless they put out this list and it gets a lot of media attention (10 Worst Zoos For Elephants-Reid Park #2 - Tucson Tails), which I'm sure is their objective. Does the list and the media attention do ANY good for the zoo world?

Please don't just go off on these guys being animal rights extremists in your response, because I think this is a generally held opinion here. If you want to criticize IDA then what should they do to be genuinely helpful to elephant welfare and conservation?
 
JBZvolunteer said:
Some of the things on this list our just bunk.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but what is the best way to respond to the bunk? Ignore it? Put out a counter press release from the AZA or some other organization?

Is there any part of the list that isn't bunk and may actually be helpful criticism? I don't know the answers to these questions and am hoping that some folks here have some constructive thoughts.
 
The IDA should really focus on the zoos that have 2 or less elephants rather than have ridiculous inclusions such as San Diego Zoo Safari Park and Reid Park Zoo. The Safari Park has a splendid herd that has been a rousing success and Reid Park has an ambitiously sprawling elephant paddock that will open to the public within the next month or so, and I am sure that many people are scratching their heads at seeing those zoos on the list.

However, I am in 100% agreement with Edmonton's Valley Zoo being #1 on this year's list, as I've read a long study all about Lucy the Asian elephant and she spends an inordinate amount of time locked inside a tiny cement bunker during Edmonton's frigid winters. That is literally solitary confinement! If the IDA's annual list can help that particular elephant move to a warmer climate then I'd be supportive of the decision. Buttonwood, Niabi, Topeka and Little Rock are 4 zoos that are not well-known and must relish having elephants to display to the public...BUT when a zoo has only 2 elephants in a crappy, outdated exhibit then it is obvious to anyone who tours and studies zoos that it won't be long before either AZA-accreditation is removed or the zoo makes wholesale changes. Those 4 zoos will have to either add a 3rd elephant to their small paddocks or spend millions of dollars expanding their elephant habitats. Already in the past decade I've seen many zoos abandon the prospect of keeping elephants on show, while many other zoos have spent anywhere from $10 million to $45 million building enormous new elephant habitats.

Every year the IDA list contains some laughable entries that ZooChatters sneer at, but I'm honest enough to admit that the list also has some zoos mentioned that seriously need to question how much longer they will maintain elephants in their collection. Whether it happens this year or not is almost irrelevant, as zoos with only one or two elephants have to make a huge decision in the near future.
 
Is the inclusion of San Diego Zoo Safari Park, so off track given this statement?

IDA Quote
"even though the zoo has single-handedly aggravated the critical problem of surplus males in captivity by producing eight males calves in the last eight years. ". Quote

Is this information incorrect? Should not a zoo be responsible for its births? I don't see San Diego Zoo Safari Park building facilities to house this number of bull elephants.
 
So San Diego Safari Park is guilty that elephants are breeding very well, against the position of IDA on elephants and zoos. IDA report is worse than what a good Zoochat forum member could produce using photo database and elephant fan websites. ROTFL.

Elephants have for their help EAZA-initiated research and AZA accreditation system. It is much more competent than IDA and harsh if it needs to be.

The problem is: elephants don't need IDA, but IDA needs elephants for donations.
 
Any thoughts on Columbus making the list despite having the largest barn in North America (at least we are pretty sure it still as we are aware that several zoo are building new ones)but never the less C-Bus has no business appearing on here.The group cites a lack of compassion in separating 8yr old male Bohdi from his mother.Bohdi was was sent to Denver on a AZA breeding recommendation which opens a brand new exhibit this spring.Like Snowleopard alluded to there are several small zoos with substandard exhibits but outside of that they just find an axe to grind and throw it onto their agenda.

Team Tapir
 
Even from what I have seen from most those small zoos is that they all say on their website that the next expansion they are doing is elephant exhibits.
 
I think the Saint Louis Zoo's inclusion on the list is ridiculous. The zoo can't control that a 40 year old mother of two would miscarry. Nor did they intentionally breed elephants while another herd member was infected with TB (Rani and Ellie were very well pregnant, prior to diagnosis of infected elephant, Donna). Kenzi's delayed debut, seemed perfectly normal to me. Considering Rani did reject her first calf. The zoo obviously wanted the family unit (Elli, Rani, Maliha, Jade, and Kenzi) to bond. They posted photo and video updates, which gave no indication of anything wrong...

Also, they mention the zoo's elephant expansion. They should know it's already completed, and has added one acre of forested enclosure to the zoo. Something other zoos with Asian elephants could only dream of.


I also find it humorous on the Columbus zoo listing, how they used the photo of an African elephant calf... while Columbus houses only Asian elephants... Also, Bodhi wasn't an average elephant calf, he went into musth very early, just as his father did. Meaning he matured faster.
 
I was extremely surprised to find the SDZSF on there. That is absolutely ludicrous to even think to put it on that list. I paid it no mind, it's complete garbage, except for, as snowleopard said, those zoos with 2 elephants or fewer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top