I have three things to add to this thread, rather than take up more room on the already explosive "Knoxville Zoo Elephant Keeper" thread. I did not join in the discussion but instead found it interesting reading.
1- Toledo Zoo fairly recently had a keeper badly injured due to their male elephant, and now all 3 of that zoo's elephants (both male and female) will be permanently managed via protected contact.
2- Knoxville Zoo fairly recently experienced an awful tragedy with the death of a keeper, and now all of that zoo's elephants will be permanently managed via protected contact. Why do zoos insist on taking the risks with free contact, especially considering that protected contact zoos in the United States are TWICE as prevalent as free contact zoos? Why wait for a tragedy or attack to occur before switching over to a system that is inevitable in the long run?
3- I just watched the new Reese Witherspoon/Robert Pattinson film "Water for Elephants" in the theatre (I've also read the book - which is naturally better!) and an elephant bullhook features prominently in the movie. There were gasps from the audience as the bullhook is used viciously on a few occasions on both pachyderm and human, and after the film was over there were a number of negative remarks referencing elephant "training" using such an implement. Whatever one thinks of the film, the method of training an elephant with a bullhook is portrayed extremely negatively, and I question what many moviegoers will think when they see a keeper handling a bullhook in their local zoo. In most cases such a tool is used wisely and considerately, but does the general public realize that?
