IDA's Top 10 Worst Zoos for Elephants 2018
- Thread starter SharkFinatic
- Start date
The most ironic part about this statement is that Bronx does more for wild elephant conservation through the WCS than anyone else in North America, and quite possibly does more than any other zoo in the world for them.
~Thylo
It really makes you wonder, instead of spending time making these lists and other propaganda, maybe the IDA should actually try to help wild elephants and donate to some conservation projects if they really want to do some good.
Also I really think it's funny how much animal rights organizations praise these sanctuaries and how they are so much better than anything a zoo could do, and the Tennessee sanctuary - the most well known elephant sanctuary in North America - has no problem working with the AZA.
Also I really think it's funny how much animal rights organizations praise these sanctuaries and how they are so much better than anything a zoo could do, and the Tennessee sanctuary - the most well known elephant sanctuary in North America - has no problem working with the AZA.
And pretty much every zoo on this list does more for wild elephants than any AR group against elephants in zoos.
But that would make too much logical sense and that just isn’t something IDA, PETA, and other groups can handle.
In reality, they don’t care about wild elephants. They see intelligent animals in “cages” and it hurts their feelings. It’s something they can exploit and push to the media as a problem when there isn’t any. It doesn’t line their wallets to give time or money to wild elephant conservation.
And that's just it, isn't it. How many millions of dollars do these groups make, and how little of that actually trickles down the shelters and programs they run?
~Thylo
Why do I feel like AR groups are reading this and going: "Well, how much of the money that zoos make really go to the animals?". In some areas AR really has a good point, especially with animal welfare. Many of their "beliefs" are very un-appealing, especially to zoo enthusiasts. One of the reasons society possibly goes with it is because it trends on the media.
Why can't they express their views with more respect? Why do zoos have to respond lightly and sometimes give up animals when AR groups can just protest and be (no, they are) very disrespectful?
Why can't they express their views with more respect? Why do zoos have to respond lightly and sometimes give up animals when AR groups can just protest and be (no, they are) very disrespectful?
Eh? Many of the welfare points they fight against haven’t been practiced in zoos in years. They pull up old husbandry practices and claim they are still being used. I can’t really think of any good points any AR group has made regarding welfare practices in zoos.
For anyone wondering it was $250,000,000 last year by AZA zoos donated to wildlife conservation.
I apologize it wasn't clear enough in the original post, but what I meant was that the AR groups occasionally boycott (a lot) to close multiple trashy roadside zoos and horrible facilities, and they [animals] get to go to amazing homes later on.
Anyone who knows a thing about Bronx/WCS would be able to immediately recognize this list as an eye-catcher rather than an objective review of elephant facilities. Unfortunately, that's not a lot of people outside of conservation circles.
I used to be against all forms of elephant captivity, so I'm somewhat sympathetic to some of their arguments too. But 100% what we need is for animal rights/welfare organizations to work alongside zoos and contribute time, funds, resources and personnel to increasing the comfort level of elephants during ex-situ conservation measures deemed necessary by AZA-accredited, scientifically managed zoo authorities.
But to be honest, the MAIN thing anyone who professes to care about elephant conditions in captivity should be doing is not focused on US-based zoos. It's in the temples, monasteries, amusement parks, roadside attractions, markets and even ecotourism facilities of India, Nepal, Thailand and other Asian countries. I was once very interested in the NHRP, but I think it says something less-than-stellar about the organization that their first target was the Bronx Zoo and not any of 100s of potential targets in India - which, according to an interview with an NHRP lawyer, they did consider as a common law jurisdiction that is relatively amenable to animal rights arguments. India's temple elephants have it FAR worse than any in an AZA zoo.
I used to be against all forms of elephant captivity, so I'm somewhat sympathetic to some of their arguments too. But 100% what we need is for animal rights/welfare organizations to work alongside zoos and contribute time, funds, resources and personnel to increasing the comfort level of elephants during ex-situ conservation measures deemed necessary by AZA-accredited, scientifically managed zoo authorities.
But to be honest, the MAIN thing anyone who professes to care about elephant conditions in captivity should be doing is not focused on US-based zoos. It's in the temples, monasteries, amusement parks, roadside attractions, markets and even ecotourism facilities of India, Nepal, Thailand and other Asian countries. I was once very interested in the NHRP, but I think it says something less-than-stellar about the organization that their first target was the Bronx Zoo and not any of 100s of potential targets in India - which, according to an interview with an NHRP lawyer, they did consider as a common law jurisdiction that is relatively amenable to animal rights arguments. India's temple elephants have it FAR worse than any in an AZA zoo.
I agree with most of what you said in your original rebuttal post, but I think the arguments about the threat level faced by elephants in the wild is a bit over-exaggerated. Elephant populations in Africa have been on the increase, to the extent that some countries have had to consider culls. In quite a few cases, wild-caught elephants being sent to zoos have been done so because of the threat of impending culls, not of poachers.
Poaching and habitat loss are both very real problems that undoubtedly threaten the long-term survival of elephants in both Africa and Asia, but a 10-year extinction seems like a farfetched stretch to me. I know it's common across the board (hunting advocates, animal rights folks, zoo community, even big conservation NGOs) to be alarmist about elephant numbers for myriad well-intentioned agendas, but most of these are distorting the truth. If zoos were to abandon all elephant programs (which I, of course, hope they don't), it won't signal the end of the species if all else continues as is. Not in 10 years, at least.
Yi Qi
Well-Known Member
Ah yes, that dillema. On one hand; but on the other, it's kind of.... unfortunate how the (mostly) white western nations are targeting millennia-old asian traditions as being cruel, even if they are in the right.
I'm not saying above that its racist to protest elephants used in hindu and buddhist ceremonies, i'm just saying that captivity debate is a lot grayer then a lot of people think.
It is difficult when it's a culture and tradition thing, but when these traditions have already driven many, many taxa into extinction and are often the primary cause of driving many, many more taxa into extinction, it's pretty safe to label them as cruel and think they need to stop. I think it's a bit incorrect to say that it's only the mostly white western nations would want these traditions to end, I'm sure the many African countries that actually care about their elephants and rhinos getting slaughtered aren't fans of the east Asian black market, or now legalized market in China... A more accurate description of the situation will be that it's often the more western nations that can be the most vocal about it.
~Thylo
I bet they didn't make it because they said they will never keep elephants again.
Kawekaweau
Well-Known Member
Do you have a (preferably but not mandatorily third party) source for that donation claim?
I hate anti-zoo activists. Recently I decided to quit arguing with them on social media for the sake of my mental health. I just hope my abstaining from the argument won't lead to our "war" being lost. They can make good points, but generally even "good" laws are nothing more than a slippery slope or "foot in the door" in practice.
The number was actually $220,000,000. It was reported by the AZA so the original source is from their reports although it is probably added from the numbers that the zoos and aquariums self report to the AZA every year.
2017 Report Highlights AZA Member Facilities’ Important Contributions to Global Conservation and Science
This one is a list of every single program that every AZA facility participated in. No numbers but still neat to look through.
https://www.speakcdn.com/assets/2332/arcs_report_2017_final.pdf
And here is the document that goes over highlights of the projects. This seems to be where the $220,000,000 comes from. I can’t seem to find a more detailed document in my quick google search.
https://www.speakcdn.com/assets/2332/aza_arcshighlights_2017_final_web.pdf
The Lousiville Zoo MeToo comment was ridiculous. They lost quite a bit of credibility with that comment. That being said, I don't agree with female elephants being kept alone and the case of Happy at the Bronx Zoo was been a troubling one for quite some time. It seems to me that exhibit needed to close years ago.
Regarding the Louisville Zoo, I wholeheartedly believe that 0.1 Punch (Asian Elephant) and 0.1 Mikki (African Elephant) should be relocated to other institutions. Despite the renovations to the enclosure, it did not provide Punch and Mikki with additional space. In addition, the Louisville Zoo is one of four institutions that still maintains mixed species socialization. Further, the elephant facility does not have the adequate space for Mikki to grow her matriarchal herd. Ultimately, Punch and Mikki deserve greater space to roam and to socialize with others of the same speices.
Without a doubt, the Bronx Zoo needs to retire Happy and Patty to a sanctuary. After the passing of Maxine, Patty lost her only companion while Happy has been in isolation for over a decade. The Bronx Zoo does not have the adequate space for elephants to roam. In addition, because of Patty's aggresive nature towards Happy, neither elephant are able to socialize with compatible herd mates. Essentially, the Bronx Zoo needs to come to the realization that they can not provide their elephants the proper space and socialization they need, and give Happy and Patty the life of retirement they deserve.