You are correct. Positive reinforcement is ONLY used in PC because when you can't physically make an animal do what you want it to do you will need to ensure ALL interaction is positive and 'enjoyable'. The elephant can walk off and end the training session at any time (they have a choice and providing captive animals with choice plays a huge part in their welfare)
Zoo Knoxville Knoxville Zoo elephant keeper killed
- Thread starter CritterBlog
- Start date
-
- Tags
- elephants knoxville zoo
You are correct. Positive reinforcement is ONLY used in PC because when you can't physically make an animal do what you want it to do you will need to ensure ALL interaction is positive and 'enjoyable'. The elephant can walk off and end the training session at any time (they have a choice and providing captive animals with choice plays a huge part in their welfare)
I've never known baby horses to be pulled from their mum's, caged, starved and denied water whilst fires are lit around them and pain inflicted on their bodies over the course of several days until the mahout makes an entrance in all his glory.
I am not an animal activist trying to use scare tactics in an attempt to turn the general public against elephants in Zoos. I am not against captivity and I am not against elephants in captivity. I just believe, in 2011, when the Zoo community have come so far in so many areas of animal husbandry, welfare and care it is mind-blowing that the practice of using positive punishment on animals, ANY animal, is allowed to be undertaken - even defended by so many and completely DENIED by many others.
And I'd like to apologies for offending keepers (in previous posts) by placing everyone in the same category. I do agree that most probably there are free contact keepers who are positive towards PC.
Using 100 % positive reinforcement and training animals using limited or no physical contact is incredibly challenging and differs immensely from using punishment or negative reinforcement. I applaud any keeper who welcomes the challenge.
as in any animal, humans included there are many personality types
while developing from a young age they all learn what is acceptable or unacceptable social behaviour
communicating what is acceptable or unacceptable behaviour is the key
like children some will always push limits while some will accept easily what is expected from them
mum and other older elephants will deliver a cuff if boundaries are over stepped in elephant etiquette
every year people are killed or maimed by supposedly domesticated animals, dogs, horses and cattle
do we call for PC with these?
some need it some not
some people should never be let near any animal
while developing from a young age they all learn what is acceptable or unacceptable social behaviour
communicating what is acceptable or unacceptable behaviour is the key
like children some will always push limits while some will accept easily what is expected from them
mum and other older elephants will deliver a cuff if boundaries are over stepped in elephant etiquette
every year people are killed or maimed by supposedly domesticated animals, dogs, horses and cattle
do we call for PC with these?
some need it some not
some people should never be let near any animal
I should have worded that better. The idea behind breaking an elephant is the same as breaking a horse. I have never seen fires lit around baby elephants or seen them denied food or water. I have watched, but not been involved in the breaking of six elephants. I have however broken in many horses and camels and the idea is the same. Horses are lunged, hobbled, camels are pulled to tge ground with ropes. Very similar to what I winessed in breaking elephants. I didn't say I agree with breaking elephants so young.
Positive punishment? I never said anything about that.
People here have been very judgmental about people that use the ankus. I am quite offended by the accusations of it being a cruel tool. I have never used an ankus in a cruel way. I touch the animal with it, give the command and give a reward. If the behavior is not performed there is no punishment, just no reward.
Also, most elephant keepers names are not Hercules. Slot are overestimating the strength of keepers. A modern ankus is not designed to inflict pain. You can push or pull quite hard ( and avoiding sensitive areas) and the elephant will completely ignore you! You have to be more creative when punishing an elephant. E.g. If the elephant is not obeying commands it does not get to go for a walk.
Funny that I have seen elephant keepers from many different zoos in Europe using the iron hook of the ankus in sensitive areas and with force. You can tell me as often as you want that this doesn`t happen, but I`ve seen it. MULTIPLE TIMES IN MANY ZOOS.
Maybe you should stop assuming that because you didn`t use the ankus this way, no one does. If you really worked with elephants, and really did it as you claim here. Given that you want us to believe you kept musth bulls in line through denying them their much-loved walks, I am becoming very sceptical. Musth bulls in Australia must be very different from those in the rest of the world.
Maybe you should stop assuming that because you didn`t use the ankus this way, no one does. If you really worked with elephants, and really did it as you claim here. Given that you want us to believe you kept musth bulls in line through denying them their much-loved walks, I am becoming very sceptical. Musth bulls in Australia must be very different from those in the rest of the world.
You make alot of assumptions. I have said more than once in this thread that there are bad elephant keepers. But you are lumping them all in together. That it what I find frustrating with this thread. I never said anything about controlling a bull in musth by denying it a walk. All bulls are managed pc in Australia. You don't know anything about my experience and knowledge of elephants. I have never worked elephants in Australia ( other than their **** collector). Again that is what is frustrating. Jumping to conclusions and making assumptions.
I find it absolutely abhorrent that in this day and age people are attempting to justify using hooks and electric goads on elephants even more abhorrent is the fact that the people who are attempting to justify it claim to be actively engaged in elephant keeping. What may I ask is this frequent comparison between elephants and young children, ? elephants are elephants and children are children, they are two different species entirely, after reading all this the sooner protected contact comes into force for every elephant in every zoo in every country the better.
If it was as abhorrent as you say, it would have already been banned. Very few zoos use electric goads and has been stated the shock from a goad is no worse than an electric fence, something a human can experience with minimal discomfort. I do not encourage their use but you are just being ridiculous. you keep calling them hooks, good zoos use an ankus which have a very little hook there is a difference between an ankus and a bullhook. You are reading and accepting only what you want and ignoring everything else.
elephants are just big children basically that don't know their own strength sometimes
never used an electric goad on an animal in my life
previously involved with a young elephant that was purchased and arrived younger than was claimed by the seller
turned into the most gentle animal i ever worked with
another i worked with was purchased as she had had some bad handling early in life and had injured a couple of keepers
it took a while but a good relationship was established with her so a hook never needed to be used on her
this is a hard topic as trying to convey the feeling of a relationship one can have with an elephant is almost impossible to capture with words
never used an electric goad on an animal in my life
previously involved with a young elephant that was purchased and arrived younger than was claimed by the seller
turned into the most gentle animal i ever worked with
another i worked with was purchased as she had had some bad handling early in life and had injured a couple of keepers
it took a while but a good relationship was established with her so a hook never needed to be used on her
this is a hard topic as trying to convey the feeling of a relationship one can have with an elephant is almost impossible to capture with words
CritterBlog
Well-Known Member
Report: Elephant trainer's death not zoo's fault - WRCBtv.com | Chattanooga News, Weather & Sports
Report: Elephant trainer's death not zoo's fault
Associated Press - February 15, 2011 5:35 PM ET
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (AP) - A Tennessee wildlife agency report says the Jan. 14 death of an elephant trainer at the Knoxville Zoo was likely due to an unprovoked but "intentional" blow by the animal.
The Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency incident report said there is no reason to believe any zoo procedures contributed to the death of the trainer, 33-year-old Stephanie Elaine James.
James died from internal injuries suffered when the 26-year-old female elephant, Edie, pushed her into the bars of a barn stall during feeding.
WBIR-TV reported Tuesday that zoo director Jim Vlna said in a statement that only the elephant "knew her intent and whatever that was, it will not change the end result. Everyone is still mourning the loss of Stephanie."
Knoxville zoo officials said their own review will be finished soon.
Report: Elephant trainer's death not zoo's fault
Associated Press - February 15, 2011 5:35 PM ET
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (AP) - A Tennessee wildlife agency report says the Jan. 14 death of an elephant trainer at the Knoxville Zoo was likely due to an unprovoked but "intentional" blow by the animal.
The Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency incident report said there is no reason to believe any zoo procedures contributed to the death of the trainer, 33-year-old Stephanie Elaine James.
James died from internal injuries suffered when the 26-year-old female elephant, Edie, pushed her into the bars of a barn stall during feeding.
WBIR-TV reported Tuesday that zoo director Jim Vlna said in a statement that only the elephant "knew her intent and whatever that was, it will not change the end result. Everyone is still mourning the loss of Stephanie."
Knoxville zoo officials said their own review will be finished soon.
Im sorry to bring this thread back up but I just had to say something here.
This exactly what Jarkari is talking about. You are lumping all free contact facilities and elephants/keepers together without any background knowledge of the facility or how the elephants are managed. My local zoo, which uses free contact, would never dream of using electric goads or cattle proders (sp?) on their elephants, nor I would think any ethical and properly managed zoo worldwide. An elephant should trust its keeper, not be forced to do anything and most of all be comfortable. Using these bad management tools means that either the zoo you have been to or heard of should not be managing free contact as the elephants do not have a close bond or trust with the keepers, otherwise they wouldn't need to use such tools.
No facility is a perfect facility really, there are pros and cons for both management practices that will be debated for a while on these forums and in the 'ethical treatment' world. You can't manage elephants in both Free Contact and Protected Contact, so I think some people need to realise it is their opinion on what management is the best and most enriching for the elephant. You have to look at it both ways.
And BTW, the elephant calves at my local zoo seem the happiest to interact with the keepers, to them it is a big game. I have never seen any elephant in discomfort and at any time at the keeper talk I never saw a keeper even need to pull out an ankus because the elephants trust them so much. Positive reinforcement is the key for both management systems.
Last edited:
@UrMumzAGoat Nicely said there is not only black and white! I am totally open minded and still try to understand both systems. What puzzles me about free contact is, how can you be top dog with only positive reinforcement at hand? You cannot. As discussed here before you have to break the animal. In addition you interfer with the social structure of your elephant herd. Just recently two circus elephants were aquired by a German zoo and switched from free to protected contact. As there had never been a clear hierachy established between those 2 animals in 25 years of free contact one received a severe beating by the other.
So imho it's time to phase out free contact and establish true matriarchal herds and bull groups in zoos using protected contact. (Of course this will take some years (better decades) as elephants are very long-lived and during that time good keepers can do good for elephants also in free contact.)
Please correct me if I am wrong!
So imho it's time to phase out free contact and establish true matriarchal herds and bull groups in zoos using protected contact. (Of course this will take some years (better decades) as elephants are very long-lived and during that time good keepers can do good for elephants also in free contact.)
Please correct me if I am wrong!
But if every animal is to become tamed, isn't breaking necessary? I mean, it will take generations for these animals to be released back into the wild so we don't need to worry about them becoming too humanised. In free contact, you need a mutual friendship with the elephant, positive reinforcement is the key. Not many free contact elephant keepers I have seen even use their ankuses, it is just there as a back-up in case a horrible accident happens. Therefore, you need to use positive reinforcement with free contact if the trust is to be built up, otherwise very nasty accident happen that can both inflict pain or death on the keeper or the elephant.
Regarding those circus elephants, I don't think their hierachal structure was not established simply by free contact, it could be due to the fact that their are in a circus with no other elephants (two elephants are not a herd, so therefore they can't form a hierachy without more elephants) or the fact that they have become so closely bonded with their keepers that there was no need or want to interact with each other. A similar situation happened here in Australia. Two circus elephants used to Free Contact were suddenly shifted to a Protected Contact facility after they supposedly killed a keeper, but what other members have said is that their personality has slumped because of the shift as they cannot get the interaction from their keepers as they would in Free Contact. At this facility, all the Asian elephants are managed Protected Contact while the single African is managed in Free Contact and allowed to roam the zoo going on walks, which the PC animal cannot do. It merely depends on the personality of the animal, some PC actually needs to be managed as they are too dangerous.
Hope that is good
Here's the deal: In free contact, keepers (I don't want to call them trainers) use bullying, positive punishment (pain, pressure points, ankus - there may be variations, but it's all the same) in order to prevent animals to 'fall out of line' i.e they will hurt, scare and intimidate animals for breaking rules even slightly. When it comes to animal learning it is quite easy to pair a stimulus (i.e a word, tone of voice or hand signal) with either something rewarding (i.e a treat) or something aversive (i.e a beating). Keepers pair words and sounds with painful events and these words or sounds are often sufficient to 'threaten' an animal that is 'playing up' i.e not obeying. You will obviously NEVER see a keeper beat an animal in front of the public and you will obviously NEVER hear a keeper admit to ever beating an animal at all. Free contact keepers do use some positive reinforcement too, but this is not how they keep these animals under control when working right next to them.
Taronga zoo in sydney is as far as I know one of only a handfull of zoos in the world which have got a free contact system in place which is based on positive reinforcement only. This is a relatively new way to work elephants, nobody knows how safe it is and many institutions are not prepared to take the risk.
People need to take their rose-tinted glasses off when it comes to their favourite zoo and when it comes to what they WANT to believe vs what is really going on. Reputable zoos, zoos which spend thousands on conservation, famous zoos, modern zoos, good zoos, zoos that care.... whatever your image of an institution - if it's got elephants that are managed free contact then it has got keepers which manage those elephants and that includes using pain and suffering, social isolation, intimidation, bullying etc.
It might not sit comfortably with people but that doesn't mean it isn't going on.
I am personally absolutely NOT against animals in captivity but I am 100 % against intentional abuse of them.
Taronga zoo in sydney is as far as I know one of only a handfull of zoos in the world which have got a free contact system in place which is based on positive reinforcement only. This is a relatively new way to work elephants, nobody knows how safe it is and many institutions are not prepared to take the risk.
People need to take their rose-tinted glasses off when it comes to their favourite zoo and when it comes to what they WANT to believe vs what is really going on. Reputable zoos, zoos which spend thousands on conservation, famous zoos, modern zoos, good zoos, zoos that care.... whatever your image of an institution - if it's got elephants that are managed free contact then it has got keepers which manage those elephants and that includes using pain and suffering, social isolation, intimidation, bullying etc.
It might not sit comfortably with people but that doesn't mean it isn't going on.
I am personally absolutely NOT against animals in captivity but I am 100 % against intentional abuse of them.
UrMumzAGoat,
If Taronga is so absolutely incident free with their elephants, would you believe Melbourne is too?
It was only a couple of years ago that a investigation was made regarding a senior elephant keeper there "mauling" Dokkoon with an ankus after she apparently intimidated him.
If he's the keeper I believe him to be then hardly surprising. Judging from what I had seen of the man, his is methods of control were aggressive and forceful.
I haven't seen him there since in fact.
So you see even at the best of Zoos - things happen. I for one think free contact of any animal capable of killing is unnecessary, and its only ever a matter of time. Whilst I love them, I am always very wary around elephants, and you wouldn't get me in an enclosure with a tiger no matter how "trained" it may be.
If Taronga is so absolutely incident free with their elephants, would you believe Melbourne is too?
It was only a couple of years ago that a investigation was made regarding a senior elephant keeper there "mauling" Dokkoon with an ankus after she apparently intimidated him.
If he's the keeper I believe him to be then hardly surprising. Judging from what I had seen of the man, his is methods of control were aggressive and forceful.
I haven't seen him there since in fact.
So you see even at the best of Zoos - things happen. I for one think free contact of any animal capable of killing is unnecessary, and its only ever a matter of time. Whilst I love them, I am always very wary around elephants, and you wouldn't get me in an enclosure with a tiger no matter how "trained" it may be.
I have no idea if Melbourne is, for I have never been there yet (except I'm going in a few weeks) and have not seen really much of their elephant practices at all. The keeper who was involved, I cannot say he was a good or bad keeper,because I also haven't seen him work with the elephants or at all as a matter of fact. However, if he intentionally did harm Dokkon, that is a bad keeping error and behaviour. If Dokkon did intimidate him, or another keeper, or anyone, a simple assertion would be enough to calm her down if they felt the need to for the risk of injury to both animal or keeper. If he was intimidated by Dokkon, I feel that then that keeper should not be in a free contact facility as he does not trust the animal, and that will only make Dokkon less trustful of him.
Not relating to the Melbourne incident or elephants at all, but I have a book called "Life is a Zoo" which is about some of the animals both still living or now deceased at both the Taronga facilities. Cuddles, the last African Elephant in Australia, got her name from being affectionate to her keepers. She is however sometimes too affectionate and leans on them which puts them in great risk. Her then keeper (2005, i'm not sure if he still works there) Scott Smith says quote "She weighs nearly five tonnes, so even if she means well (referring to leaning up against the keepers) you can't let her do it. For safety reasons it's important that she respects our body space. We have to teach her, with positive reinforcement and rewards, that she can't really be leaning on us." end quote. This means that still through positive reinforcement and NOT BEING AGGRESSIVE that you can teach an elephant what to do and control the animal.
I just want to let everyone know that I am a one sided dice in favour of free contact, I support both methods and what is best for the animal. I just need to explain to some people and defend free contact that it is not all about bullying the animals and forcing them to do things, its all about mutual friendship and trust.
And the free contact tigers (such as at Dreamworld and Zion) are a whole different story.
Last edited:
Saro
Well-Known Member
I have read this thread with great interest and even though I did not read every post in detail, I feel like I should throw in my five cents. First of all, we are talking about a keeper who got killed, this is tragic. Stephanie James surely did not want to die. She might have thought she knew the risk, but she probably underestimated it, like many others before her. Friends and colleagues of mine have been injured and killed by elephants over the years. They all thought they knew better, including at least one mentioned here. I personally worked with elephants in FC in the eighties, including two bulls and a very dangerous cow. It was in a big zoo with lots of history in elephant keeping and breeding. We had electric cattle prods, baseball bats, bull whips, lots of more or less sharpened elephant hooks (including a number of very sharp ones for the head keeper). This is to all the people who say that this was an exception: It was not and is not ! Unless you currently work at the place that is being talked about, you don’t know what is really going on! People often say one thing but really do another.
As a junior keeper, I did not have to beat the elephants too much myself, but I witnessed elephants being beaten, shocked and whipped many times. This was tough, but with the management system in place, we pretty much had no choice. „Real elephant keepers“ ? Trust me, I worked with REAL elephant keepers. I always thought that there must be a better way to work with elephants and I really welcomed PC from the early days on. After all, elephants should be able to be elephants, without someone dominating them. IN FC, you have to – period.
Maybe you don’t have do it too much with some old friendly cow, but you certainly have to do it with the young ones. In 98‘, I was invited to an elephant workshop in Emmen to debate PC versus FC. I was invited as someone who knew a few things about operant conditioning (being a marine mammal keeper/trainer). Many big European zoos were present, but also Scott Riddle and Gail Laule. It was frightening to see, how little people knew about how operant conditoning really works. Many elephant keepers, who thought they worked with it, really didn’t. At that time, it was even debated if adult bulls should be kept in PC ! At least we seem to have have moved on from that debate (with almost all bulls in PC today), because keeping a bull in FC is pretty much always suicidal ! But keepers have been killed by cows as well, Stephanie James just being the most recent one. I always thought and said: „if your FC works for you and your elephants, you should continue to use it“, but maybe we should move on again. In my opinion, if you have to beat an animal (any animal, not just elephants), it usually is because you are helpless and you don’t know better. But there is „better“! I believe the time for FC is coming to an end and PC (if used correctly) is the way forward. Today I believe this is better for the elephants and better for their keepers. After all, it really saves lives without reducing the quality of care for the elephants (it really doesn’t) and this is what should matter most!
As a junior keeper, I did not have to beat the elephants too much myself, but I witnessed elephants being beaten, shocked and whipped many times. This was tough, but with the management system in place, we pretty much had no choice. „Real elephant keepers“ ? Trust me, I worked with REAL elephant keepers. I always thought that there must be a better way to work with elephants and I really welcomed PC from the early days on. After all, elephants should be able to be elephants, without someone dominating them. IN FC, you have to – period.
Maybe you don’t have do it too much with some old friendly cow, but you certainly have to do it with the young ones. In 98‘, I was invited to an elephant workshop in Emmen to debate PC versus FC. I was invited as someone who knew a few things about operant conditioning (being a marine mammal keeper/trainer). Many big European zoos were present, but also Scott Riddle and Gail Laule. It was frightening to see, how little people knew about how operant conditoning really works. Many elephant keepers, who thought they worked with it, really didn’t. At that time, it was even debated if adult bulls should be kept in PC ! At least we seem to have have moved on from that debate (with almost all bulls in PC today), because keeping a bull in FC is pretty much always suicidal ! But keepers have been killed by cows as well, Stephanie James just being the most recent one. I always thought and said: „if your FC works for you and your elephants, you should continue to use it“, but maybe we should move on again. In my opinion, if you have to beat an animal (any animal, not just elephants), it usually is because you are helpless and you don’t know better. But there is „better“! I believe the time for FC is coming to an end and PC (if used correctly) is the way forward. Today I believe this is better for the elephants and better for their keepers. After all, it really saves lives without reducing the quality of care for the elephants (it really doesn’t) and this is what should matter most!
Last edited:
@ Saro: Thanks.
@UrMumzAGoat: Unless you worked at Taronga as elephant keeper, you shouldn`t be so sure about what is happening there behind the scenes re elephant training. Visitors are usually only seeing what the keepers want them to see, and that`s NOT the rough stuff, but rather the fluff. Neither should you believe everything you read - I don`t believe that a lot of elephants, if any, can be trained to respect the body space of humans with positive enforcement only. Zoos like Vienna and Dresden openly admit that it is necessary to beat elephant calves to teach them not to knock over the keepers.
@UrMumzAGoat: Unless you worked at Taronga as elephant keeper, you shouldn`t be so sure about what is happening there behind the scenes re elephant training. Visitors are usually only seeing what the keepers want them to see, and that`s NOT the rough stuff, but rather the fluff. Neither should you believe everything you read - I don`t believe that a lot of elephants, if any, can be trained to respect the body space of humans with positive enforcement only. Zoos like Vienna and Dresden openly admit that it is necessary to beat elephant calves to teach them not to knock over the keepers.