San Antonio Zoo San Antonio Zoo News 2014

San Antonio Zoo Won't Relocate Aging Elephant | NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth

The latest article stating the directors latest refusal to send the zoo's lone Asian elephant, Lucky, to any other zoo/sanctuary.

Personally, I have my opinions and believe Zoo's (some) can offer elephants a great place to live. I don't think the answer is to immediately send her to a sanctuary but I strongly disagree with the Zoo keeping her alone. I think its selfish and I'm not sure what the Zoo will have planned IF Lucky is still alive in 2016 to meet new AZA requirements. If she does live to see 2016 I think the zoo's decision not to move her will have increased the risk and dangers of moving her even more. I believe it's in her best interest as well as the zoo's to send her to a nearby facility with similar aged elephants and a better facility who might need another elephant to meet AZA policy, maybe to San diego (Who specialize in the care of elder elephants) Tulsa, who has Gunda, a soon to be 64 year old Asian elephant, or even to OKC.

What are some thoughts others have as to pro moving or anti moving?
 
ctfctf7 said:
San Antonio Zoo Won't Relocate Aging Elephant | NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth

I believe it's in her best interest as well as the zoo's to send her to a nearby facility with similar aged elephants and a better facility who might need another elephant to meet AZA policy, maybe to San diego (Who specialize in the care of elder elephants) Tulsa, who has Gunda, a soon to be 64 year old Asian elephant, or even to OKC.

What are some thoughts others have as to pro moving or anti moving?
Click to expand...

I think OKC is the best option based on how large their facility is and how small their herd is. Fort Woth is very dated and full and Houston's is at capacity.

That said, SA Antonio should have done this 10 years ago before they acquired Boo and this debate started. I am concerned if this elephant is too old to move at this point and could survive a trip to OKC or anywhere else. I would not be surprised if in late 2015 Lucky's health "took a turn for the worse" and San Antonio was "forced" to euthanized her.

I hope not, but at this point with this zoo, I would not be surprised.
 
ctfctf7 said:
I think its selfish and I'm not sure what the Zoo will have planned IF Lucky is still alive in 2016 to meet new AZA requirements. If she does live to see 2016 I think the zoo's decision not to move her will have increased the risk and dangers of moving her even more.
Click to expand...

I believe previous press releases have stated that the zoo has applied for and will most likely be granted a variance from policy.

On an honest level, if it were feasible for the zoo to relocate Lucky, they would do so as soon as possible. The reality is she is a legitimately socially irregular animal, who would require special accommodations (i.e. yards separate from the herd)- meaning hardly any zoo would be interested in taking such on.

I know the SA zoo has voiced its plan to exhibit a bachelor herd of African males at some point, which only further confirms that this is a legitimate inability to transfer her, rather than institutional selfishness.
 
loxodontaafrica said:
I believe previous press releases have stated that the zoo has applied for and will most likely be granted a variance from policy.

On an honest level, if it were feasible for the zoo to relocate Lucky, they would do so as soon as possible. The reality is she is a legitimately socially irregular animal, who would require special accommodations (i.e. yards separate from the herd)- meaning hardly any zoo would be interested in taking such on.

I know the SA zoo has voiced its plan to exhibit a bachelor herd of African males at some point, which only further confirms that this is a legitimate inability to transfer her, rather than institutional selfishness.
Click to expand...

I must agree here. It is never as clear cut B/W as some would have it believe. The African elephant bachelor group is very much in the MP.
 
loxodontaafrica said:
I believe previous press releases have stated that the zoo has applied for and will most likely be granted a variance from policy.

On an honest level, if it were feasible for the zoo to relocate Lucky, they would do so as soon as possible. The reality is she is a legitimately socially irregular animal, who would require special accommodations (i.e. yards separate from the herd)- meaning hardly any zoo would be interested in taking such on.

I know the SA zoo has voiced its plan to exhibit a bachelor herd of African males at some point, which only further confirms that this is a legitimate inability to transfer her, rather than institutional selfishness.
Click to expand...

Agreed. A lot of people are saying that the zoo is only keeping her because they're greedy and only care about money... But I think the African elephant plans are proof against this. From a financial perspective, if they're already getting the elephants it would be more profitable to get them sooner rather than later. (multiple elephants would be more popular in an exhibit, plus if they plan on breeding at some point, they can get the crowd-pleasing babies) If the zoo really only cared about money, they'd send Lucky away regardless of whether it was good for her and they'd get those new elephants. Whether or not other people or experts or zoos or whatever agree, I think the SA zoo legitimate believes that keeping Lucky is the best thing for her.
 
TheMightyOrca said:
Agreed. A lot of people are saying that the zoo is only keeping her because they're greedy and only care about money... But I think the African elephant plans are proof against this. From a financial perspective, if they're already getting the elephants it would be more profitable to get them sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...

You're missing a very important part of the puzzle: The start up costs to build a new exhibit. This will cost millions. San Antonio is not a rich zoo, or even a rich city. While this new exhibit is their goal, the zoo has not been fundraising for this, nor do they have a savings account dedicated to this. This is a goal on a piece of paper and some good p.r., nothing more.

It's more likely they will continue to showcase their lone elephant until she passes then begin the 2-3 years of fundraising for their "goal" then spend one more year executing that plan. Until their hand is forced through the death of the current animal, why change a functioning operation for something which will cost them a lot in the short term?
 
TZFan said:
Executive Director J. Stephen McCusker is retiring at the end of November after 20 years on the job. He will be succeeded by Tim Morrow who most recently worked for Sea World San Antonio.

Executive director of San Antonio Zoo to retire
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see what changes the new director brings. It is nice that he is a San Antonio native, so obviously he is committed to his local zoo. Considering his career with a pure theme park (Fiesta Texas) followed by an animal theme park (Sea World), I will be curious to see if he takes the zoo in a more theme oriented direction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top