Taronga Zoo Taronga's Elephants and other news!!!

jay said:
She certainly gives the Greens a bad name and seems to be associating herself more with PETA type issues than enviromental.
Click to expand...

yes i agree jay, i vote green all the way. not because i think they'll get in or even because even if they did, by some extraordinary miracle, that they would be the best party to run the country. i vote for them because i agree with most of their policies environmental or not, and more importantly because by giving them more seats we put pressure on the other parties to place environmental issues on the agenda. i'm very proud to say this attitude of mine has spread to almost all of my family and friends as well.

so, since i take my green party seriously - I HATE, I ABSOLUTELY HATE, when when the greens are linked to the stereotype, of the animal-libber, vegan, tree-hugging, jobless, stinky, whinging feral. okay so i hate ferals, i do. not just because i was totally almost became one when i was in my late teens but also because i think someone who "removes themselves from the disease of society man" doesn't have much of a right to comment on it. if your that bloody dedicated to the cause - get a job, cut your hair and put on a shirt so someone takes you seriously. if not, your just, fairly or unfairly, giving us greenies a bad name.

where was i? oh yeah Lee Rhiannnon. she's aligning herself with the animal libbers, and whilst animal liberation is in many cases a very worthwhile cause, its not what the green party is about. so yeah - she can shut up.
 
Ara said:
BE PREPARED!

As we all know, young females of all species are often unsuccessful with their first baby/babies.
Now that Thong Dee is confirmed pregnant, I hope it's a success, or the Greens, RSPCA and all the other opponents of the elephant importation will love it and squeal loud and long.
Click to expand...

But in Elephants, young females seem far more likely to have an easy delivery and a safe birth than older females that haven't bred before. Her chances are therefore pretty good, I think.
 
The article doubting the age of the pregnant elephant is unfortunate, as now Taronga Zoo is making headlines for all the wrong reasons. Between the alleged abuse at Melbourne Zoo and now the "under-age pregnancy" in Sydney, the elephant mysteries down under continue to make international newspapers. I'm really hoping for a stress-free delivery of a baby pachyderm so that any negative publicity can eventually disappear.
 
glyn said:
so the elephants who would never breed in an australian zoo............and shouldnt have been seperated from each other (cow and bull)........may be breeding. and now taronga zoo is irresponsible for breeding animals which are impossible to breed and irresponsible because they were doing what the Greens said they should, but werent.
btw, what would the Greens know about elephants anyway? about as much as a zoobeat forum member ;)
Click to expand...

Fair comment. But I assume the concerned forum members know a deal or 300% more than the average Green political bandwagoner! :D

My view on the entire affair is yet that Taronga is exactly doing what all opponents of the elephant breeding programme said they would not be able to do. Was it not these opponents that maintained that the elephants were taken from a safe environment from their range country and taken to a totally abject captive environment. Stress, deaths and the like should be expected. The indications for that none (safe for some critique regarding the elephant exhibit and bull enclosure ... at Taronga).

Currently, the opponents are fighting a backyard brawl and yet still manage to cap the papers. I put it down to slack and uneven newspaper reporting. If it were my turf, I would slap all these opponents with slander and an injunction on the newspapers to report unsound comments and rectify BIG TIME on page 1 their wrongful arguements.
 
In todays SMH not only are there articles doubting the age of the elephants but also the legality of the entire process....why do i get the feeling that this is going to be a long few months!?!?!

theoretically what do people think the worst thing that could happen if the greens prove their claims are right (i.e she is too young and was a wild elephant) they cant make the zoo send the elephants back all i can see them doing is forcing the zoo to send the eles out to Dubbo and that wouldnt be that bad would it?
 
its interesting that you say that jelle - since you could look at it this way - the elephant import was major fiasco and even though the zoos technically won, they have failed to avoid even more criticism.

melbourne zoo, has had an incident, in which the zoo themselves admit - risked the keepers lives forcing one keeper to retaliate.

taronga has now admitted they didn't even know how old their elephants were (anyone else believing this?!!) after they got caught out switiching ages when it suited their argument.

fiction from animal-libbers is very easy to deflect when your not doing anything wrong. after all, who are the experts here? any semi intelligent statement from the zoos themselves could quash most of the the issues raised in a flash.

instead the zoos are failing miserably. ask yourself why? do you really believe that the papers have it in for the zoos? here in australia they publish just as many "feel-good" stories as any negative ones..

tens of millions on an elephant acquisition, an import thats been touted as a conservation breeding program, that was dragged through the every court possible and taronga doesn't even know how old they are....

what a load of rubbish!
 
That's very encouraging, Pertinax; I wasn't aware of that. I've got my fingers crossed!

Yes, it's funny, Kiang. Sydney has two morning newspapers, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Daily Telegraph. The Herald regards itself as more of a quality broadsheet and it considers the Telegraph to be a down-market "rag". The Herald is fairly leftist, is very much for the Greens in general, and enjoys being critical of Taronga and zoos in general. Almost instinctively, the Telegraph (as its competitor) is very much pro-Taronga, and few days go by without a "feel-good" story or pictures from the zoo.
 
was at melbourne today and overheard a very interesting conversation between one of the keepers and some visitors. Now starting with the comment that of course he was going to be biased in his views but he raised some interesting topics that we all should consider.
1. First of all, the elephants did not come from some fantasy feel good home where they were treated with love and care. Apparently one of the mel eles (Don't think it was Dokkoon though it may have been) has scars on her back where she was viciously attacked by Thai keepers for not doing what they wanted her to do (puts the mel. 'attack' into perspective). They were all badly treated in the work camps.
2. These paticular elephants were in fact the rejects from the Thai work camps because they were not suitable for the work required (phycological problems, recalcitant etc)- so what would have happened to them if they had been left in Thailand?
3. The elephants were grouped in ages for the zoo people to look at eg a bunch of 6-8 year olds, another bunch 8-10 year olds etc. They weren't exactly aged.
Pat I know that you are very hard on the zoos re the elephants and that they certainly deserve a lot ofit but I think you are letting your own bias get in the way a bit. No one could claim that these elephants are being ill treated. The Animal rights groups ARE using the zoos as a soft target and while it may not be ideal it certainly not bad.
 
interesting jay. forgive me but i have to respond in the dreaded point by point quote system usually reserved for pedants....

jay said:
1. First of all, the elephants did not come from some fantasy feel good home where they were treated with love and care. Apparently one of the mel eles (Don't think it was Dokkoon though it may have been) has scars on her back where she was viciously attacked by Thai keepers for not doing what they wanted her to do (puts the mel. 'attack' into perspective). They were all badly treated in the work camps.
Click to expand...

hmmmm. thats certainly not what michelle the ex-melbourne zookeeper would have said. remember her? shes an australian who runst a place called elephantstay.com. she came online a while back. anyhow, one of the melbourne elephants came from this place. and whilst i haven't been there i'm not exactly prepared to call it a "work camp"...are you?

secondly, is that taronga and melbourne's official statement now - that all the elephants came from work camps is it?
sheesh! i really wish the zoos would make up their mind. originally when the idea was put forth they argued that they came, captive bred, from "tourist camps" guaranteeing that none had been abused or "broken in" using the traditional thai technique. has everyone forgotten that? and hold on? weren't some so called "street elephants"?. so if they truly came did come from such hideous abusive conditions - who did the zoo pay for them? the same people who abused them? hold on - doesn't everyone know thats not something your supposed to do, because it supports the very thing the zoos are trying to suppress? what's stopping these guys from catching themselves another elephant and tomorrow and making a buck (or baht in this case) outta selling that to australia zoo?

i'm confused!!! where did these elephants really come from? and who did they pay for them? they can't keep changing their story to suit any argument.

jay said:
2. These paticular elephants were in fact the rejects from the Thai work camps because they were not suitable for the work required (phycological problems, recalcitant etc)- so what would have happened to them if they had been left in Thailand?
3. The elephants were grouped in ages for the zoo people to look at eg a bunch of 6-8 year olds, another bunch 8-10 year olds etc. They weren't exactly aged.
Click to expand...

well now thats a very professional way to select your founders for a breeding program isn't it? a bunch of age-estimated, behaviorally disturbed "rejects". i can't think of anything more suitable.

pleeeeease! this argument has even less merit since one of the elephants initially considered for import was reportedly rejected for being too "stroppy". (incidentally michelle had an interesting take on that from memory). do you really think the zoos, who had millions and millions riding on not only a baby elephant, but that the elephants would unload from their crates with great big smiles on their faces, (and stay that way in the face of a huge amount of legal pressure from a consortium animal welfare organisations), would have chosen animals known to have behavioral issues or that may potentially been too old? i'm now convinced thong-dee is as young as the zoo initially said she was. they bumped her age up a few years to try and defend the fact that they got her pregnant, rather that just say the truth, which is, her biology certainly says she is old enough so despite the guidelines they went against them anyway..(which is a whole different argument and one i'm not necessarily going to take up)

jay said:
Pat I know that you are very hard on the zoos re the elephants and that they certainly deserve a lot ofit but I think you are letting your own bias get in the way a bit. No one could claim that these elephants are being ill treated. The Animal rights groups ARE using the zoos as a soft target and while it may not be ideal it certainly not bad.
Click to expand...

and what's my bais jay? because i'm a conservationist? because i'm an ARAZPA member and melbourne zoo addict?

the zoos are a soft target because they keep changing their stories. why? why does it change EVERY SINGLE TIME they cop even the most ridiculous uneducated of criticisms?
 
Last edited:
very interesting.......but after all the scrutiny from the thai and australian governments, the court system, international conservation community and Australian community, then why is this argument only being presented now?
would it have emerged had thong dee not got pregnant? i dont swallow every line the zoos spin but i do believe these individual elephants are no better off here in Australia then they would have been if theyd stayed in Thailand.
where and when did Thong Dees age get bumped up? all official media releases put her age at 8/9. 10 to 11 when she delivers.
the constant retort that the animals would be better at dubbo is bull **** as any one who knows anything about breeding asian elephants would tell you that you wouldnt base a breeding program for this species right next door to African elephants.
 
glyn said:
where and when did Thong Dees age get bumped up? all official media releases put her age at 8/9. 10 to 11 when she delivers.
Click to expand...

haven't your been reading the papers? according to the zoo she has gone from 7 to 12 in just a few months!!
 
i cant read im like totayll lexdyclick. yeh course i have man, and ive been saving the stories all of which have put her at 8 or 9, which is why im so confused.
she did seem to stay 6 for a very long time though, from about 2005 to mid 2006. anyway, she is pregnant and so i dont care what the green groups say. real animal cruelty is still going on in the southern oceans, i wish the greens would put more resources into lobbying against that, not against 5 of the best looked after animals in the country. reading the report into the animals is like reading a care brochure for the american president, so im not really surprised they have started to breed, much to the displeasure of opponents because by now they should all be dead from foot infections, or killing keepers or swaying morosely, not ****ing madly and getting knocked up and certianly not seeming to be enjoying themselves. having visited zoo elephant groups accross australia and europe i can honestly say ive never seen such an active, cohesive group although this could stem from the fact that they are all apparently wild 2 or 3 year olds.
 
by the way. the elephants (and images of them) in thailand have been widely availbale since at least 2005, and obviously earlier from the sourcing process. now, if thong dee really was a 2 year old street elephant, wouldnt she have stood out quite clearly against the proven older cows in terms of size difference???
 
glyn said:
very interesting.......but after all the scrutiny from the thai and australian governments, the court system, international conservation community and Australian community, then why is this argument only being presented now?
would it have emerged had thong dee not got pregnant? i dont swallow every line the zoos spin but i do believe these individual elephants are no better off here in Australia then they would have been if theyd stayed in Thailand.
where and when did Thong Dees age get bumped up? all official media releases put her age at 8/9. 10 to 11 when she delivers.
the constant retort that the animals would be better at dubbo is bull **** as any one who knows anything about breeding asian elephants would tell you that you wouldnt base a breeding program for this species right next door to African elephants.
Click to expand...

glyn,

Thanks for your perspective on this ... :confused: episode! I agree with patrick that certainly - alas also true for European zoos when criticism from animal libbers comes their way - the entire public relations exercise is a bundle of joy. Often the entire arguement is not put forward as concise and transparant as it could be. A sure bundle of joy sometimes.

But I am not a believer of conspiracy theories as patrick who is known for his criticism of all Aussie zoos on the breeding project (I respect your opinion, I just do not agree with you .. and that is entirely fine). Sure, several issues could be better addressed and the age stories seem peculiar, but the essence of the entire project should be to ensure optimum conditions for breeding in the zoos concerned. Now in this respect Taronga is now succeeding, whereas Melbourne with its admittedly superior exhibit and enclosure set up is not

Now I am not about to start a city competition here, but perhaps we should review why Taronga's group is so cohesive instead. I agree with glyn's perspective that the essence is a cohesive herd structure. It is hardly surprising Taronga does better on this than Melbourne's. The latter ones are assembled from different imports, whereas those at Taronga are from a single shipment whose socialization process started in Thailand (and thanks to the prolonged court battle) and was accomplished over a considerable period of time.

And lastly, ... and a point I think is certainly decisive in choosing Taronga as the favoured location .. the African connection at Dubbo WPZ. Africans are carriers of the herpes virus to which they are not susceptible, but the Asians damn well are. And the first to be affected by herpes virus are calves and Asian females in calve are suspected of transmitting the virus in utero. Now I assume and hope that patrick will agree with us that we do not wish for herpes related deaths in the breeding programme - which otherwise could have been avoided .... :p

On the conservation perspective of the arguement. I do not agree that millions of dollars have gone to waste on an ineffectual breeding programme (for any meaningful evaluation one should have it run for 15-20 years to make this effective and realistic). Besides the educational value of an Asian elephant breeding programme is far greater than we are willing or capable of believing. Where it not for captive-breeding of Asians in Europe, conservation projects in Burma, India, Sumatra and Thailand would go without any meaningful funding. Finally, it is truly unrealistic to believe the Asian elephant welfare camps can absorb all rogue, tourism ride and work camp elephants. Captive holders of Asian elephants (AND successful at that in breeding them) are thus required big time, in the ranges country zoos as well as overseas. If these can provide a haven for them FINE and besides each support a conservation project in situ in its natural range (so outside the welfare camps) and in national parks we can secure a future for Asian elephants in the wild (if not, most wild populations are doomed and particularly so in SE-Asia). Just read the IUCN assessments on that and you will leave on a sad footing :mad:
 
I don`t want to go into the dtails of this debate again, just two short comments -

1) Taronga is looking incredibly bad in these articles and that they don`t know how old these elephants are really makes one doubtful if the papers which stated that the eles are all captive born are trustful

2) Asian elephants should not be housed together with Africans in one enclosure or within trunk distance. But the herpes virus can`t fly and needs physical contact to be passed from one ele to another, so I can`t see why the asians from Taronga shouldn`t be housed there. I have stated more then once that in my opinion the new ele facility in Taronga is totally inadequate and much too small and an incredible waste of money.
 
glyn and jelle - remember, these animals have been in australia for all of a couple of years - hardly long enough to start touting an excellent foot-health record or psychological wellbeing let alone calling tarongas breeding program a success and melbournes a failure.

doing so seems a little foolish to me.

on the dubbo debate, once again. the counter argument to "but they can't be housed safely at dubbo due to disease risk" that taronga should never have gotten more asian elephants in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top