Do elephants belong in zoos?

Ah, free-range life in Kenya for a mother elephant and her family. In the wild, they live to be much older than those raised in zoos, according to a study.

The findings will probably give celebrities Lily Tomlin and Bob Barker more leverage in their fight to halt construction of the L.A. Zoo's elephant exhibit, and to move its sole current resident, Billy, to a wildlife sanctuary. According to Tomlin, "The word ‘zoo’ is sort of elephant speak for Guantanamo."

What do you think? Should elephants live their lives outside of zoo confinement, or do you agree with columnist Hector Tobar: a zoo without elephants would be a loss for the children of L.A.?

-- Clare Abreu

Photo credit: Associated Press

Comments

[Heh]

I don't believe in placing large animals in small captivity but I am for zoos that have the intent to save the species by breeding them.

Not all zoos are the same. A wild animal park can be considered to be a zoo because it is putting an animal in a simulated natural habitat.

I believe if all the "zoo elephants" were to be instantly released into the wild they would be immediately slaughtered. I do not believe these magnificant beings cannot exist in the wild under current wold politics. I say politics because some kill elephants or take parties out to hunt them to feed their respective families---another tangential issue.

I think this post strongly needs to be reworded. I would never disgrace anyone or any organization that tries its best to save a species . . . even if one of those organizations is a zoo.

[Lisa]

Hector Tobar's column sort of left me speechless. While I absolutely respect his right to his viewpoint and he seems to feel strongly in his position, I have to disagree. Humans do many things to animals for their own pleasure, but even if you eat them, the animal is no longer suffering by the time it passes your lips. I choose not to eat products of animal cruelty/suffering, but certainly realize that not everyone shares my interests or beliefs.

Keeping animals - not just elephants - in such a foreign, confined environment for our viewing pleasure is something they can't understand and an unnatural experience that lasts until their (usually much earlier than natural) death.

Long before I ever saw an elephant in person, I recognized its enormity and majesty. Any picture or recording that shows scale will accomplish this. Perpetuating the "tradition" of captive animals will only continue to desensitize future generations to the sentience of animals, turning these amazing creatures into mere objects and shadows of what they really are.

I'm not arguing that animals are equal to or more important than humans, but they are sentient, they do feel, they will cry out in pain, flee danger (if they even can due to our caging), feel playfulness and joy, express compassion toward their brethren, and so on.

Just because we can doesn't mean that we should. Animal sanctuaries can often be visited, much like zoos; unlike zoos, they seek to replicate an animal's natural environment as much as possible, with respect to each species' needs and habits. This is how our children will learn respect for all creatures, experience empathy, and truly learn about nature. A lonely elephant bobbing his head in a cage is just a spectacle to be momentarily observed between other "exhibits" and visits to the concession stand. We can do so much better, and we should try.

[Lori]

The LA Zoo needs to face reality and join the 21st century and the other zoos around the country who have realized that elephants do not belong in zoos. Billy has now spent two years in solitude, all alone, because of the selfishness of Zoo officials and those, like Tom LaBonge, who want the children of Los Angeles to experience the wonderment of the majestic elephant. But at what price?

Gita is dead because of her life at the LA Zoo while Ruby is finally free, living a wonderful, SOCIAL life an elephant NEEDS and deserves at the PAWS Sanctuary. Billy certainly should get that same treatment. Otherwise he conceivably can spend another few years all alone, sadly bobbing his head up and down, while the City Council continues to decide the fate of having elephants in an exhibit that still needs to be completed and will still be way too small to accomodate Billy and the other Asian elephants they want to add to the exhibit.

For what? So children can see the majestic elephant?

Instead, the space could be converted into an interactive display with animatronic figures that could teach youngsters the truth as to why elephants are no longer on display at many zoos, including the LA Zoo.

[Kate Woodviolet]

I don't really get what commenter #1 is talking about. The blog post simply reflects the facts of the report in the journal "Science" which are that elephants in zoos live roughly half as long as wild populations, and even elephants working in the timber industry in Myanmar. This is not an issue of "hurting zoos' feelings," it's scientific fact.

Mr. Tobar's article, insofar as one can call it an article when it was so flagrantly one-sided, came perilously close to re-casting the debate over Billy's future as a class/racial issue, which is a supremely false and cynical thing to do. No child, of any race or ethnicity, is benefited by the abuse of animals. Any child, of any race or ethnicity, can tell the differences between fair and unfair, and certainly happy and unhappy. Why can't we tell our children that kind adults know it's more important than Billy be happy than that we get to stare at him while he spends his whole life unhealthy and unhappy.

And for any adult who still thinks "elephants in zoos help elephants in the wild" is a valid concept, I would just like to ask how seeing elephants in the zoo when you were a child motivated you help them when you grew up?

[mspenelope]

I think that Tom LaBonge and Hector Tobar should be put in a cage at the LA Zoo. This way children can see and learn what happens to evil, selfish and uncompassionate human beings. Children need to understand the meaning of Karma.

[sandra m]

I agree with all the posters who are anti-zoos. To continue Lori's argument about the need for forward thinking in the 21st century, zoos are a relic of a bygone era in which the idea of keeping animals in captivity was as unquestioned as human slavery and subjugation of women. If the environmental crisis has taught us anything, it is that we must respect nature. That means leaving animals in their ecosystem. We have the technology to provide an up close and personal virtual encounter with animals in their natural habitats. Doing so will offer a far better experience for children than having them see animals imprisoned and on display.

[Cynthia]

Kate said, "And for any adult who still thinks "elephants in zoos help elephants in the wild" is a valid concept, I would just like to ask how seeing elephants in the zoo when you were a child motivated you help them when you grew up?"

Hear Hear!!! If anything it made me want to help them get out of the zoo! I remember the very moment when I saw a beautiful elephant swaying back and forth for over 2 hours in the SF Zoo.
I was only 6 years old, but this was very disturbing to me. It can be likened to any creature or human that has little or no variance in stimulation in their environment or is in solitary confinement. Even Billy's keeper said that Billy is frustrated!
There are so many people in these blogs that think it is alright for an elephant to be alone, and they use the excuse that in the wild males leave the herd and go off on their own. The truth is that a male elephant is never alone in the wild...with other species of animals and other male elephants around him...never alone.
They are not alone for years like Billy was with virtually no stimulation or socialization.
Billy should never have been left in that small enclosure for that long.
To quote naturalist, Vicki Croke;
" While the zoo can be an intriguing place to visit, it can be an awfully boring place to live..."