People will pay fistfuls of cash to see a baby anything. When a female Asian elephant was born at the Woodland Park Zoo in 2000, the zoo’s “name the baby elephant” contest generated nearly 16,000 entries. Zoo employees privately proposed naming her Cash Cow—female elephants are called cows—but she was officially named Hansa, meaning “supreme happiness” in Thai. (Asian elephants are native to the hot jungles of Southeast Asia and India.) After Hansa’s birth, attendance at the Woodland Park Zoo doubled. Then, at age 6, Hansa was found dead in the elephant barn by zookeepers. Her death was caused by elephant herpes, a disease that kills nearly 90 percent of infected young Asian elephants in captivity and was likely passed on through her mother, Chai, a wild Asian elephant gifted to the zoo in 1980.
The zoo has tried to artificially inseminate Chai at least 57 times since acquiring her, according to a lawsuit that will have its first hearing on May 27. (The lawsuit is the source of the allegation about employees calling the baby Cash Cow.) All those attempts to get Chai knocked up have resulted in only one live birth (Hansa) and many miscarriages. “These miscarriages have caused Chai to suffer both physical and psychological pain,” the suit alleges.
Elephants—intelligent, self-aware, and capable of empathy—mourn their dead, from stillborns to old matriarchs. In captivity and the wild, they’ve been observed rocking and keening over stillborns. “That’s not an anthropomorphic exaggeration,” says Dr. Gay Bradshaw, the author of Elephants on the Edge, which explores elephant psychology and behavior in captivity and the wild. “Elephants have a capacity psychologically and emotionally that’s comparable to ours.” When Hansa died, her mother and the other elephants were given time alone to smell and touch her body to pay their last respects. (Presumably, there’s a 90 percent chance that will happen again if Chai gives birth again—the zoo’s most recent attempt to impregnate her was in March.)
Chai lives with two other female elephants—Bamboo and Watoto—in the Woodland Park Zoo’s one-acre elephant enclosure, whimsically named the Thai Village. You get there by following the Trail of Vines past the swimming grotto and through the Elephant Forest. But the exhibit isn’t as idyllic as its Candy Land–ish name portends: The enclosure consists of grubby fields, a concrete pool, and the Elephant Barn, where Chai, Bamboo, and Watoto hide out when temperatures dip below 40 degrees.
“Is he dancing?” a child in front of the Elephant Barn’s large Plexiglas windows asked her mother the other day. In the barn’s shower room, Bamboo rocked gently in place, her head pointed at the wall. Picture books don’t prepare children for real-life elephants—their sparse hair, canyon-deep wrinkles, or magnificent bigness. The elephants tower over the children like breathing buildings.
“He is dancing!” Mom replied.
The zoo argues that the elephant exhibit is important because elephants are endangered and their presence helps educate the public and spur conservation efforts. But the education element in the Thai Village is pretty sparse—nothing you couldn’t learn from a children’s book—and it’s printed on plaques no one reads. “There have been empirical studies of how long people stay at exhibits, and if they read the signs, that show people don’t learn much from the exhibits,” says Matthew Liebman, the Animal Legal Defense Fund lawyer handling the lawsuit. A 2010 study in the peer-reviewed journal Society & Animals with Dr. Lori Marino as its lead author concurs—finding that “there is no compelling evidence to date that zoos and aquariums promote attitude changes, education, or interest in conservation in their visitors, despite claims to the contrary.”
Even the mom and her kid looking at Bamboo haven’t learned a thing about her—like, for instance, Bamboo is not a he. And for what it’s worth, Bamboo is not dancing. The movement Bamboo is making is “an exhibition of profound distress or trauma,” explains Dr. Bradshaw. Captive elephants exhibit a host of specific behaviors, Dr. Bradshaw continues, including lethargy, aggression, and “behaviors consistent with people who are held captive and suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. We see the same in elephants.”
While Bamboo rocked in the shower room, Watoto and Chai were stretching their trunks into lofted barrels of alfalfa inside the barn’s main room, pulling out tufts of food and tucking it into their mouths. Occasionally, Watoto stopped eating to pace the room. Watoto and Chai weigh more than 8,000 pounds and are between 12 and 15 feet long. The space in the barn they share is smaller than a tennis court. Watoto can’t easily turn around with Chai in the room. She must back up instead—an elephant in reverse. Even though elephants are incredibly social creatures, Bamboo and Watoto don’t get along and must be separated at all times, so there’s very little socializing.
Experts with the World Wildlife Fund estimate that elephants in captivity should have a minimum of 247 acres to roam. Elephants are accustomed to walking up to 20 miles a day in the wild, and daily walks keep their feet healthy. The lawsuit charges that Chai, Bamboo, and Watoto sharing a single acre has caused preventable foot and joint problems. “Bamboo and Watoto both suffer from osteoarthritis, a degenerative and painful joint disease,” the suit states. “Bamboo and Chai suffer from… pockets of fluid and pus that often develop above the nails of the foot or underneath the foot and are very painful.” Elephant osteoarthritis and foot abscesses are caused by standing on hard surfaces, lack of movement, excessive moisture, and excess weight, the suit contends.
Moreover, Highway 99 runs right past Woodland Park Zoo’s elephant enclosure. Elephants use their feet to communicate, and local animal rights activists say the constant traffic vibrations contribute to their abusive environment. “We have no idea how those vibrations affect them,” says Alyne Fortgang, codirector of Friends of Woodland Park Zoo Elephants, one of three local groups that has unsuccessfully lobbied since 2005 to get the zoo’s elephants retired to a 2,700-acre elephant sanctuary in Tennessee, one of two such sanctuaries in the nation. (Fortgang is not a party to the current lawsuit.) “But common sense tells us it can’t be a perk of the environment.”
Lawsuits filed by activists against zoos are nothing new, but last year Mary Sebek and Nancy Farnam took the unusual step of filing suit not against the zoo but against the City of Seattle—only the second lawsuit in the country taken out against a city for supporting “illegal zoo practices.” (The other lawsuit is in Los Angeles and also concerns elephant welfare; it’s currently in litigation.)
In spite of protests from activists for years, the zoo flatly refuses to send its elephants to the Tennessee sanctuary. The zoo did send a fourth elephant it owns, Sri, to the Saint Louis Zoo in 2002, but not because it could provide a better home for her. The zoo sent her there to make baby elephants as part of an inter-zoo breeding program. At one point in Saint Louis, Sri became pregnant, but her full-term fetus died in utero. Surgery to remove the fetus would be incredibly complicated, expensive, and risky—it’s simply not done. Instead, most elephants succumb to infection caused by the decaying fetus inside them and die. Surprisingly, Sri has not died. According to the lawsuit, “Sri has been carrying the deceased, slowly mummifying fetus in her birth canal for more than four years.”
The aim of Sebek and Farnam’s suit is to halt the $6.5 million flow of taxpayer funds that the zoo gets annually. “The city owes the public not to waste public dollars or misuse public space,” says Liebman, the Animal Legal Defense Fund lawyer. “We’re arguing that the city is funding the private zoo society to indulge in illegal practices. It’s not in the public’s best interest.” The lawsuit claims the zoo violates state and local animal cruelty laws by “knowingly and recklessly inflicting unnecessary pain and suffering on its elephants.” The suit cites abusive breeding practices, exposure to beatings, extended periods of confinement, subjecting the elephants to the “severe and chronic foot and joint injuries” mentioned earlier, as well as “unexplained physical trauma and bleeding, and sustained psychological harm.”
I tried to get the Woodland Park Zoo’s side of the story, but when I asked how much revenue the elephants bring in, a zoo representative declined to comment, citing the lawsuit (the zoo is a codefendant). When I inquired if I could ask more general questions about the zoo, another declined and sent me a press release, which states:
Woodland Park Zoo vigorously disputes the plaintiffs’ characterization of our elephant care program. Our elephants are healthy and thriving—they have healthy appetites, they play, they socialize, they vocalize, and they interact with their herd mates and keepers. We are committed to the lifelong and day-to-day care of our elephants… As an institution accredited by the Association of Zoos & Aquariums (AZA), which sets the highest standards of animal care for all species, our zoo meets or exceeds all of AZA’s Standards for Elephant Management and Care.
“Accreditation doesn’t mean they have the elephants’ best interests in mind,” Liebman counters. “The AZA is essentially a trade organization—its job is to promote zoos. Elephants are marquee attractions—they make money. So the AZA has fought almost every attempt to move elephants out of zoos. Even in Detroit, where elephants have no place being, they’ve fought transferring them.”
The Detroit Zoo is the only zoo in the nation to voluntarily retire all of its elephants to a sanctuary. The Bronx Zoo has stated that it will shut down its two-acre elephant exhibit once the elephants living there now die off. Even the Point Defiance Zoo in Tacoma acknowledges that elephants need more room to roam than it can provide and is exploring “transitioning away” from keeping elephants (again, once its current elephants die off).
“We’d like to have more space—our yard is about an acre—but our footprint doesn’t allow much for expansion,” says John Houck, deputy director of the Point Defiance Zoo. There are also only about 150 Asian elephants nationally, and captive breeding programs just aren’t working, he says. “We need to see about nine calves born a year, nationwide, and we’re averaging about two. It’s really a numbers game. When we lose these two current elephants, what will we do?”
Still, the Woodland Park Zoo has no plans to retire its elephants or expand its space. It continues to try to breed more babies on its one-acre plot.
On April 25, the City Attorney’s Office and the zoo filed a joint motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The motion will be considered by King County Superior Court judge Mike Heavey on May 27. “Plaintiff’s belief that zoos should not house or breed elephants is a political, policy debate not justifiable in this Court,” the motion states. Zoo officials boast that over one million people visit the Woodland Park Zoo annually. “If people are to care about elephants, they need to learn about elephants. Accredited zoos provide a powerful venue that inspires conservation learning, interest, and action.”
“If you want to learn about elephant behavior, go read a book,” says Dr. Bradshaw. “Learning isn’t an excuse for cruelty. If you want a healthy elephant, you don’t put them in a zoo.” 
This article has been updated since its original publication.
the zoo exploits all the animals for pockets full of cash
I’ve looked into keeping cattle, and found that I’d need about an acre per cow. To think that they keep three ELEPHANTS on less space than I could humanely keep three COWS on just hurts my heart. I see where the zoo is coming from, I really do. They want to stay open, and they feel this is the only way to do that. But this is not the way, guys…
I’m certain most zoo employees got into this business because they truly love animals. I hope they don’t let business concerns make them lose sight of what’s truly important. They could set up a high-tech, interactive elephant exhibit in that space, maybe including a webcam to the elephants that they’ve sent to live somewhere they can be happy. If they made that their goal, I bet they could raise some money to see it happen, perhaps even from the activists that they’re fighting now.
Three elephants on one acre is simply unacceptable. Anyone who knows the slightest thing about animals knows that.
Cienna, thank you for writing this article. The treatment of elephants in captivity is absolutely shameful. I was so incredibly saddened reading about Chai’s 57 forced impregnations and subsequent miscarriages and Sri having to carry her dead fetus around inside of her for years. I hope this article opens some eyes and hearts to the plight of what are some of the most amazing, sensitive and intelligent creatures on earth. Obviously, Woodland Park Zoo is not going to do anything about this problem until the public demands it. I’m hoping you’ve inspired a few more to speak out on the elephant’s behalf.
Science, death statistics and common sense tells us elephants don’t belong in tiny urban zoos. The 2,700 acre Elephant Sanctuary is the best we can do for them
Science, death statistics and common sense tells us elephants don’t belong in tiny urban zoos. Allowing Bamboo, Chai and Watoto to live out their lives at the 2,700 acre Elephant Sanctuary is the best we can do – ASAP!
As a former employee of the Woodland Park Zoo, I can tell you that the elephants are treated with the utmost respect. They are well maintained and cared for 24 hours a day.
Thank you for this very enlightening article. Elephant experts and scientists and – increasingly, the public – know that elephants cannot have healthy and satisfying lives in small urban zoos. WPZ is NOT doing what is best for the elephants! Do they really think that 3 incompatible enormous social creatures are better off in a barren, less-than-one-acre yard or at the 2,700-acre paradise for elephants at The Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee (elephants.com)? There they are free to roam, swim, dig, dust-bathe, knock down trees and play with elephant companions of their own choosing.
The former employee of WPZ must not know that the elephants are locked up alone in the barn – with no keepers present for 16-17 hours a day for 7 months of the year. And her claim that the elephants are “cared for 24 hours a day” causes me to ask: where was this care when Hansa spent the last 14 hours of her life ALONE (except for her poor mother, Chai, watching helplessly) dying a horrible excruciating death.
Thank you for this article & getting the word out.
If people want to see elephants go see Born to be Wild http://www.imax.com/borntobewild/ or look up conservation groups such as Elephant Voices http://www.elephantvoices.org/ to learn about elephants & see them in their habitats. This is way more accurate than any behavior exhibited at a zoo & will garner appreciation of the actual animal!
Elephants ARE born to be wild – not kept enclosed, isolated from larger family groups & certainly not artificially inseminated.
Thanks Stranger!
The zoo should put the elephants’ welfare above all other considerations. The current conditions in which the elephants are kept are inhumane, and the elephants are showing their distress. The compassionate thing to do is to release them toan elephant sanctuarywhere they can live out their years in peace in .
What an amazing and fascinating article. It reminds me of a movie that just came out titled “The Elephant in the Living Room” addressing a similar issue of individuals wanting to possess animals that belong in the wild. (http://www.theelephantinthelivingroom.co&hellip😉 I highly recommend you check it out if you get the chance. It’s quite the eye opener.
What an amazing and fascinating article. It reminds me of a movie that just came out titled “The Elephant in the Living Room” addressing a similar issue of individuals wanting to possess animals that belong in the wild. (http://www.theelephantinthelivingroom.co…) I highly recommend you check it out if you get the chance. It’s quite the eye opener.
required reading on this topic:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/magazi…
Oh my goodness! Is there finally a possibility that Chai, Watoto and Bamboo (and Sri at the other elephants at the St. Louis Zoo) will be released to the 2700 Elephant Sanctuary in Hohenwald, Tennessee, to live out the rest of their lives in dignity with room to roam freely and socialize with other elephants instead of in captivity suffering physically, psychologically and emotionally for the pleasure of gawkers and greedy humans. Prayers going up on their behalf
Cienna, thank you for your important article. WPZ must do the right thing now and let these three poor elephants go to their freedom. I am surprised that the board is not taking a compassionate approach and vote to let them go. Why delaying? Bamboo,Chai and Watoto are poor innocent prisoners…
Thanks for printing this article.
My so-called liberal, green, eco-conscious, humanity-fostering city, Seattle, is far behind Detroit when it comes to walking its talk. It doesn’t take genius to realize large animals require large spaces. Money and egos again cause suffering to other helpless beings. Shame on Woodland Park Zoo – they have a chance to do the right thing, and they refuse to do it.
Disgusting and shameful. Thank you for covering this. Can we say, “PUPPY MILL”?
Thank you. These captive elephants are overdue being sent to an sanctuary. It is amazing that the zoo continues to hang on to the idea that they are being well cared for. How can they be so blind to the true needs of these majestic animals.?
The misery of the elephants at the zoo is palpable – and an embarrassment to the city. At one time, WPZ was a world-class facility and a leader in the zoo community. Unfortunately, it has failed to keep pace with the increased understanding and knowledge of animal behavior and welfare – not the mention the changing attitudes of the public – and is now on a par with a shabby roadside zoo.
Thanks Cienna – once Seattle’s taxpayers separate the nostalgia they feel for zoos they will appreciate that the veil of “conservation” falls flat with regard to what has been happening for years at the WPZ.
All the zoo is nurturing is their own pockets until they have to shuffle another elephant to another zoo or explain another elephant death to the public.
Send the elephants to the sanctuary – let us watch them via TV monitors or online.
Wouldn’t it be something to see them run?
@6, it’s not enough that the WPZ “respects” its elephants. When they’re dying of herpes, or suffering from osteoarthritis and absesses, or living in isolation, it’s simply a lie that they’re being well cared for. It’s also irrelevant, since it is not in their (the elephants’!) interests to keep them at the zoo. There is no reason at all to have these elephants at the zoo, expect to make the zoo some moolah.
I don’t care if every zookeeper in the park gave every elephant a big smooch on the nose and a belly rub. Caring well for elephants in captivity is oxymoronic.
Sometimes when I am sad or just want to think in the company of quiet, intelligent creatures, I sit at the Woodland Park Zoo’s elephant exhibit. It’s my mental comfort place. I do honestly believe that the WPZ may be doing everything it can to treat the animals in the best, most humane possible way, while still doing the elephants an injustice. You can dine like a king in prison, but still yearn only to be starving and free.
The sanctuary sounds like an ideal solution, and though I would miss my three elephant friends, I would feel immeasurably better knowing their quality of life has greatly improved. I’d imagine the Seattle community here would be happy to band together and sponsor their transition and tenure. That in itself is even more comforting to my mind than sitting near them with rough fence between us.
Re: Yearning to be free, watch this seal!
http://youtu.be/RtxTW394L_4
Thank you Cienna!! These girls have suffered enough. Get them to The Elephant Sanctuary!
Simply stated, these animals do not belong in captivity, no matter what measures are taken for their physical well being. Think about this for a minute. What if you were claustrophobic, temperamental, or even perhaps suffered from anxiety attacks, do you think being shoveled into a small space would help the situation? No matter how clean, how well fed, or vetted the animal is,we as humans do not have a full understanding of their need to be free to roam. That is why we found them in open spaces, their need for their natural surrounding is obvious. Woodland Park Zoo is an amazing zoo, however the need to provide elephants on display is not necessary, so why continue to victimize these
beautiful creatures.
I recently visited the zoo and saw Chai rocking and swaying horribly. It was nonstop. The keeper told another zoo visitor that she was just anticipating her next meal. He fed her and as soon as Chai finished eating, she went right back to rocking back and forth. Obviously this behavior was not “anticipatory” behavior, but the severe sign of distress that Dr. Gay Bradshaw and other experts have described. What bothers me is that the zoo claims to be all about elephant education while they deliberately misinform the public about their poor elephants. How completely hypocritical.
I recently visited the zoo and saw Chai rocking and swaying horribly. It was nonstop. The keeper told another zoo visitor that she was just anticipating her next meal. He fed her and as soon as Chai finished eating, she went right back to rocking back and forth. Obviously this behavior was not “anticipatory” behavior, but the severe sign of distress that Dr. Gay Bradshaw and other experts have described. What bothers me is that the zoo claims to be all about elephant education while they deliberately misinform the public about their poor elephants. How completely hypocritical. Let these poor, long-suffering elephants go where they can finally be elephants.
My father and I belong to different generations and therefore have differeing veiws on the issue of elephants in zoos. Some animals seem thrilled to have the safety and good care of a zoo. Other, more intelligent, usally larger, social animals with specialized needs such as elephants and gorillas just can’t be properly provided for in zoos, no matter how much we respect and adore them and do everything we can. Unfortunately, these very animals are indeed the cash cows of the zoos, but the zoos need to find better ways to support their mission. Your article will be a helpful aide to the ongoing respectful and good-willed debate my father (now in his 70’s) and I have been having over this very issue. Thank you.
So wait…everyone agrees these elephants are being treated in a far-from-ideal way…the 1-acre thing at the very least has to be acknowledged by even the most craven zoo advocate to be grossly inadequate.
And yet the argument for keeping them here in these conditions is to, as Cienna paraphrases, “help educate the public and spur conservation efforts.”
So basically, they’re saying “we’re mistreating these animals, so you can see how badly these animals are being mistreated”? Is that the logic here?
Bullshit. Humanity fail.
so everyone who wants them to be happy at the reservation is cool with using Seattle tax dollars to pay for it?
And we all also know that elephants get shot and killed in the wild all the time right?
An acre is tiny, but a lawsuit demanding they be retired at expense, while citing the expense of abusing them as a reason is a little hypocritical.
Is it just me or does this thread read like some person (or group of people) is comment bombing this article? I mean, not that I neccesarily disagree with the position, but why?
Heartbreaking……
I love how people are saying: “I totally don’t agree with it, we just went and they look so sad.”
First, that’s completely hypocritical to not agree with yet fork over your cash to a zoo.
Second, I love how human beings think they know everything about everything. “The elephants looked sad” “An expert said” it’s all bullshit.
Experts are, at best, making educated guesses regarding wild animal behavior. Sure they’re educated, but they’re hypothesis after studying the animal. Typically, these hypothesis will also have some human element to them which just astounds me with stupidity.
But what do they think of the Fleet Foxes?!
@35 I’m sensing the same thing about the comment bombing.
I take issue, a little bit, with the assertion that zoos are incapable of promoting conservation and public education. I like zoos.
That being said, last time I was at WPZ I got the distinct sense that those particular elephants were in a bad place. They are big, complex creatures and I don’t think the average zoo (which WPZ is), is an appropriate place to house them. Seriously, the Ringling Bros. elephants seem better off.
Thank you so much for this article! The plight of Bamboo, Watoto and Chai (and the death of poor little Hansa) needs to be brought to the attention of the public. The part of this article I DIDN’T know about was the story of Sri. The idea of a rotting fetus left inside her because it was not in the zoos financial interest to remove it just sickens me. How can they possibly claim to have the best interests of the elephants in mind and then do something like this?? Disgusting! If they REALLY cared about the lives of these animals, they would move the elephants to the Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee… NOW!!!
This is a great article. Thanks for researching and writing.
I learned a lot – for instance, I knew elephants walked, but twenty miles per day? This fact alone makes the educational argument that the zoo advances silly, silly, silly.
We should focus on conserving and restoring natural places – not wasting money on unsafe urban enclosures.
Extremely well presented piece, Cienna. As a former director of Woodland Park Zoo I would like to thank you for highlighting these awful problems. The elephants at the zoo have always had a wretched time, and things have only gone rapidly downhill in recent decades.
There is no evidence that zoos have any beneficial impact on visitor attitudes, compassion or knowledge. And zoo elephant breeding programs make no contribution to conservation: they are nothing but attempts to keep elephants in zoos.
Such intelligent animals & as sentient beings they should be treated with respect. It is OUR responsibility to be sure they are treated well.
First, regarding the idea that a group is “bombarding” this article is ridiculous. Could the reason that almost everyone who has responded so far has been against keeping the elephants here be that we all see the same thing and it sickens us that they are kept in a tiny enclosure and they are not in a habitat anywhere NEAR what their natural surroundings should be?? I have 2 draft horses in a pasture that is FIVE times larger than what the WPZ elephants have, I am aware how much area a large animal needs to thrive, not just survive. I appreciate that the WPZ says they are treated with respect, although I disagree, they need more than that to thrive. DO the right thing and send them to the sanctuary. This kind of incarceration is barbaric.
I attended the last Zoo board meeting, they were visibly disinterested in constructive comments made by myself and 4 others for up to three minutes.
They only clapped when a commenter praised the zoo.
Yet I am still a Seattle taxpayer that contributes to their 6.5 million received by the city. So are you.
Retiring Bamboo, Chai, and Watoto to TN’s Elephant Sanctuary (at no cost to the Seattle taxpayer) *is* the right thing.
To do the right thing, watch: http://bit.ly/WPZElephantsSpacelessinSea…
Then go to Woodland Park zoo Contact Us website and respectfully request the retirement of our elephants. Now.
Thank you,
Veronica Cannady
the zoo is great enough besides the elephant exhibit that if they get rid of them it wont hurt there attendance. there is no opinion here, it is a scientific fact that these elephants are in hell
If you think the elephant enclosure is bad, go check out the tigers- their pen was basically a cement box with stairs, sans one wall for viewers. It was the most depressing thing I saw all day.
time for some action
it may not be “comment bombing”, but posting the same comment multiple times is “commenter error”.
simply, zoos are animal jails – not only the elephants are miserable, but the wolves look like they’re about to have a nervous breakdown. the only thing that makes them look decent by comparison are research vivariums. which are ALL AROUND YOU.
@35 Maybe it’s because the hypocrisy of the zoo is so palpable that no-one can ignore it?
I was director of Woodland park Zoo from 1976 to 1984, when we were trying to set new standards for zoos. I sincerely believed that we could make a difference; improving people’s attitudes through education and compassionate exhibits, and contributing to conservation by captive breeding and research.
Sadly, no evidence has emerged to support my hopes. Indeed, in situations such as the elephants at WPZ, who have always had to endure miserable conditions, and whose quality of life has even declined significantly in recent decades, the Zoo is merely generating negative outcomes. The only right and good thing to do is to send the elephants to a Sanctuary.
please consider moving the elephants to the Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee. The climate will be perfect for the elephants.
also, the 2700 acres in tennessee is too small. we should introduce them back into the N American wild so they evolve into mastodons, because that would be sweet.
Thank you for writing this article!
The City Council and the Mayor’s office should immediately demand that the zoo re-locate these elephants to a sanctuary. We don’t have enough room. No other zoo has enough room.
I’d be happy to elect out of office anyone who doesn’t take decisive and responsbile action on re-locating these elephants now!
I’d still support the zoo, and even more so, without the elephants there…at least I would know that MY ZOO MEMBERSHIP isn’t funding animal abuse!!!