news-record.com

Skip to the site menu
Skip to search

OPINION

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Doug Clark: Zoo could add to elephants' territory

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

(Updated 3:00 am)

By Doug Clark
Staff Columnist

The N.C. Zoo features hundreds of magnificent animals, but its biggest attractions are its seven elephants.

The zoo last year completed an $8.5 million expansion project, officially opening its Watani Grasslands Reserve. The enhanced exhibit affords marvelous elephant viewing opportunities for delighted adults and children.

I enjoy watching these amazing giants every time I visit. But, what meets the eye doesn't tell the whole story.

You got a sense of that if you read the articles in our Ideas section Sunday and looked at the related video on our Web site.

There's a vigorous nationwide debate about captive elephants, which has led some zoos to give up their elephant exhibits and others to improve theirs.

The N.C. Zoo took the latter course. It believes it can educate the public about elephant conservation and become a leader in captive elephant breeding.

Nevertheless, some observers contend that these massive, intelligent, highly socialized creatures simply don't fit into any zoo setting.

I remain a fan of the N.C. Zoo, although I've developed some doubts about its exhibits and breeding program.

Saying the zoo has expanded its elephant habitat is true with an asterisk. It had one exhibit area of 3.5 acres. Now it has two. They join to form a seven-acre site, but the connection so far has been closed, denying the elephants the extra space. Why? They don't all get along.

The two males, C'sar and Artie, probably never will share the same enclosure. Artie, acquired nearly two years ago, still has not been placed with the females, either. Nekhanda, on loan to the N.C. Zoo since 2007, took well over a year before she was sufficiently "socialized" to be placed with the other cows.

Elephants are complex animals that in the wild live in family groups. Mixing unrelated adults in a confined zoo environment is difficult. It's easier for the zoo to keep the two outdoor habitats separate for now, but doing so limits each animal's space to 3.5 acres, not seven -- and that's when they're out. They spend more time in their barn.

I'd like to see the zoo put at least some of the elephants in its 37-acre "African Plains" area, as it has its rhinos. Assuming the socialization problems eventually are overcome, two obstacles remain.

One, stated by Curator of Mammals Guy Lichty, is the expense of "elephant-proofing" the 37-acre plains enclosure. Fences that contain antelopes or rhinos won't necessarily hold elephants.

Second, expressed by zoo Director David Jones, gets to the heart of the matter. Visitors can't get a close look at elephants foraging at the far end of a 37-acre habitat. Poor viewing diminishes the visitors' experience, which ultimately could hurt attendance and revenue.

The zoo really hopes for an elephant calf someday, which could be worth an extra 100,000 visitors, Jones said.

The zoo has never produced a calf. C'sar, who's about 35, has been a dud as a stud. Artie, about 30, is much more promising. But two of the adult females are over 30 and one is 28 -- getting up there in terms of elephant fertility. Nekhanda is 21 but seems to have other issues. The best hope in the long run is Batir, but at age 7 she's still a few years too young.

Elephant reproduction is lower in captivity than in the wild, and infant mortality is higher. Maybe, through good management, the N.C. Zoo will achieve success.

On the subject of breeding, however, don't think the purpose is to help replenish depleted wild herds in Africa. That's not going to happen, Jones said. The goal instead is to maintain a healthy captive population in the United States. Even that is uncertain.

When the zoo acquired C'sar, its first elephant, back in 1978, it was out of its depth. It didn't even have a veterinarian but would call in local vets when the animals needed care. During one such treatment, C'sar sustained an accidental injury that cost him most of an ear.

Now the level of veterinary care is exceptional. I've read some of the medical reports and am impressed by the amount of attention the elephants receive. And the staff has been very patient in working with Nekhanda, who arrived with apparent psychological distress from past experiences. It's very expensive to keep these animals healthy. Handling them behind the scenes is challenging and potentially dangerous -- which is why the new, $2.5 million barn is built like a maximum-security prison for giants.

I appreciate the zoo's natural-looking habitats for its seven largest residents. I applaud its conservation work in Africa. I'd cheer more if the zoo would use its plentiful space to really expand its elephant territory. Doing that could make them healthier, happier and maybe even more productive.

A little elephant would be the biggest attraction of all.

What do you think?

8 comment(s)

Read other visitors' comments.

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please notify us.

clm1950

September 16, 2009 - 9:11 am EDT

Doug Clark gets it!

Caroline T

September 18, 2009 - 7:03 pm EDT

Surely the last sentence in this article says it all. "A little [baby] elephant would be the biggest attraction of all." The whole motivation in the zoo industry for breeding elephants is wrong. It isn't to save elephants from extinction in the world as zoos lead the public to believe. It is to establish a self-sustaining captive population of elephants to serve a lucrative draws that bring people in to pay admission fees. It's the take at the gate folks! And that is not a very noble motivation. Nekhanda probably suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) either as a result of traumatic experience in Africa or in another zoo or circus. She will probably never be healed from this condition. She might have a chance at The Elephant Sanctuary in TN. But that would be her only chance. And this fake increase in space in which they just cram more elephants onto that space so that they often end up with less space per elephant and cramming incompatible groups of elephants together is another recipe for disaster. It shows that the zoo industry does not understand the very nature of elephants and continues to try and force a square peg in a round hole. It won't work. It will never work. We humans need to get over the compulsion to subjugate nature for our own benefit. In the end, nature will not be subjugated. Elephants are opting out of this zoo system that is unlivable for them. If they can't get to a sanctuary, they're getting out by dying. But one way or the other, they are getting out.

Lane Batot

September 26, 2009 - 3:05 pm EDT

Thinking EVERYONE at the N. C. Zoo is only interested in just revenue is extremely unfair. You might be suprised to find out that SOME people actually work there because they really care(a lot) about animals, and become extremely attached to the animals in their care, and only want the best for them. Many animals at this zoo come from conditions that were deplorable, and their quality of life has improved dramatically since they arrived. Many animals here would have been euthanized had the N. C. Zoo not provided them with a home and some kind of life. If you are an animal and are stuck in a zoo, the N. C. Zoo is a pretty good one to be stuck in. Where do you think the elephants at the sanctuary in Tennessee stay when it gets cold? Is there indoor facility any better than the N. C. Zoos? Not from what I've seen. Do all their elephants get along, and always have access to all that acreage? Of course not. I WOULD like to see the elephants at the N. C. Zoo have access to more room myself(as well as many of the other animals)--perhaps have larger off-exhibit areas for them, and let them alternate so the viewing public is happy, AND the animals' quality of life is improved. But just WHERE is the funding for this going to come from? Grousing about the zoo will likely drive away admissions fees, and make it HARDER to improve things for the animals. If you REALLY care about their individual lives, get out there and raise some money, and donate it to the zoo to be used for this specific cause, and quit pointlessly griping, which doesn't help anyone!

Caroline T

September 28, 2009 - 5:33 pm EDT

If I donate, it's going to be to the Sanctuary and any campaign to get elephants out of zoos or circuses. That is the worthy donation of money. I am utterly convinced at this point that the zoo industry has failed to take the leadership role in moving from the 19th century model into the 21st century. There never seems to be more than a token improvement and then when we find out the whole truth we realize that it was all an illusion. The NC Zoo's 7 acres is divided into two parts which have never been joined. Their elephants are incompatible so that isn't likely to change. More elephants are just crammed onto each 3.5 acre part. This is no real improvement for them at all. And if the you really care about them, then let them go to a place where they make a serious effort to address the spatial needs of the largest land mammal on Earth. Because they have so much space, integrating them together is much easier than in a small zoo and there is less incompatibility because no one feels hemmed in or threatened. And baby elephants born in your zoo could be taken away from their mothers and sent to some other zoo or even sold to a circus.

southernlass

September 28, 2009 - 5:52 pm EDT

I think the general public weighing in on this "what is humane?" debate is ill-advised. Most people are not well informed on what, exactly, the facts are when dealing with captive animals and their needs.

Let's face it, a wildlife documentary, watched from your comfy couch at home doesn't make you an expert. Nor does it come close to actually observing elephants (up close and personal) at your State Zoo displaying natural behavior, trumpeting and splashing as they carry on with their daily lives, oblivious to the human debate going on regarding what is "best for them".

Captive-born elephants do not pine for the days they spent in Africa, walking for hours searching for food or evading poachers. They never knew that kind of harsh life.

The fact of the matter is the NC Zoo has spent millions of dollars ensuring that their elephant collection is healthy, happy and safe AND IT SHOWS! I take my family often and we always leave there thrilled with what we learned and observed that day.

P.S. - Regarding elephant "sanctuaries", although they may provide hundreds of acres to roam, they do not have spacious, heated barns with warm water showers or daily medical observation and records. And, sanctuaries do not welcome the public (meaning no educating school children or visitors) nor do they accept male elephants.

Caroline T

September 29, 2009 - 10:18 am EDT

Correction, Southernlass: sanctuaries do provide spacious, heated barns and the best veterinary care in the world. One of the vets at The Elephant Sanctuary in TN is the co-author of the most recent, definitive veterinary textbook on elephants. They also keep meticulous records and examine each elephant every day. The PAWS Ark 2000 Sanctuary DOES accept male elephants, so your information is very inaccurate. You should check your facts so that you don't misinform people. In addition, you criticize the sanctuaries for not being open to the public. This attitude is what is wrong with zoos and zoo supporters. What makes you think that elephants are there for your pleasure? What makes you think you or anyone has the right to confine these animals in small, deprived exhibits just so your kids can look at them. Arrogance is what makes you think you have that right. Arrogance and selfishness, the belief that only you and your species matter. And that is simply not true. Elephants have as much right as you or I do to live their lives as nature intended. The NC Zoo has taken a step in the right direction by increasing space but the way they have done it has canceled out any improvement for the elephants from that space by cutting it in two and by cramming more elephants onto the space. If the zoo industry refuses to make substantive changes in its core philosophy and view of animals, then zoos should be abandoned like the antiquated and outdated model.

Caroline T

September 29, 2009 - 10:21 am EDT

I meant to say that ......zoos should be abandoned like the antiquated and outdated model that they are.

southernlass

September 29, 2009 - 5:15 pm EDT

Correction Caroline- The NC Zoo has been competently caring for elephants for decades. Speaking of uninformed, make sure you check out:
http://www.fieldtripearth.org/div_index.xml?id=3

I do not proclaim to be an expert. But I feel strongly about this and I am pretty good with Google research. You should try it as well.

Fact: Carol Buckley, the director of The Elephant Sanctuary in TN publicly stated "Elephants need to live in a healthful environment, and if zoos and circuses provide that, that's fine. We don't care where they live as long as where they're living is a healthy environment for elephants." This said, what exactly is your argument??

I'd be willing to bet that elephant sanctuaries employ a large percentage of people with former elephant experience. (I would hope so, anyway). And just where would they have received elephant experience? From Zoos, who have provided the large majority of elephant research and medical treatment this century.

I stand corrected on what (exactly) the Tennessee Sanctuary has to offer (heated barns, ponds, etc.) Sanctuaries can be wonderful places, no one is arguing that. But, in your opinion, what exactly do they offer that is so superior to million dollar zoo exhibits? (Keep in mind that elephants, when provided with food, water and nice weather, do not need to roam and don't).

The sanctuary in Tennessee takes "sick, old, needy elephant females". Everyone knows that elephants live in female-dominated hierarchies, but why NO males? They have thousands of acres available and for various reasons, have kept some elephants isolated. Are bull elephants not worth 'saving'? What, exactly, would be done with male elephants in North American zoos if the animal rights loonies woke up tomorrow and got their way?

As far as visitation goes - It is a proven fact that humans take an interest in what they SEE and experience. Children will not care passionately about elephants without that connection with them and satisfying the very human desire to SEE and understand animals. Ask anyone who feels strongly about a certain exotic animal species and it'll turn out they were motivated after they saw those animals up close and personal, usually as a child AT A ZOO. Zoos currently serve a huge role in educating the general public and I fully support all NC schools having the opportunity to take field trips to the zoo for children to see elephants, giraffes and every other animal housed there.

There is no way to prove who is right in this discussion because there is no right or wrong answer. I do know that it is not "wrong" for me or my young children to desire to see elephants, whether in their natural habitat or a recreation of their natural habitat.

In closing, I do not accept your insistence that elephants belong in sanctuaries or that zoos are 'bad' or somehow inadequate in keeping elephants or breeding them.

The bottom line: your idiotic opinion is irrelevant and my future grandchildren will enjoy seeing elephants and their offspring at the zoo. You and I will be dead and gone and elephants will still serve as ambassadors to future generations and that is how it is.

We will just agree to disagree and I will think about you and smile when I go to the zoo next weekend and watch the muddy elephants frolic and play in front of thousands of other like-minded people.