clm wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:33 AM:Wonderful article. You're not crazy. These wonderful creatures should never be caged.

Anonymous wrote on Jun 24, 2007 10:51 AM:This story is preposterous! It is a VERY one sided story meant to give the writers point of view instead of the actual story. I have done my own homework on this subject (more than any press personal could do) and found that the animals at the Wild Animal Park are very well cared for with six full time vet staff (which is more than any zoo in the country). Loved by all of their respective keepers and in some cases by all park staff. Regarding the elephants in particular... When a herd of elephants in the "wild" are doing well and populating nicely, local farm owners in Africa take notice and care only for their own wellbeing and ask the local government if that particular herd (or a portion of that herd) can be culled (killed) so that the possibly of their farm land being destroyed is avoided. Depending on the case the government may say yes. This was the case with the elephants at the Wild Animal Park. I know for a fact that the Wild Animal Park would prefer the animals to be in the wild but it is the humans throughout the world that make it impossible for animals to survive in the "wild". The "wild" today is mostly just reserves setup by local governments to give what animals they have left a fighting chance at survival. A local animal for instance... The Peregrine Falcon. The Peregrine was near extinction just a few years back because of farms using a pesticide called DDT. The DDT would get into the female Peregrine’s system and make the egg shells that she was producing soft and brittle making the eggs impossible for her to incubate without crushing them. With extinction approaching fast for them the US Government banned the use of DDT and thankfully these majestic birds are populating once again! But for many species this is not the case and the species goes extinct noticed or even unnoticed! Did you know the worlds frog population has dropped by 33% in the last 5 years alone! This was simply because someone brought a frog to South America from Africa that had a fungus that didn't effect it at all but all of the frog species in South America did not have the immunity that that African frog did, thus causing an astronomical amount of frogs to die and some species to go extinct. If you are thinking "so what", there have been a couple cases of this in San Diego already! Basically what I am trying to say here is that Zoos used to exist for the purpose of having a living museum, but they have transformed into places designed to teach people about the majestic animals we have today and how we can help to save them. The Wild Animal Park is special to the zoo grouping because is does not only exist to teach (in fact that is secondary to its real purpose) but to replenish. The San Diego Wild Animal Park was built as a breeding facility, to help breed animals for zoos so that they would stop being taken from the wild. The Wild Animal Park has done this well and taken it a step further by actually replenishing the wild with some animals! A great example of this is the story of the California Condor who was, once again, almost extinct from the wild but with the help of the Zoological Society of San Diego and the California Condor breeding facility at the Wild Animal Park their numbers are slowly raising and, as of recently, they have started breeding in the wild again! So, with this comment I hope that I have changed at least one person’s views on zoos and the way they treat their animals. If you really want to help animals in the wild, stop attacking zoos. The only thing we can do is educate our selves and if you can take it a step further educate those who share the land with the animals, those who are causing these wonderful creatures to go extinct whether they know it or not.

Theresa wrote on Jun 24, 2007 11:48 PM:San Diego zoo is extremely immoral in their treatment of elephants; they have discarded the three older elephants who died in Lincoln Park zoo (one on the way to Hogle zoo); I can only wish the director who made this decision will meet the same fate. The zoos are cruel to many animals, elephants in particular. Boycott the zoos!

PJ wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:49 AM:Wonderful article, I agree! I grew up loving elephants and going to zoos all over the country, but as I got older, the spaces they were in were colder, harder, the elephants sadder. I have not been to Amboseli, but was introduced to Tennessee's Elephant Sanctuary's elecam a couple of years ago and saw elephant behavior I'd never seen before, happy, joyful, playful, affectionate. After 50+ years of seeing elephants in zoos, I finally SAW them being themselves. I've also been introduced to some European zoos where spaces are larger, families stay together and wonder why zoos in this country have not adopted that model. And wonder how they defend keeping these wonderful creatures in such horrid conditions. If they don't have the money and space to give elephants a REAL life, then please send them to a sanctuary before they have to be "euthanized".

Jane wrote on Jun 25, 2007 10:31 AM:Observer - Thank You for your insightful comment and judgement. If only people could take the time to observe, and then think clearly, more would be done to correct the wrongs we do to these magnificent fellow inhabitants of this planet Earth.

Odd wrote on Jun 25, 2007 12:22 PM:Seems the wild animal park is a sanctuary. A sanctuary is just a big zoo! The elephants are still not free, but it makes some folks feel better because their not in one of those evil "zoos". Pretty silly if you ask me, and self deceiving.

Not very "observant" after all wrote on Jun 25, 2007 12:28 PM:"Observer" is one of the fortunate few who is actually able to travel to Africa to see these animals in their natural habitat; the majority of people in the world would never be able to appreciate the beauty of these animals were it not for conservation organizations such as The SD Zoo/Wild Animal Park - yes, zoos, the Wild Animal Park, sanctuaries, ALL organizations dedicated to the conservation and preservation of animals. Without being able to see these creatures, why would anyone care what happens a world away, in continents mostly known for their poor treatment of people, diseases, and poverty? Do you think the free roaming elephants living in their natural habitats that fall prey to poachers, have their faces cut off and tusks stripped are happier and living longer, fuller lives? Are they given the option not to suffer when they're being violently murdered for the profit of man? How would Observer know anything about the treatment of Carol, unless Observer were him or herself there to have experienced the love and care given this beautiful, sweet elephant. How would Observer know the heartache and sadness that overwhelmed those closest to her at her death, unless he or she were one of those people? Very quick to judge without all the facts, oh, unobservant Observer. In all of North America, there are approximately 300 elephants in captivity, who are ambassadors for their free roaming counterparts in other parts of the world. A very small percentage of the world's elephant population, and if not for our ability to TRULY observe these magnificent animals outside their natural habitat, surely their free roaming cousins would be at much greater risk - the world would remain ignorant to such horrifying circumstances they face in the wild. Before rushing to judge something you know little about, other than inflammatory statements you've read or seen in the media from organizations that are more interested in being "righteous" than seeing the bigger picture, you might try looking at that same bigger picture, Observer, et. al. Sure, it's a lot more fun for you to bash the big bad zoos and all those "horrible", unfeeling people that dedicate their lives to caring for animals, but perhaps you could open your mind ever so slightly, and offer a bit of empathy to those who have lost their close friend, Carol, and would have done anything in their power to save her - other than allow her continued suffering. Perhaps you could take a moment to walk in the shoes of some of the people who had to make this excrutiating decision, despite knowing they'd have to take the nasty barbs that would be thrown their way in addition to their grief. As for Observer and others who rush to judge the "morality" of zoos and those associated with them, you might even learn something, if that's possible. Are zoos perfect and always fair? Certainly not. Nor are "journalists", and neither is life.

Keith wrote on Jun 25, 2007 1:18 PM:John, it's not crazy to have compassion and empathy, it's the best of what makes us human, and what links us to all the other animals. Clearly zoos are part of an out-of-date, arrogant mindset, which allows us to pluck wild animals out of their contexts and stick them in a display case for our amusement. The much-touted education they offer has clearly not worked for those who think that captivity provides any kind of alternative to a wild existence in Africa or Asia. Sure there are challenges in keeping room for both elephants and people in the places where they share habitats, but spending millions to keep a few lonely, unhealthy and as you rightly not, clearly unhappy, is definitely not anything close to the answer. Has anyone stopped to ask why zoos have to employ legions of vets and undoubtedly dedicated carers to hold back the ravages of joint and limb ailments, obesity and psychological damage? If there is to be ANY justifiable case for elephants to be kept captive, then it must involve the closure of most zoo collections and the consolidation of America's elephant herd in a few, large, sanctuary-type reserves. And taking no more prisoners into captivity.

How about REAL observation? wrote on Jun 25, 2007 2:19 PM:This article is a joke and it's unfortunate that the newspaper would lower itself to such poor journalistic standards. The observer is OBVIOUSLY NOT VERY OBSERVANT of the world at large. The "wild" he so romanticizes is quickly disappearing. How long ago was that visit to Africa? Perhaps the observer should revisit! And perhaps the newspaper should not write observations about places that are decades outdated. The wild is a romantic notion that barely exists anymore. Animals are being slaughtered for their meat and tusks at rates that ensure extinction within decades. Yes, decades. Observer talks of an Africa from decades ago and ignorantly believes that same place still exists today. Africa is different today. And a couple decades from now many African species will only exist in Zoos they will be eaten and poached out of wild existence. If you really love these creatures, than support conservation. The San Diego Zoo is a world leader in conservation and is actually on the ground working in Africa with the communities in Africa and doing a fine job at caring for the animals at its facilities. I wonder how many people who are so quick to slander the zoo's conservation efforts are actually doing anything at all to save wildlife. I bet there aren't many. The Zoo is doing so much in these far away lands. The Zoo recognizes the realities of these far away nations and situations. It isn't as romantic and wild as you seem to think. I wish "reporters" would do more real reporting on hard facts rather than fanciful notions and ideas. Piss poor judgement on the newspaper editors part in running this ridiculous nonesense of a story.

JK wrote on Jun 26, 2007 4:44 AM:Thank you for an astute article. One can only attempt to educate - the reader has to want to learn...obviously some don't. In this lifetime they may never understand and I pity the animals who are subjected to the views of organizations like the AZA. I am glad there are people like you who care enough to speak for the elephants.

JK obviously doesn't want to learn wrote on Jun 26, 2007 2:35 PM:and this response made my point quite clearly for all to see. There is no changing the mind when it remains closed. Pity.

Christie wrote on Jul 4, 2007 12:43 PM:There are two types of people who love animals. One type, perhaps the most common, have lots of pets and take their children to the zoo and circuses to see the animals up close. The second type puts the animals' welfare above their own needs or desires. I would love to swim with dolphins, but I would never condone a program that keeps dolphins in a pool for human contact. I admire, respect, and love elephants, but I would never choose to make them captive for my enjoyment. A study recently statedt that there are some animals that are more naturally suited to the captivity found in zoos. Elephants were not one of them, nor bears. Certain species evolved in a manner that makes them incapable of living a full, healthy life while in captivity. For that reason, I say that breeding and capturing elephants for zoo or circus use should be stopped. If you truly loved animals, you would want what is best for them and shelve your own desires to be closer to them.