Click here to go back to the issue outlines list

2006/21: Should Asian elephants be brought to Australia to live in zoos?

Related issue outlines?:
1997: Animal cruelty: should wild animals perform in circuses?

Dictionary: Double-click on any word in the text to bring up a dictionary definition of that word in a new window (IE only).

Analysing the language of the news media: Click here to read a useful document on media language analysis

Age, Herald-Sun and Australian items specifically on this subsject: Click the icon below to access the Echo news items search engine (2006 file) and enter the following words.

elephants
australia



Sydney Morning Herald index: Click here to use the State Library of NSW's online index to the Sydney Morning Herald

Online newspaper items: see the end of this outline (after the list of newspaper sources) for a google search facility with which to attempt to access newspaper items still online or cached by third parties.


What they said ...

'Elephants in captivity die at a younger age, experience a range of health problems and also exhibit signs of severe stress, including the constant, repetitive 'weaving' that is familiar to many observers'
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

'By bringing more elephants to Melbourne Zoo, we will contribute to the survival of the species through building knowledge and expertise about their care and management which we will provide to partners back in their homeland'
John Thwaites, the Victorian Minister for the Environment

The issue at a glance
In July 2005, the Federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell approved the importation of eight Asian elephants from Thailand. A day later, the deal was stalled when animal welfare organisations took legal action to stop the elephants being brought to Australia.
In February 2006, the Administrative Affairs Tribunal approved the importation of the eight elephants on condition that the host zoos meet a list of conditions. The conditions included providing appropriate flooring and installing closed-circuit television.
In June 2006 a small group of activists is blocked the movement of several trucks heading for Bangkok airport. Their departure has now been postponed as the activists call for DNA testing of the elephants to ensure that none have been taken from the wild.
The eight elephants, which zoo authorities claim worked in logging camps, have now been held in quarantine in Thailand for two years.
Melbourne Zoo and Sydney's Taronga Zoo want to bring in the elephants as part of the Australasian Zoos Association Conservation Program for Asian Elephants. If allowed, five elephants will go to Taronga Zoo and three to Melbourne. The zoos are part of a consortium that includes Perth, Auckland and Monarto Zoo (east of Adelaide), which has plans for a captive population of 40 elephants.
The zoos hope to establish a breeding program and use the exhibit to help stop the decline in wild elephant populations in Asia. Asia's wild elephant populations have dropped by 80 per cent in the past 60 years.
Melbourne Zoo recently spent $13.5 million upgrading and expanding its Asian elephant enclosure, and Taronga Zoo spent $40 million on its new enclosure.

Background
1999: The Melbourne Zoo began investigations into a captive breeding program for Asian elephants.
2001: Thailand was identified as the best option because of its large population of domestic animals breeding well.
2004: Three elephants (Dokkoon, Kulab and Num-Oi) were selected and joined at the Kanchanaburi quarantine camp by Melbourne Zoo keepers Laurie Pond and Manu Ludden, who have remained with the elephants to this day.
December 2005: The RSPCA, the International Fund for Animal Welfare and the International Humane Society took Zoos Victoria, Taronga Zoo and federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The welfare groups failed in their attempt to stop importation.
February 2006: The tribunal placed provisions on the living conditions of the animals.
June 2006: Protesters blocked the convoy carrying the elephants as it attempted to leave the quarantine camp for the Cocos Islands.
July 2006: A Thai senate committee on the environment asked for information on the origin of the eight elephants. The panel chairman, Kaewsan Atipho, stressed that the shipment must not breach regulations under the Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species.

Internet Information
On February 9 2005 the Australasian Zoo and Aquarium Association (ARAZPA) put out a position statement explaining why the Association believed it appropriate to bring Asian elephants to Australia to be reared in Australian zoos.
This position statement can be found at http://www.arazpa.org.au/Documents/elephant_position%20statement.pdf

The Taronga and Western Plains Zoos Internet site has a section of their site given over to explaining what provisions have been made for the Asian elephants and why the zoo authorities believe they should be kept within Australian zoos. This sub section of the site can be found at http://www.zoo.nsw.gov.au/content/view.asp?id=1137

The Victorian branch of the RSPCA has a section of its site given over to arguing why Thai elephants should not be brought to Australia to be kept in zoos. These arguments can be found at http://www.rspcavic.org/news_info/thaielephant_contact.htm

The RSPCA, Humane Society International and International Fund for Animal Welfare have together opposed Australian zoos importing Thai elephants. They have produced an information sheet outlining the reasons for their opposition to the animals being kept in Australian zoos. The full text of the information sheet can be found at
http://www.hsi.org.au/news_library_events/press_releases/N301_Ask_Zoos_the_Difficult_Questions_over_Elephant_Plans_3_May_2004.pdf

Arguments against Asian elephants being brought to Australia to live in zoos?
1. The elephants' physical and social needs cannot be met in a zoo environment
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), which is strongly opposed to the elephant importation plan, has argued, 'While some animals can thrive in the captive environment, elephants in zoos suffer from a range of health problems, including serious and painful joint disorders as well as obesity and diabetes. Many of these result from lack of movement, as zoos can't possible provide for the space these large, nomadic animals need.'
The same point has been made in more detail by David Hancocks, a former director of Werribee Open Range Zoo, a director of strategic planning for Zoos Victoria, and a former director of Woodland Park Zoo, Seattle. David Hancocks has claimed, 'Space is a critical issue, although that's denied by zoos ... [Elephants] love to explore, to exercise, to wander. The Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee, home to many abused zoo elephants, provides more than 1000 rolling hectares. My view is that eight hectares could be an acceptable minimum, if properly designed. Should that seem barely tolerable, consider that the new $15 million exhibit at Taronga provides just one fifth of a hectare. Melbourne Zoo's new exhibit, of similar cost, provides less than half a hectare.'
David Hancocks has claimed that without adequate room the elephants will suffer both physically and psychologically. David Hancocks has argued, 'They are active for more than 16 hours a day, foraging over 10 kilometres while exercising their joints and ligaments, maintaining muscle tone, burning fat, ensuring good blood flow, and enjoying mental stimulation from covering such large areas.
This bears little resemblance to the life that characterises captive conditions in even the best zoos. Typically, zoo elephants lead stoic lives marked by depression, foot rot, bone disease, obesity, and boredom. Zoo elephants die younger than their wild brethren, and most of them suffer ailments from a combination of inactivity, inappropriate diets, loneliness, inadequate housing, lack of space, and stress. A study by the RSPCA in England four years ago revealed so many concerns they recommended importation and breeding of zoo elephants should stop.'
Finally, concern has been expressed that zoos not only fail to cater for elephants' physical needs, they also fail to cater for their social needs.
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) has produced an information sheet outlining the social distress that captivity causes among elephants. The information sheet states, 'In addition, zoos cannot mimic the social structure that elephants need to thrive. Elephants in the wild can exist in herds numbering up to 58 animals. Female elephants particularly are intensely social animals, existing in small groups made up of mothers, calves, 'aunts' and so forth. These animals develop strong lifelong bonds with these family members. When elephants are held in captivity, moved and separated from their group, this cause unacceptable levels of distress and the breakdown of these family groups.
The proposed guidelines developed by the participating zoos argue that increasing the size of the elephant herd will increase the opportunity for the current zoo elephants to socialise, but the plan reveals the zoos intend to split the herd, resulting in final individual group sizes of only around four females and a single separately housed male!
Furthermore, the guidelines recommend male calves are separated from their mothers at a minimum of four years of age and preferably at eight years of age. This is also of great concern, given that the natural age of separation in the wild is approximately 10-15 years.
Elephants in captivity die at a younger age, experience a range of health problems and also exhibit signs of severe stress, including the constant, repetitive 'weaving' that is familiar to many observers.'

2. Elephants cannot be bred effectively in captivity
It is claimed that keeping elephants in zoos cannot be justified on the basis of boosting their numbers via captive breeding programs.
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), which is strongly opposed to the elephant importation plan, has argued, 'Elephants in zoos ... breed very poorly, with very high rates of miscarriage, still birth and infant mortality. In fact, despite keeping Asian elephants in captivity for around 100 years, not one single calf has ever been bred in an Australia zoo. Yet the tourist camp these elephants were taken from [to be brought to Australia] has had 25 successful births in the last five years, with any number of female elephants pregnant right now!'
David Hancocks, an elephant expert with international experience, has also claimed that a captive environment is not one where elephants are likely to breed successfully. He has also indicated that any baby elephant which might be born in captivity will never be returned to its native environment and so will never contribute to the native elephant breeding stock.
David Hancocks is a former director of Werribee Open Range Zoo, a director of strategic planning for Zoos Victoria, and a former director of Woodland Park Zoo, Seattle. He argues, 'No zoo elephant babies will ever be reintroduced to the wild. Nor will they ever enjoy a life remotely like the quality and complexity they could enjoy in the wild.
No credible authority on elephant conservation supports the idea that zoo breeding is necessary. Only zoos seem to think this is a good and useful action ...
The track record for successful breeding ... is not good ... The approximately 130 Asian elephants in American zoos have produced 12 offspring since 2000. Seven of those were born dead or died within days of birth.'

3. The money spent on keeping captive animals would be better spent preserving them in their natural habitats
It has been claimed that the money being spent to establish improved facilities and then to maintain elephants in captivity would be more effectively spent improving their chances of surviving in their natural habitats.
The International Humane Society has argued, 'Close to $40 million has been spent on the upgrade of Taronga's facilities and the building of a quarantine facility for the elephants in Thailand while there is only $50,000 planned to be spent on the ground projects in Thailand ... Doesn't this seem like a disproportionate allocation of funds for genuine conservation efforts?'
The Thai Government is attempting to conserve the country's elephants in their natural environment, at a cost far less than Australian zoos are spending to place small numbers of elephants in this country. The government is embarking on a 700-million baht ($25 million) elephant park as the second stage of the Chiang Mai Night Safari project. The park will house 200 wild elephants within the Doi Suthep Pui National Park. It will feature a jungle-like habitat in which elephants would live under natural conditions, roaming the forest for food. Visitors will be able to observe the elephant from an enclosed area.
It has been claimed that if Australian zoos are genuinely concerned about the survival of Asian elephants they could give some of the money they were spending on elephant enclosures in Australia to Thailand to help that country continue its conservation efforts.
Aster Zhang, the China director of the International Fund for Animal Welfare, has claimed, 'Asian elephants desperately need to be conserved in their home range states, not shipped abroad under the guise of a "conservation breeding programme", which will have no long-term benefits for the species.'
It has been claimed that recent British research shows it costs 50 times more to keep an elephant in a Western zoo then conserve them in the wild. A minimum of $70,000 a year is needed to keep an elephant at Taronga Zoo. It has been suggested this money would be more sensibly put into conservation programs.

4. The zoos' are motivated by commercial and public relations concerns
A number of conservation and animals welfare groups have cast doubt on the motives of the Taronga and Melbourne Zoos. Rebecca Brand of International Fund for Animal Welfare has stated, 'We believe this is a primarily commercial venture. They are bringing elephants in because they're a drawcard.'
The International Fund for Animal Welfare has also claimed, 'A zoo without elephants will not be commercially successful. The breeding program is camouflage. The real purpose of the Zoos is commercial. Their plan, and the importation of the elephants, is prohibited under the EPBC Act and Regulations. The importation of Asian elephants for exhibition in Taronga and Melbourne Zoos is wrong.'
The International Fund for Animal Welfare has further argued, 'Under the EPBC Act and EPBC Regulations an importation of elephants primarily for commercial purposes, or a program which allows an elephant, used in the program, to be used for commercial purposes, cannot qualify as an approved cooperative conservation program. Whatever breeding may be attempted, the commercial purposes of the Zoos preclude the issue to them of import permits based on a breeding program.'
Dr Hugh Wirth of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has also said he is suspicious that the breeding programme was really 'a dressed-up commercial enterprise' and pointed to research showing that zoo elephants suffered obesity and shorter life spans.

5. Many zoos around the world are no longer keeping elephants
It has been claimed that many zoos around the world have ceased keeping elephants because they have recognised that they cannot meet the animals requirements adequately.
David Hancocks, a former director of Werribee Open Range Zoo, a director of strategic planning for Zoos Victoria, and a former director of Woodland Park Zoo, Seattle has stated, 'In recent years, zoos in Detroit, New York, Phoenix, San Francisco, Chicago, London and Bristol, recognising they cannot meet the complex social, behavioural, psychological and spatial needs of elephants, have closed their exhibits or are phasing them out. Other zoos, in Tucson, Anchorage, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and, sadly, Seattle, are being dragged kicking and screaming into a rapidly growing public debate across America about zoos and elephants.
The concerns are fuelled by information emerging from years of field studies. One researcher, Cynthia Moss, aptly describes elephants as "intelligent, complicated, intense, tender, powerful, and funny". We now know from Moss and others that elephants in the wild live in very stable, multi-generational families, never separated from each other except by death.'

6. Taking animals from other countries is in violation of conservation agreements
Asian elephants have been protected from trade since 1976 under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
Australia is one of more than 150 countries that are a party to CITES. Each member country controls the import and export of an agreed list of species that are endangered, or at risk of becoming endangered, due to inadequate controls over trade in them or their products.
However, a loophole allows for second generation elephants bred in captivity to be exempt from the ban for non-commercial purposes. Animal activists believe this exemption does not apply in the case of the elephants to be sent to Australian zoos as their exhibition is a commercial purpose and they further believe some of the animals sold to Australia probably come from the wild.
Activists are calling for DNA sampling of the elephants to determine whether the elephants were born in the wild, which would prevent their transfer.
Friends of the Asian Elephant Foundation want proof the eight Australia-bound elephants are domestic-bred and not wild. They submitted a petition to the Australian Ambassador asking that shipment be suspended on the grounds that the doubts over the pachyderms' geographic origin have yet to be resolved.

Arguments in favour Asian elephants being brought to Australia to live in zoos?

1. Asian elephants are at risk in their natural environment
It has been argued that zoos play a valuable role in conserving animals that are at risk in their natural environment. This is the position that Asian elephants, including elephants in Thailand are said to be in. Asian Elephants are endangered with as few as 34,000 remaining in the world across 13 countries. There are only about 2300 Asian elephants left in the wild in Thailand and about 2900 in the captive population, which includes working elephants in work camps, in circuses and on the street. Wildlife conservationists estimate that the Asian elephant will be extinct in many parts of its natural range (including Thailand) within 50 years.
The federal Minister for the Environment, Senator Ian Campbell, in paraphrasing the argument put in favour of importing elephants to live in Australian zoos has stated, 'Elephants ... are under enormous threat in their habitat in South East Asia. You have big population growth, you have demands on the land for agriculture, they have had a massive population threat there and we have seen what has happened with other species, such as rhinos where they have virtually been wiped out in their existing habitats. So zoos have played a constructive role there in the past ...'
This point has been reinforced by Will Meikle of Life Sciences, Taronga Zoo, who has noted, 'If you consider now that the forest cover of Thailand has decreased from about 80 per cent in World War II to currently 15 per cent, the big problem for elephants is that there is nowhere for them to live.'
John Thwaites, the Victorian Minister for the Environment, has stated, 'By bringing more elephants to Melbourne Zoo, we will contribute to the survival of the species through building knowledge and expertise about their care and management which we will provide to partners back in their homeland.'
The Australian zoos are also contributing to projects intended to support Asian elephants in their natural environments. These projects will include building a 20km fence at Kuiburi National Park where Thailand's largest remaining group of wild elephants live. The fence is to protect the elephants from human-elephant conflict due to elephants raiding adjoining pineapple plantations, which are the livelihood of local villagers.
They will also be supporting the Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species - Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants (CITES MIKE) by providing funds for global positioning equipment to track and monitor wild elephants in Thailand and Cambodia, as well as funding for a ranger training course to protect wild elephants in Burma.

2. The Melbourne and the Taronga Zoos will conduct elephant breeding programs
Australian zoo authorities have claimed that they have not succeeded in breeding elephants in captivity because they have made no serious and sustained attempt to do so.
Supporters of an Australian elephant breeding campaign claim that over 400 Asian Elephants have been bred in 117 zoological institutions around the world. Oregon Zoo in the USA has bred 29 Asian Elephants and, in fact, have now bred from their first offspring. The survival rate of Asian Elephant calves in reputable zoos is now high, as zoos learn more about expert husbandry of these endangered animals.
The Federal Environment Minister, Ian Campbell has similarly noted, 'The reality is that ... [there are] 33 zoos around the world, many of them metropolitan zoos, where there's been multiple births of elephants. Just to give you an idea the Hanover Zoo there's been 21 born there, elephants in captivity; the Oregon Zoo in the USA, 29; Fort Worth Zoo, 5; the Metro Zoo in Canada, 2; Houston Zoo, 13; Zurich Zoo, you know you can go on. Even the Moscow Zoo are breeding them. Singapore Zoo, 3. So elephants can breed in captivity.
Elephants are under serious threat in our near neighbourhood. Australia has a choice to be part of the solution, part of an important international environmental mission to save these elephants, or to turn our back and say well it's some one else's problem, and I think this is a very good decision for the conservation of elephants.'

3. Both zoos have constructed artificial habitats that suit elephants
Melbourne Zoo has recently launched the $3.5 million Stage 2 of Trail of the Elephants, which expands the animals' living space to some 5,000 square metres.
Victoria's Education Minister has noted, 'The new section of the elephant exhibit gives Melbourne Zoo's male elephant, Bong Su, a barn of his own, as well as providing an extra wading pool, mud wallows, scratching posts, sleeping mounds, and varied terrain for all the animals to use.
It makes a wonderful addition to the existing, award-winning Trail of the Elephants that opened three years ago to mark a new era for Melbourne Zoo. Stage 2 has been built on the same concept as the first part of the exhibit - it immerses the visitor in the elephants' world.' The zoo's total recent expenditure on its elephant facilities now totals $13.5 million.
Taronga Zoo has spent $40 million on a new enclosure, complete with hot and cold bathing areas, an elephant exercise area, waterfalls and ponds, and specially designed 'sleeping mounds' for the pachyderms.
Neither Melbourne Zoo nor Taronga Zoo claim that their facilities for the elephants they wish to place replicate those provided in the wild. However, the elephants they will be housing are not wild elephants. They are camp and circus elephants that are generally kept in confined conditions and the facilities provided by the Melbourne and Taronga Zoo are far better.
Dr Michael Lynch, a veterinarian at Melbourne Zoo, has stated, 'Natural ecosystems are complex and not easily artificially recreated, whether in a zoo or a damaged natural environment. This is true for all species, not just elephants. The aim of caring for animals in captivity is to cater for their physical and psychological welfare, not to pretend their ecosystem can be manufactured ...
The welfare of elephants at Melbourne Zoo has steadily improved since 1993, when it was recognised that hard enclosure floors and an inadequate behavioural enrichment program were contributing to foot infections in our bull elephant. A process was introduced to tackle welfare issues by improving the housing and enrichment for these animals. This included the opening of their excellent exhibit in 2003 and will, I hope, include the acquisition of new elephants to create a more natural social group ... the elephant's recurrent foot infections have ceased.'

4. The zoos intend their elephant exhibits to raise popular awareness of the value and plight of these animals
An information brochure produced by Taronga Zoo states, 'We believe that our visitors will have the opportunity to have wonderful encounters with elephants and achieve a greater understanding of these animals in their contextual environment.'
In a letter to the editor published in The Age on June 20, 2006, Rob Gell has argued, 'Zoos expose people to the wonders of nature to which they might otherwise never be exposed. They play a crucial role in raising awareness of environmental and conservation issues in audiences that otherwise may not be reached.'
The zoos are also encouraging those who visit the elephants to become involved in international efforts to conserve them. The same brochure states that the zoos will be engaged in 'fundraising in Australia [to enable them] to invest in further elephant conservation projects in Thailand. This includes opportunities for [Taronga] Zoo's 1.3 million Australian and overseas visitors to make donations to in situ conservation projects for Asian Elephants.'

5. The zoos are not keeping the elephants for commercial purposes
Both the Melbourne Zoo and Taronga Zoo have claimed that their primary purpose in seeking the Thai elephants is not commercial. When this suggestion was made to William Meikle, Taronga's general manager of life sciences, he responded, 'That is an outrageous allegation.'
Both zoos have maintained that elephants cost much more to maintain than they are likely to attract in revenue from visitors.
Melbourne Zoo has so far spent $2.5 million on five-year-old Kulab and his female companions Dokkoon, 12, and Num-Oi, also five. That figure does not include the $13.5 million spent on the expanded Trail of the Elephants enclosure.
It will also cost up to $100,000 per elephant per annum to feed and care for them.
If a baby elephant were born it might be expected to increase visitor numbers to Melbourne Zoo by 25 per cent. This would mean about 200,000 extra visitors. At an average $15 a head for admission, this would bring an additional $3 million in revenue. But this does not go anywhere near covering the cost of the exhibit and ongoing expenses.

6. Importing these elephants does not place Australian zoos in breach of conservation agreements
The Melbourne and Taronga Zoo authorities argue that they are not in breach of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). The Convention allows for second generation elephants to be imported into other countries so long as this is not for commercial purposes. Both the Melbourne and the Taronga Zoos have claimed that they are not seeking to have the elephants bought into Australia for commercial purposes, indeed they argue, elephants are so expensive to maintain that zoos cannot hope to defray the cost of keeping them by increased zoo attendance. The Perth zoo found, when it closed its elephant exhibit because it could no longer afford to maintain it, that attendance at the zoo did not decline.
The Melbourne and Taronga Zoos also note that the elephants they will be importing have not been breed in the wild. They claim they have carefully selected the elephants they will be importing and that they have remained under the care and observation of elephant keepers from the zoos since they were selected.
The Federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell approved the importation of the eight Asian elephants from Thailand in June 2005. In February 2006, the Administrative Affairs Tribunal approved the importation of the eight elephants on condition that the host zoos meet a list of conditions which they have now done.

Further implications
If it can be demonstrated via DNA testing that the elephants to be brought to Australian zoos are second generation captive animals then it is likely that they will be brought to the Melbourne and Taronga Zoo. The zoos' claims that their concerns are not commercial seem to have been accepted by relevant authorities within both Australia and Thailand. However, opposition to elephants being sent overseas appears to be growing within Thailand and if it becomes sufficiently strong Thai authorities may decide that the zoos are in fact concerned to commercially exploit the elephants. This would see their removal from the country prohibited by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
Whether the zoos' claims that their concern is primarily to help prevent the extinction of the species are valid will in part depend on the success of their captive breeding program. Even then, however, the elephants will remain exhibition specimens for Australian zoo visitors as there is no intention that any animals breed in captivity will ever be returned to their natural environment.

Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
The Age
June 7, page 9, news item by Levett and Darby, `Zoos' elephant plans meet jumbo problems'.
June 10, page 18, news item by C Levett, `How two women stopped eight elephants'.
June 20, page 10, letter, `To survive in the wild, elephants need zoos'.
June 19, page 11, comment by David Hancocks, `Save elephants from zoos'.
June 19, page 11, cartoon.
June 18, page 20, analysis by C Egan, `The shadow of giants'.
June 23, page 15, comment by Michael Lynch, `These elephants are being rescued from hell'.

The Australian
June 7, page 11, news item by P Alford, `Thais trample on Aussie elephant shipment'.

The Herald-Sun
July 11, page 8, news item by S Wotherspoon, `When's the next jumbo out of here?'.
Using google to find newspaper items still available on the Web
Use your mouse to copy a newspaper headline (just the headline, not the entire entry as it appears in the sources) and paste it into the google search box below. Click search to see if the item is still accessible.

Google