Today Fri Sat
It is forcast to be Fog at 11:00 PM EDT on May 24, 2012
Fog
29°/14°		 It is forcast to be Chance of a Thunderstorm at 11:00 PM EDT on May 25, 2012
Chance of a Thunderstorm
20°/16°		 It is forcast to be Partly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on May 26, 2012
Partly Cloudy
21°/14°

18 Comments

news

Zoo Board Votes to Send Elephants to Friendlier Facilities

By Hamutal Dotan

20110512elephants.jpg
Photo by kaeko from the Torontoist Flickr Pool.


After debating most of today, Toronto’s Zoo Board has decided to close down the longstanding elephant exhibit and relocate our three remaining elephants—Toka, Iringa, and Thika—to a more suitable habitat. Debate about the elephants’ future has been raging for a while, with many feeling that Toronto’s cold climate, combined with the relatively small enclosure the elephants were provided, made us not as ideal a home for the beloved animals as generations of zoo-goers might wish. Finding a suitable home and arranging the move will take some planning, and won’t be happening immediately—we will have up to two years to bid our friends goodbye, staff are predicting.

Filed under: , , , ,

Report error Send a tip

Comments

  • torontothegreat

    Thank f'n god! It's about time. Not even sure why zoo's exist anymore.

  • Diego

    I know nothing about what these animals actually need… but the 10-year-old in me is simply screaming “This freaking SUCKS!”

  • Cpt_Sunshine

    There are lots of reasons for zoo's to exist, primarily scientific research.  The Toronto Zoo in particular was been very successful in studying the reproduction of various endangered species. 

    For example the Toronto Zoo has been front and center in the reintroduction of the Black-footed Ferret to the parries.  In 1986, the last population of 12 wild ferrets was taken into captivity, now there over 650 in the wild with the goal of having a global population of 1500 in a few more years.

  • torontothegreat

    You don't need a zoo for that…  Sorry.

  • tyrannosaurus_rek

    “zoo's”

    Apostrophes do not work that way!

  • Cpt_Sunshine

    You're right. I guess scientists should just invent a time machine and go back to the 19th century when we started destroying the ferrets habitat and save them that way – Please wake up and join the real world

    The funniest thing is that your desire for conservation and saving animals is probably due, in no small part, to your parents bringing you to the zoo when you we're young.  Out of sight – out of mind.  Without zoos ivory would just be that stuff your piano keys are made with.

  • torontothegreat

    “The funniest thing is that your desire for conservation”

    The funniest thing is that your desire for small spaced, caged animals is outright ridiculous.  The other funny thing is how you mention “conservation” without giving any thought to http://www.google.ca/search?q=…

    My desire?  My parents?  My childhood?  LMAO.  STFU.

  • Cpt_Sunshine

    What do all those conservation areas have to do with the research being done at the Toronto zoo?  Why don't you give some thought to: http://scholar.google.ca/schol… 

    Conservation is much much more than simply cording off natural habitat. You can create all the conservation areas you want, knowledge is how you are going to save animals and save species.  Habitat destruction is not the only cause of extinction.  For example, in order to know that a certain type pollution effects a species you need to know how the biological systems of that species work.  It may seem obvious now, but we only know acid rain hurts fish reproduction, because some scientist somewhere did an experiment.  They most likely put a bunch a fish in a bunch of different aquariums (sea cages) with different ph's and watched what happened.  It probably wasn't the greatest life for the fish living in the low ph tanks.  Was the experiment cruel? You obviously think so.  I don't think it matters.  Without that experiments and other similar experiments there would be no reason to regulate sulphur emissions.  Those experiments saved the lives of billions of other fish.
    Further, It's not an experiment that could have been done in nature (ie out in captivity), because there is no way to control the ph of a large natural body of water.  All you could do is watch and wait as the ph slowly lowered over the years.  Of course, by the time it reached the critical level and you discovered that fish reproduction was impossible, it would be too late to do anything about.  Why do you take things so personally?  I was rhetorically using you to explain that one of the other main purposes of zoos is the dissemination of information and more importantly creating compassion about these animals.  Seeing an elephant has a far bigger impact than reading about one in a book, especially for kids.  I'm sorry if I offended you (that last you is not rhetorical).

  • torontothegreat

    “Habitat destruction is not the only cause of extinction.  For example,
    in order to know that a certain type pollution effects a species”

    Habitat destruction is not the only cause of extinction.  Yet you use pollution as your ultimate example?  Tighten the screws, serious.

    Futhermore, if you're implying that you need to cage and corden off animals to do research, I'd suggest you do some of that research yourself.  Tonnes (and I mean TONNES!) of research is conducted both in the wild and at animal conservations.  The huge difference is that things like stress and (for the sentients) depression of the animals doesn't have to factor against the research, sometimes rendering the research moot.

    I'm not sure if you're being naive but researchers, researching fish actually do conduct most of their research in the wild.

    “Studies included: monitoring fish survival in caged fish studies;
    fitting brook trout with transmitters and following them to determine
    where they went during snowmelt; and measuring fish populations before
    and after acidic periods. Thousands of lake and stream water samples
    were analyzed, and acidified lakes were found just a short distance from
    healthy lakes. Nearly 1,500 Adirondack lakes were surveyed to assess
    the fish populations.”

    http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical…

    So you're just making stuff up now.  Not cool.

    Personal?  Naw.  Assuming things about myself (having nothing to do with this particular debate) warranted my response.  You obviously know nothing about me, so why make it a “debateable point”.  Furthermore, if you don't want to look like an ass, don't make “ass”umptions.

  • Cpt_Sunshine

    Since when is giving one example (pollution) mean that I think it is definitive cause of extinction.  I never said that.  
    Also, I never said there is no useful research being done in the wild.  Also, I never said anything about were most of the research is being done.  What I'm trying to say is that is research that cannot be done in the wild.

    The research paper you cited is from 1998:

    “Twenty years ago, we all found it hard to believe that rain water could be killing Adirondack fish”  

    That's the first sentence from the article you posted.  That experiment was in no way trying to show how ph levels affect fish reproduction.  As the first senctence states, all that work has already been done… 20 years ago.  Actualy, almost exactly 20 years before that article was published

    Here's an example of a experiment from 1977 that studied the effect of ph on fish IN LAB: http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…

    Of course you're going to want to check to see how conservation efforts are affecting native populations later on, thus the 1998 experiment.  In no way is that article trying to prove that acid rain hurts fish, it's trying to see if our conservation efforts have had any effect.

    Any experiment that is trying to address the complex chemical reactions in any living organism needs to be done in laboratory in sterile conditions.  You need to have tight control over the compounds entering and exiting the system you are studying.   There is no way to conduct any such experiment except in a lab. 

  • torontothegreat

    Yes, research is not able to be done in the wild or in a conservation park.  Caging and killing animals in zoos is the only way to accomplish this type of research.

    /sarcasm.

    From a scientific standpoint, I'd really suggest you research your last paragraph.  You most DEF. do NOT have to have a sterile environment in order to study compounds entering and exiting an eco-system.

    Have fun at the zoo!

  • Cpt_Sunshine

    I said organism not eco-system.

    Actually, I'm going to take it all back. You're totally right.  You should email all the faculty at http://www.eeb.utoronto.ca/  and tell them that all money they spent on their labs is a waste.  And then if you're up to it, you can repeat that for the  thousands of other Universities around the world.  You clearly know their business better than they do.

  • torontothegreat

    Labs?  Universities?  I thought you were arguing for ZOOS?

    You're all over the place and have not been able to properly explain WHY Zoo's themselves are completely necessary (besides your stupid assumptions about my childhood and my parents). Great Job! Thumbs Up!

  • canuck1975

    … but… but… maybe it's the zoo's existentialism that doesn't need to exist anymore!

  • LiseBise

    So, if zoos are so bad, why don't I see anyone protesting the new acquarium that's coming to Toronto? That's not even for research, it's a pure for-profit organization that will grab fish from the oceans for our entertainment.

  • torontothegreat

    Labs?  Universities?  I thought you were arguing for ZOOS? Are labs and zoos inclusive to each other?

    You're all over the place and have not been able to properly explain WHY Zoos themselves are completely necessary (besides your stupid assumptions about my childhood and my parents).

    Great Job! Thumbs Up!

  • http://www.scotchblog.ca canuck1975

    … but… but… maybe it's the zoo's existentialism that doesn't need to exist anymore!

  • LiseBise

    So, if zoos are so bad, why don't I see anyone protesting the new acquarium that's coming to Toronto? That's not even for research, it's a pure for-profit organization that will grab fish from the oceans for our entertainment.