The Canadian Press
EDMONTON -- TV game-show legend Bob Barker took aim at the City of Edmonton Monday, accusing it of "torturing" Lucy the elephant by keeping her sick and isolated at its Valley Zoo.
"The isolation is sheer torture for this elephant. Lucy is being tortured," Barker said in an interview from Hollywood, Calif.
"If she were alone any place she would be suffering, but alone in that building seven months out of the year, it's incredible to me she's even alive."
Zoo officials, however, say Lucy is fine and that the 85-year-old TV icon is getting some poor information.
Barker, famous for his silver hair and saucy tongue, hosted "The Price is Right" game show for more than three decades before retiring in 2007, but has kept up his high profile in animal rights work.
He said Valley Zoo medical reports on Lucy dating back to 1980 -- which he said he received from the animal rights group Zoocheck -- describe sore, infected, pus-oozing feet, arthritis and respiratory problems along with psychological ills: rocking back and forth and pressing her head against the wall.
"Does that sound like a happy, healthy elephant?" he asked.
Lucy has become a cause celebre for organizations like Zoocheck, which want her moved to a natural habitat refuge such as one for elephants in Hohenwald, Tenn. They argue keeping elephants in captivity is cruel, that animals in the wild live much longer and are not prone to foot problems, tuberculosis, arthritis and other ailments.
Barker said he wrote letters last month to Edmonton Mayor Stephen Mandel and the city councillors outlining his concerns.
He said only one wrote back, Coun. Linda Sloan, whose west-end ward includes the zoo.
"Lucy's physical and psychological health is not deteriorating and she continues to respond positively to the treatments and care provided," Sloan wrote.
"Lucy is a calm, well-adjusted animal."
Sloan was in committee meetings Monday and not immediately available for comment.
Her statements were echoed by Dean Treichel, the zoo's operations supervisor.
Treichel said the 32-year-old, middle-aged Asian elephant does indeed have arthritis and respiratory problems (caused by a malpositioned molar), but is not suffering.
Staff walk her twice a day around the park to get exercise and have staggered their shifts so she has more contact with humans.
"Lucy has her social structure with the people that care for her," he said.
"That's part of her herd, and you find elephants can be that way."
He said the malpositioned molar could cause severe stress that could kill her if she was transported.
"We couldn't move her if we wanted to.
"And we're not willing to take that chance."
He said they would like to bring in another elephant for companionship but noted it's a difficult proposition given the price, availability and cross-border red tape involved.
"We've asked to see if there are any available elephants out there and at this point in time there isn't."
Barker said if he had his way, "we wouldn't have zoos, period."
"Zoos are prisons for animals and they all suffer, but the elephant probably suffers more than any other animal in the zoo."
What about the kids, he was asked, who wouldn't otherwise get to see an animal up close?
"Is it really great for a child to go out and watch an animal suffer or watch a tiger pace back and forth in a cage?"
Treichel said Barker is entitled to his opinion, but is disappointed that before condemning the zoo, Barker didn't at least pick up the phone and give them a call.
"He's never contacted us directly.
Courtesy of Joey Ratliff
*************************************************************************************
Mr. Treichel, why would you expect him to contact you directly. This kind of person does not want a debate, or another point of view, and most importantly they do not want somebody to tell them anything other, then what they want to hear. That's why they do their discussions and fact finding in private behind closed doors, with carefully selected participants. Then when they convince each other they have the story they fire from behind closed doors, so that they don't have to respond or justify. It's a sadness in many.
Posts
13 comments:
Mr. Barker has been the deep pockets behind several AR campaigns for fifteen years. I suppose he still has nightmares about all of those mink coats he gave away on game shows earlier in his career. Much of his funding has gone to the training of lawyers interested in extending Constitutional protections to animals -- though he has funded more mainstream spay/neuter programs as well. I've listened to Mr. Barker "testify" several times and have yet to hear him make a reasoned case for his positions. His reflexive anti-zoo sentiments would be almost comical if his money and his star power didn't afford him an audience.
Ben,
"His reflexive anti-zoo sentiments would be almost comical if his money and his star power didn't afford him an audience." That is exactly the point of the post. That there are actually people naive enough, to believe that it is valid because it is coming from a celebrity. As bizarre and amazing as MC being valid, because it is in Monaco, endorsed by royalty???? Need we ask why they by into the "Barkers"? He tells them what they want to hear. He and the Princess have now become their bud, their pal, their friend, and most importantly, their equal!!!
Wade
A2,
Did you get my email? I haven't gotten a response? Did it get lost in the "vapors", as our friend John Cooper would say?
Wade
sorry didn't get your email; having trouble with my yahoo account. let me see if i can get back on there.
A2,
I'll wait.
Wade
I'll try once more:
!) Barker did contact the city council. Why would you expect him to speak with the zoo director who has been absolutely intransigent as far as this elephant is concerned?
2) He has the zoo records. How can you be so sure that he is not "knowing the facts or taking the time to learn about" this situation?
3) Ben speaks of "reflexive anti-zoo sentiments" - but is it not a reflexive pro-zoo sentiment to not even consider the merits of what Barker is saying because of who he is? Is it possible that he is right on this subject - that Lucy should not be alone and that the climate in Edmonton cannot be doing her physical problems any good? Is the zoo right just because they say so? A2
A2. (1) Barker starts out from his oft-stated "position" that all zoos are bad. That bias, for better or worse calls into question his credibility. Clearly all zoos are bad only if you subscribe to the philosophical position that no exotic animal should ever be managed in captivity or domesticity. If you believe that animals can be managed successfully in captivity/domesticity you'll take the position that some zoos are bad, some are good, and all zoos can always strive to be better. (2) The Edmonton Zoo isn't a hell hole. In point of fact beginning with Toronto MetroZoo back in the 1960's Canadian parks have been modern, innovative, and fiercely concerned with animal care. Many modern restraint protocols have been pioneered in places like Calgary. Why should we assume that if zoo officials tell us the elephant is well adjusted and cared for that she isn't? (3) The park seems quite willing to discuss the animal's health, and I fail to see where moving her would improve her misplaced molar. The whole "isolation" argument is a nifty way to ignore the fact that there are no shortage of examples of isolated herd animals that over the years have bonded to keepers or other animals and are quite content. In some cases when introduced to other members of their own species they have never transitioned and end up far more isolated than they were previously. If there's a "better way" here it seems to me that finding another elephant for Edmonton makes a lot more sense than moving this animal to TN. Because Canada is home to a very successful reproduction program, it may be that in the next few years that could actually be done.
Of course if one's position is that all elephants belong in TN or at Pat Derby's place, then the counter argument is that Edmonton is too cold -- conveniently forgetting that modern elephants once ranged as far north as the Korean Peninsula.
Ben,
Excellent rebuttal. The lone elephant in question, has been alone since late 2007 because her companion was sent to another zoo to be bred.
Yes animals can bond, with their keepers, but they can also bond with an abusive keeper. Mote point. Here's one to ponder. Two is not a herd but three are? Here is the argument against the zoo that has an African and an Asian, and have met the herd criteria. Africans and Asians should not be kept together, because they "speak" different languages. Guernsey and Hereford sound like "moo" to me, but then I don't have cow ears.(Lest we forget the video of the dog and elephant working on world peace!!!) The anti argument to counter two as a herd, is that it doesn't provide the diverse structure of a large group. In other words, two people can't be happy, unless they are part of an assembly. Or a two person relationship pales in comparison to a harem.
So yes, something as obvious as the climate will be used if that is necessary. LOL
Wade
Wade you make an interesting point about bonding with an abusive keeper or trainer -- because indeed it happens. Classic example, the dog who loves the master who kicks it. The root of course is social hierarchy within herd/pack animals. Anyone who thinks that in the wild dominate animals aren't sometimes abusive has never done field work. In some bands/herds/packs dominant animals can be down right psychotic.
Wade, the phenomenon that Ben mentions happens with humans also, where it is known as Stockholm syndrome.
Mary Ann
Mary Ann,
Then there is the philosophical debate of "what is abuse?" They obviously need some form of control/dominance with fire extinguishers, vehicles, noise makers, yet disdain elephant hooks. Physical or mental, which is more abusive? A spritz with a spray bottle or a snatch with a chock chain? Abuse to me has always been defined as doing more then what is necessary to gain the desired result. Fire extinguishers, noise makers can be overused, so as to be ineffective, as can a hook, whip, spurs, etc. Is the person like Dianne Old Rossi, who's situation of moving/responding to music/tempo change abusive because she uses spurs and a bit, while the person who does a demo bridleless and does not need the precision of instant response is not? It is the same with a protected contact situation. The environment dictates a different kind of discipline. Mental/physical which is a worse discipline?
Wade, I think that either form of abuse, physical or mental, is equally bad. Also, what is merely discipline to one animal can constitute abuse to another, depending on the degree of the individual animal's sensitivity.
Mary Ann
Mary Ann,
And that is what makes sanctuary, zoo, circus, such a heated debate. Have you ever watched a group of gorillas, mothers, babies, immature, all in a group interacting, and then watch their immediate reaction when the dominant Silverback walks up. It there is respect, somethings it just takes a look. That respect was gotten by giving what was necessary, no more no less. It is not fear and it is not dismissal, it is respect. Depending on a persons knowledge of the psyche of the animal they are working with, will depend on whether they get that respect or if they get fear only, or dismissal only. That is the crux, Mary Ann. Does buying a dog, make you knowledgeable about that animals psyche? They are much different then wide screen tvs or cars. You can do what every you want with your new couch, but that isn't the case with an animal big or small. You can wait until next week to dust, but you can't wait until next week to water the dog.(If you have Blackfooted cat's, water isn't even an issue, LOL)
PAWS is admitting that there must be some type of dominance/control whether it be mental or physical in the use of fire extinguishers/noise makers, whether you are inside or outside. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, if it is done fairly and with a definite purpose. I don't know of what use "vehicles" would be, unless it was to drive into them, to separate, or to transport folks to the hospital.
How many hours has Mr. Barker spend, really spent learning that of which he speaks?
Wade
Post a Comment