Elephant experts around the world as well as animal advocates such as the Humane Society of the United States have written the Dallas Zoo and the Dallas City Council stating unequivocally that Jenny would be better off by far at TES; yet, the officials in Dallas still refuse to send Jenny to TES and continue to support the construction of the new inadequate habitat. 

What most people who insist on keeping elephants in confinement at zoos refuse to accept is that, no matter how much money you throw at these habitats, they will never be large enough to keep an elephant well and thriving. Elephants simply need more acreage than is available in a zoo. 

The Dallas Zoo was willing to send Jenny to Mexico and away from Dallas in the first place because Africam is a member of the AZA. The AZA sees elephants mainly as assets and sending an elephant to any place other than another AZA facility is to lose the value and use of the asset. 

Here, the activists in Dallas and Los Angeles part ways.  

In Dallas, the chances of closing the elephant exhibit are pretty much nonexistent, so the main thrust of the campaign there is to get Jenny transferred to the sanctuary while she still has a chance to heal and live out a healthier and more natural life in the years left to her.  Let Jenny go to the sanctuary and when the new exhibit is finished, upgrade a couple of elephants currently subsisting in even more dire circumstances — perhaps eking out a miserable existence chained to a post in some roadside zoo or circus. In this way, Jenny’s life is upgraded and another even more unfortunate elephant is also upgraded. 

In today’s hard times, one must question the economic sense of keeping Jenny at the Dallas Zoo, when she could retire at no cost to the city to the peace and safety of the sanctuary. It costs hundreds of thousands of dollars annually to just maintain a single elephant in a zoo. The City of Dallas plans to spend $30 million alone to build a controversial 3.75 elephant exhibit to house up to five elephants, which critics contend will still be woefully inadequate to meeting Jenny’s needs. And, all the while, thousands of people in Dallas are losing their jobs and homes, causing the tax base to inevitably shrink. Many want the City of Dallas to retire Jenny to TES and direct that money into much-needed civic services.  

Let Jenny go to the Sanctuary. Let her welfare come before the profits of a zoo. City and zoo officials in Dallas have shown only their own political self-interest and complete inurement to Jenny’s plight; yet, activists in Dallas are not giving up on retiring Jenny to a better life. 

Please continue to phone and e-mail the Dallas City Council and the Dallas Mayor, Tom Leppert. If you have friends and family in Dallas, urge them to bring Jenny up to the candidates running in opposition to incumbents in the May, 2009, City Council election. Please go to the website ConcernedCitizensforJenny.org and see the ways to help free Jenny.

BILLY THE ELEPHANT AT THE L.A. ZOO

The L.A. Zoo is another case. The L.A. Zoo’s history of keeping elephants is horrific. Forty-seven elephants have passed through the L.A. Zoo since it’s inception in 1920.  Records are somewhat sketchy for the years prior to 1975; however, since 1975, 14 elephants have died at the L.A. Zoo. Causes of death were from torture and abuse as well as from diseases caused by the confined spaces in which they are kept. (Go to the website helpbilly.org for the history of elephants at the zoo.)

In 2006, the L.A. City Council voted for an "expanded" elephant exhibit at a cost of $42 million. This expansion was to be 3.5 acres for up to five elephants. For the largest land mammal, kept in captivity, who travels in matriarchal herds with entire families, and walks up to 30 miles a day, 3.5 acres is not only insufficient, but detrimental to the point of being fatal. After examining the issue thoroughly, Councilman Tony Cardenas recently put forward a motion to close the elephant exhibit completely and to send the lone remaining elephant Billy to the PAWS Sanctuary in northern California.

The City Council will vote on the Cardenas motion on Wednesday, January 28.

Billy has subsisted more than 20 years on a quarter acre at this zoo, isolated from other elephants. I say "subsisted" because elephants do not "live" in zoos; they die in zoos, literally. Councilman Tony Cardenas has called zoos "elephant mortuaries." Fourteen elephants have died at our L.A. Zoo since 1975 — don’t let Billy be the fifteenth. Elephants live physically and mentally stressful lives in zoos because there simply is not enough room for these largest of land mammals. They develop agonizing foot and joint diseases and die prematurely in this kind of confinement. To remain healthy, elephants need hundreds of acres in which to roam. If the public knew the true facts, I don’t believe their compassion would allow them to endorse keeping elephants in these cruel conditions. Many zoos in major cities have closed their elephant exhibits after finally recognizing that elephants do not belong in the inadequate space of zoos. The Mayor and the City Council of Los Angeles have voted to spend $42 million dollars on a new, "expanded" elephant exhibit. This plan is completely illogical for all the reasons stated above; especially at a time when the city is under great financial pressure. This space can easily and successfully be turned over to the giraffes who would benefit greatly by this additional acreage.

Please go to the website helpbilly.org and write letters to the council members. Let them know your views and tell them that no matter how much money the mayor, the council, GLAZA or any other proponents throw at this exhibit, the result will be the same: The space will never be big enough for elephants, and more elephants will continue to suffer and die prematurely in the L.A. Zoo.