Graham v. San Antonio Zoo (Lucky the Elephant) Complaint 2015

Transcription

Case 5:15-cv-01054 Document 1 Filed 12/01/15 Page 1 of 24
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
JAMES GRAHAM,
ELIZABETH WYMER,
and NOAH B. KHOSHBIN,
Plaintiffs,
v.
SAN ANTONIO ZOOLOGICAL
SOCIETY,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No. ______________
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1.
Plaintiffs James Graham, Elizabeth Wymer, and Noah Khoshbin
(collectively hereafter, “Plaintiffs”) file this complaint against Defendant San
Antonio Zoological Society (the “San Antonio Zoo” or “Zoo”) pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544. Plaintiffs seek declaratory
and injunctive relief against the San Antonio Zoo for “taking”—i.e., harming and
harassing—an endangered Asian elephant named Lucky in violation of Section 9 of
the ESA, 16 U.S.C. § 1538(a)(1)(B), and for possessing an endangered species that
has been unlawfully taken in violation of Section 9 of the statute, 16 U.S.C. §
1538(a)(1)(D). The San Antonio Zoo engages in these unlawful activities by keeping
Lucky: (a) without the companionship of any other Asian elephants; (b) in a small
enclosure; (c) with virtually no shelter from the sun; and (d) on a hard, unnatural,
species-inappropriate substrate. Each of these conditions—which have existed for
-1-
years at the Zoo—violates the ESA by continuing to cause Lucky great physical and
psychological harm and significantly impairing Lucky’s ability to engage in normal
elephant behaviors.
2.
Plaintiffs provided the required statutory notice to the Zoo that the
conditions under which Lucky is maintained violate the ESA. More than 60 days
has passed since that notice was served on the Zoo, and the Zoo has failed to correct
its violations of the ESA. Although not required to do so, Plaintiffs also provided the
Zoo with one possible solution to this issue at the very outset, advising the Zoo that
The Elephant Sanctuary, a world-renowned elephant sanctuary in Tennessee
accredited by the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries (“GFAS”) was open to
accepting Lucky into its group of Asian elephants, and that the Animal Legal
Defense Fund (“ALDF”) would pay for the cost of transporting Lucky to The
Elephant Sanctuary.1 Transporting Lucky to The Elephant Sanctuary or another
reputable sanctuary would further the purpose of the ESA by allowing her to live out
the remainder of her life in a setting more akin to her native habitat. Elephant
sanctuaries have large areas of hills and grasslands in which Lucky can roam, with
access to plenty of water and shade, and, perhaps most importantly, with the
companionship of other Asian elephants with whom she could play and socialize. In
The Elephant Sanctuary requires elephants to meet certain health standards for transport and
transition. Testing positive for tuberculosis does not necessarily preclude an elephant from
acceptance, as The Elephant Sanctuary maintains a habitat for tuberculosis-positive elephants.
Plaintiffs have also been in communication with the Performing Animal Welfare Society (“PAWS”), a
second reputable, GFAS-accredited sanctuary in the United States, with a specialized separate
treatment area for tuberculosis-positive elephants. PAWS may have the ability and capacity to accept
Lucky even if she fails to meet the health standards set for transport and transition to The Elephant
Sanctuary.
1
-2-
support of the notice, Plaintiffs attached a sworn declaration from Scott Blais, an
elephant expert, in which Blais explains that living in a GFAS-accredited sanctuary
has the potential to improve Lucky’s health and meet her companionship needs.
Plaintiffs respectfully show the Court the following:
Parties
3.
As outlined in detail below, Plaintiffs are private individuals each with
interest in protecting animals and observing them in humane conditions. All
Plaintiffs have been injured by and are adversely affected by the San Antonio Zoo’s
harm and harassment of Lucky. Plaintiffs have visited the Zoo and developed
aesthetic, emotional, spiritual, and cultural connections with Lucky. The Zoo’s
violations of the ESA with regard to Lucky have caused Lucky pain and have caused
Plaintiffs to experience suffering in their own right. Said injuries will be redressed
by the relief sought.
4.
Plaintiff James Graham is a Texas citizen residing in San Antonio.
5.
Mr. Graham has been a resident of San Antonio for over 64 years. In
the past, he visited the San Antonio Zoo many times and took his children there
when they were young to enjoy visiting the animals and to teach his children about
wildlife. During these visits, he would go out of his way to visit the Asian elephant
Lucky, but has had a difficult time doing so because of the conditions under which
she is maintained. Although he enjoyed visiting Lucky and formed a special
connection with her, he is no longer able to enjoy visiting her—or to take his
grandchild to visit her—because Lucky is kept in isolation in a small enclosure, on a
-3-
hard, unnatural, species-inappropriate substrate, without adequate shelter from the
hot San Antonio sun. The last time Mr. Graham visited Lucky, he was extremely
disturbed to see her maintained in these conditions. She looked overweight and
listless, and exhibited abnormal stereotypic behaviors, which are meaningless,
repetitive movements such as bobbing her head and swaying back and forth.
6.
Seeing Lucky this way caused Mr. Graham great aesthetic harm. Mr.
Graham suffers this harm not only when seeing or thinking of Lucky, but also when
hearing about the treatment of other elephants and animals, as this reminds him of
the conditions under which the Zoo maintains Lucky. Because of his connection with
Lucky, Mr. Graham would very much like to visit her again and to take his
grandchild to meet her. Therefore, he is forced to make the decision either to visit
her and again suffer aesthetic harm and expose his grandchild to such harm, or to
avoid this harm and refrain from visiting Lucky. Having to make this choice causes
Mr. Graham additional aesthetic, emotional, and recreational injuries.
7.
These injuries are directly caused by the Zoo and the conditions under
which it maintains Lucky.
8.
Mr. Graham’s injuries would be redressed if the Zoo either improved
Lucky’s conditions by providing her with a larger enclosure, access to adequate
shelter from the sun, an appropriate and more natural substrate, and, most
important, additional Asian elephants with whom she could socialize, or allowed
Lucky to be relocated to a place that could provide her with these much needed
ameliorative conditions. If Mr. Graham prevails in this lawsuit and Lucky is
-4-
provided better, more humane, living conditions compliant with the ESA, including
other Asian elephants as companions, Mr. Graham will visit or observe Lucky often
in the future either at the Zoo or at another facility that could host Lucky in
conditions that comply with the ESA.2
9.
Plaintiff Elizabeth Wymer is a Texas citizen residing in San Antonio.
10.
Ms. Wymer is a long-time resident of San Antonio. She has visited the
San Antonio Zoo many times throughout her life, both as a child and as an adult.
She has visited Lucky numerous times and formed a special emotional connection
with her. However, it is extremely difficult for Ms. Wymer to visit Lucky at the Zoo
because of the conditions in which Lucky is kept—a small enclosure with no other
Asian elephants for companionship, inadequate respite from the sun, and a hard,
unnatural, species-inappropriate surface upon which she must live.
11.
Ms. Wymer now finds herself having to make the choice to either visit
Lucky again and subject herself to aesthetic and emotional injury from seeing Lucky
maintained in conditions that harm Lucky and interfere with Lucky’s natural
behavioral patterns, or to refrain from visiting this elephant with whom she has a
The Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee and PAWS in San Andreas, California, are two such options.
Although The Elephant Sanctuary is not generally open to the public, it maintains a web cam that
would allow Plaintiffs to view Lucky living in her natural habitat in the sanctuary. The “Elecam” is a
non-invasive way to view elephants going about their day, grazing, foraging, swimming, and napping,
and is a free online feature available seven days a week, year-round. The Elecam would provide
Plaintiffs, and the public in general, the opportunity to observe Lucky socializing with Asian
elephants in an expansive habitat at The Elephant Sanctuary. The Elephant Sanctuary also allows
monthly volunteering and has a Welcome Center where visitors can learn about the elephants and
watch streaming video of the elephants in the habitat. Plaintiffs would also seek such visitation
opportunities if Lucky were relocated to The Elephant Sanctuary. The only other elephant sanctuary
in the United States, PAWS, may also be able to accommodate Lucky and has several open house
events each year open to visitors, and provides online virtual tours and web cams.
2
-5-
special connection. Ms. Wymer would also like to take her young son to see Lucky
but does not want to upset him by exposing him to such an unhappy elephant, who
lives alone and engages in abnormal, stereotypic behavioral patterns, including
bobbing her head and swaying back and forth.
12.
Having to make these choices causes Ms. Wymer aesthetic, emotional,
and recreational injuries.
13.
All of these injuries are caused by the Zoo and the ways in which it
maintains Lucky. If the Zoo would provide Lucky with other Asian elephants as
companions, more space, adequate shelter from the sun, and a species-appropriate
substrate, Ms. Wymer would be able to enjoy visiting or observing Lucky again.
14.
If Ms. Wymer prevails in this action, her injuries would be redressed
because the Zoo would have to improve the conditions under which Lucky is
maintained or it would have to relocate Lucky to an alternative facility such as an
accredited sanctuary that would provide her with more humane conditions that do
not “take” her in violation of the ESA.
15.
Plaintiff Noah Khoshbin is a Texas citizen residing in San Antonio.
16.
Mr. Khoshbin has lived in San Antonio for several years. He has been
to the Zoo a number of times, including before he became a San Antonio resident.
He has many times visited Lucky specifically, and has established a particular
connection with her. However, because of the way in which Lucky is maintained at
the Zoo—in a small enclosure, with no other Asian elephants, without adequate
shelter from the sun, and without a more natural, species-appropriate substrate—
-6-
Mr. Khoshbin no longer visits Lucky or the Zoo. Knowing how Lucky is maintained
requires Mr. Khoshbin to make the choice between visiting her and exposing himself
to aesthetic and emotional harm from seeing her kept in inhumane conditions that
violate the ESA, or refraining from visiting Lucky at all. Mr. Khoshbin would also
like to take his son to see Lucky but does not want to upset him by showing him an
elephant held alone in a small and inadequate enclosure. This causes Mr. Khoshbin
additional emotional and recreational injuries.
17.
These aesthetic, emotional, and recreational injuries are caused by the
conditions under which the Zoo maintains Lucky.
18.
If Mr. Khoshbin prevails in this action, the Zoo will have to improve the
conditions under which Lucky is maintained or send her to another location where
she will receive more humane treatment that is consistent with the ESA. Mr.
Khoshbin would make every effort to visit or observe Lucky again, and would very
much relish seeing her in humane conditions, especially those in which she can enjoy
the companionship of other Asian elephants. Hence, his aesthetic, emotional, and
recreational injuries would be redressed.
19.
Defendant San Antonio Zoological Society is a 501(c)(3) organization
formed under the laws of the State of Texas with its principal place of business
located at 3903 N. St. Mary’s Street, San Antonio, Texas 78212. On information and
belief, the San Antonio Zoological Society, as owner and operator of the San Antonio
Zoological Gardens and Aquarium, is responsible for the unlawful acts described
herein.
-7-
Jurisdiction and Venue
20.
This Court has jurisdiction over this case pursuant to 16 U.S.C. §
1540(g) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
21.
Venue in this Court is proper pursuant to 16 U.S.C. § 1540(g)(3)(A)
because the violations occurred and continue to occur in this District. Further,
venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because a substantial part of the events or
omissions giving rise to the claims occurred within this District and Division, and all
parties reside in this District and Division.
Factual Background
22.
Asian elephants, including Lucky, have been listed as endangered
under the ESA since 1976. 50 C.F.R. § 17.11.
23.
Asian elephants in the wild can live to be 70 years old or older.
24.
In the wild, Asian elephants walk many miles each day on a variety of
terrains and substrates; they forage for food, swim in water, dust their bodies with
dirt, seek shelter from the sun, and interact with other Asian elephants. Asian
elephants living in the wild are in motion approximately 20 out of 24 hours each day,
actively engaging in foraging, exploring, and socializing.
25.
Elephants are large-brained, sentient beings with high cognitive
abilities and emotional aptitude. They are autonomous, empathetic, altruistic, and
cooperative. They are capable of enjoying complex social interactions with other
elephants. They can also experience stress and anxiety, have the ability to suffer
greatly, and are known to mourn the loss of other elephants, particularly family
-8-
members.
26.
In the wild, Asian elephants form strong bonds with their family units.
Female elephants remain with their natal herd for life.
27.
Being held in captivity does not change the fundamental social nature
of Asian elephants. They need other compatible elephants to be healthy, to engage
in normal behavioral patterns, and to promote their psychological well-being.
28.
Asian elephants held in captivity are able to bond with and become a
social unit with other Asian elephants to whom they are not biologically related.
29.
Lucky was taken from her family in the wild in Thailand when she was
a baby and spent the first two years of her captivity at the Brookfield Zoo in Illinois.
30.
Lucky arrived at the San Antonio Zoo in 1962 and has spent her entire
life there on display to the public. She is approximately 55 years old.
31.
The Zoo previously housed Lucky with another Asian elephant named
Ginny, with whom Lucky bonded. Additionally, an African elephant named Alport
was also housed with Lucky. Alport and Lucky did not bond, primarily because
Asian and African elephants are very distinct species that would never encounter
one another in the wild and do not communicate or bond easily in captivity.
32.
Ginny died in 2004, leaving Lucky without any Asian elephant
companionship.
33.
Alport then died in 2007, leaving Lucky entirely alone for a period of
two and a half years. The Zoo then housed Lucky with another Asian elephant, Boo,
who for various reasons behaved aggressively toward Lucky. The Zoo euthanized
-9-
Boo, who was ill, in March of 2013.
34.
Since Boo’s death, Lucky has once again lived entirely alone in her
enclosure at the Zoo.
35.
In addition to allowing Lucky to live alone, without the necessary
companionship, the Zoo also maintains her in an inadequate enclosure. The
enclosure in which Lucky lives is much too small, offers nearly no shade from the
sun, does not provide a pool that is deep enough for her to immerse herself, and is
made of an unnaturally hard and species-inappropriate substrate. By maintaining
Lucky in these conditions, the Zoo harms and harasses Lucky, as described in
further detail below.
36.
On April 9, 2015, pursuant to 16 U.S.C. § 1540(g), Plaintiffs sent a
letter providing notice to the Zoo of its various violations of the ESA and sent copies
of that notice letter to both the Secretary of the Interior and the Director of the Fish
and Wildlife Service. A true and accurate copy of that Notice Letter, with its
attachments, is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The 60-day notice period has expired
without the Zoo correcting its violations of the ESA. Thus, this action is properly
brought.
37.
Attached to the notice letter was a sworn declaration from elephant
expert Scott Blais, the founder and Chief Executive Officer of Global Sanctuary for
Elephants, a U.S.-based nonprofit organization dedicated to the development of
expansive natural habitat sanctuaries for captive elephants worldwide. The
Declaration of Scott D. Blais is attached to the Notice Letter and will be referred to
- 10 -
herein as the “Blais Decl.” Mr. Blais was the co-founder and head caretaker of
elephants at The Elephant Sanctuary for many years. See Blais Decl. at ¶ 6.
38.
The conditions in which Lucky is presently maintained at the Zoo are
harming her in various ways and significantly impairing her ability to engage in
normal elephant behaviors. As Mr. Blais concluded, he is “convinced that Lucky’s
life at the San Antonio [Z]oo has caused great psychological and emotional
impairment as well as physical damage and compromise.” Id. at ¶ 31.
39.
Mr. Blais has also determined, based on his many years of experience in
transporting and rehabilitating elephants who previously lived in zoos or circuses,
that Lucky could be successfully transported and that she would also have no trouble
acclimating to life at an accredited sanctuary, such as The Elephant Sanctuary. See
id. at ¶¶ 18-22, 25, 30-32.
40.
Put simply, Lucky “is fit to travel, her social responses indicate a strong
desire for elephant companionship, and her physical limitations are not yet beyond
recovery.” Id. at ¶ 32. It is therefore critical for Lucky’s physical and mental health
and wellbeing that she is “immediate[ly] transfer[red] to a facility specifically
designed to meet the inherent needs of Asian elephants,” so that she can “liv[e] in an
environment that is as close to nature as captive life allows.” Id.
41.
There are only two GFAS-accredited elephant sanctuaries in the United
States, both of which are capable of providing Lucky a much better home. They
include hundreds of acres of green grass, brown grass, dirt, and other features of a
naturalistic habitat upon which Lucky could walk, large natural ponds in which she
- 11 -
could immerse herself, and other Asian elephants as companions. The notice letter
sent to the Zoo informed the Zoo that the ALDF “has agreed to pay the cost of
relocating Lucky” to one of those sanctuaries.
Statutory and Regulatory Framework
42.
In enacting the ESA, Congress declared that species in danger of
extinction are of “esthetic, ecological, educational, historical, recreational, and
scientific value to the Nation and its people.” 16 U.S.C. § 1531(a)(3). Accordingly,
the purpose of the Act is to provide for the conservation of such endangered species.
Id. § 1531(b).
43.
An “endangered species” is “any species which is in danger of
extinction.” Id. § 1532(6).
44.
Section 9 of the ESA prohibits the “taking” of any endangered species,
Id. § 1538(a)(1)(B), and also makes it unlawful “to possess” any endangered species
that has been unlawfully “taken.” Id. § 1538(a)(1)(D).
45.
The term “take” is broadly defined by the Act as “to harass, harm,
pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in
any such conduct.” Id. § 1532(19). The term “harm” includes any act that “kills or
injures” an endangered animal. 50 C.F.R. § 17.3. Subject to certain limited
exceptions for captive animals, the term “harass” includes an “intentional or
negligent act or omission which creates the likelihood of injury [to an endangered
animal] by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal
behavioral patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or
- 12 -
sheltering.” Id.
46.
Section 10 of the ESA authorizes the federal Fish and Wildlife Service
to issue a permit for any act that is otherwise prohibited by Section 9, but only if
such act is “for scientific purposes or to enhance the propagation or survival of the
affected species.” 16 U.S.C. § 1539(a)(1)(A). On information and belief, the San
Antonio Zoo does not currently have a permit under Section 10 of the ESA to take or
possess Lucky in the ways described herein.
Plaintiffs Are Entitled to Injunctive Relief
47.
Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the foregoing
paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
48.
Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable injury if the Zoo does not agree to
transport Lucky to The Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee, or at a minimum, remedy
its treatment of Lucky. Plaintiffs do suffer, and will continue to suffer, actual
injuries as Lucky’s current enclosure causes substantial aesthetic, emotional, and
recreational harm to Plaintiffs, and physical, psychological, and emotional harm to
Lucky. This harm is irreparable because it cannot be measured, as Plaintiffs cannot
be adequately compensated for the losses they and Lucky are currently suffering.
49.
There is no adequate remedy at law. The legal remedy is merely
illusory in that simply declaring that the Zoo’s treatment of Lucky violates Section 9
of the ESA does not, in and of itself, remedy the injuries Plaintiffs and Lucky have
suffered and continue to suffer.
50.
There is a substantial likelihood that Plaintiffs will succeed on the
- 13 -
merits of this case. For the numerous reasons discussed below, the Zoo’s treatment
of Lucky violates Section 9 of the ESA and must be prohibited through a declaratory
judgment and injunctive relief.
51.
The injuries Plaintiffs face significantly outweigh any injury that the
Zoo may sustain as a result of the injunctive relief. Specifically, the aesthetic,
emotional, and recreational harm to Plaintiffs and the physical, psychological, and
emotional harm to Lucky overshadow the Zoo’s self-interest in keeping Lucky at the
San Antonio Zoo in her small enclosure, with no other Asian elephants, with
virtually no shelter from the sun, and on a hard, unnatural, species-inappropriate
substrate. The beneficial effect of injunctive relief on nonparties, i.e., the Zoo’s other
visitors, will likewise substantially outweigh any injury to the Zoo. As is readilyapparent in the media, there is a public outcry to “Free Lucky.”
52.
The injunctive relief Plaintiffs seek will not adversely affect public
policy or the public interest. Rather, enjoining the Zoo from continuing to violate the
ESA with respect to its possession and treatment of Lucky will cause a desirable
result. It is unassailable that enjoining the Zoo from its behavior will positively
affect public policy and public interest in protecting endangered animals and
promoting the “esthetic, ecological, educational, historical, recreational, and
scientific value” that the ESA acknowledges such animals provide to the American
people.
- 14 -
COUNT I
The Zoo is Harming and Harassing Lucky in Violation of the ESA by
Keeping Her Alone Without Any Asian Elephant Companions
53.
54.
The San Antonio Zoo previously housed Lucky with another Asian
elephant named Ginny.
55.
Although not biologically related, Lucky and Ginny clearly bonded with
each other. They played, vocalized, and otherwise socialized with each other in very
positive ways. Ginny was the last elephant with whom Lucky bonded socially and
emotionally.
56.
Lucky was also housed with an African elephant named Alport, with
whom she did not bond for various reasons; namely, Asian and African elephants are
very distinct species that would never encounter one another in the wild and do not
communicate or bond easily in captivity.
57.
Ginny died in 2004, leaving Lucky without any Asian elephant
companionship.
58.
Alport then died in 2007, leaving Lucky entirely alone for a period of
two and a half years. Although the Zoo eventually placed another Asian elephant,
Boo, with Lucky, Boo was an older elephant, had been used in a circus, suffered from
various illnesses, and, because the Zoo’s elephant enclosure is too small, behaved
aggressively toward Lucky. The Zoo euthanized Boo, who was ill, in March of 2013.
- 15 -
59.
Since Boo’s death, Lucky has once again lived entirely alone in her
enclosure at the Zoo.
60.
The Association of Zoos and Aquariums (“AZA”) issues standards that
apply to all zoos wishing to be accredited by the AZA. Those standards provide that
“[e]ach zoo holding elephants must hold a minimum of three females . . . (or the
space to hold three females), two males or three elephants of mixed gender.” AZA
Standard 2.2.1.1.
61.
Although the AZA has provided the San Antonio Zoo a variance from
this requirement, that variance expires in September of 2016. The AZA’s variance
has no legal effect on the requirements of the ESA. Moreover, the Zoo may also lose
its AZA accreditation next September unless it expands its current space and
acquires at least two more Asian elephants.
62.
The Zoo has announced to the public that it intends to keep Lucky
without any Asian elephant companion until she dies. The Zoo’s leadership has
stated that, as soon as Lucky dies, the Zoo will convert its elephant exhibit into one
that will house only African elephants in an effort to fulfill its ambitions of
implementing its Africa Live! “safari experience.” Upon information and belief, the
Zoo has a vested financial motivation for realizing this new exhibit as soon as
possible as it is expected to boost attendance and revenue for the Zoo.
63.
Although Lucky currently suffers from arthritis and other health issues
likely as a direct result of the inadequate conditions in which she is maintained at
the Zoo, she has the potential to live many more years in pain and suffering at the
- 16 -
Zoo. Given the inadequate conditions at the Zoo, Lucky’s pain and suffering will
only increase with time. However, if Lucky is moved to a GFAS-accredited
sanctuary or other facility with other Asian elephants, Lucky would be provided an
expansive natural habitat, adequate shelter from the sun, veterinary care, and the
companionship of other elephants to help ensure her health and wellbeing for the
rest of her life.
64.
By keeping Lucky alone, without the requisite companionship from
other Asian elephants, the Zoo is harming and harassing Lucky in violation of the
ESA. Keeping her in isolation eliminates her opportunities to engage in natural
group behavior. Without the opportunity to engage in this natural group behavior,
Lucky’s incentive to move is significantly restricted. This contributes to painful
arthritis, which is a leading cause of premature death for elephants in captivity.
Depriving her of the company of other elephants also causes her distress and anxiety
and significantly disrupts and impairs her normal and essential behavioral patterns.
65.
As demonstrated by the AZA’s standard, keeping an Asian elephant
with a total absence of companionship from other Asian elephants is not a generally
accepted husbandry practice within the meaning of the ESA definition of “harass” as
it applies to captive wildlife. 50 C.F.R. § 17.3.
66.
As a result of being kept in isolation from other Asian elephants, Lucky
exhibits stereotypic behavior: she engages in repetitive head-bobbing and swaying of
her body back and forth (also known as “weaving”). This indicates poor welfare,
physically manifests stress, discomfort, and severe emotional injury caused by the
- 17 -
conditions in which Lucky is forced to live, and demonstrates that she is being both
harmed and harassed by those conditions.
COUNT II
Keeping Her in a Small Enclosure Which Fails to Meet AZA Standards
67.
68.
On information and belief, the San Antonio Zoo’s elephant enclosure is
not large enough to hold three Asian elephants, as required by AZA standards.
According to the AZA standards, the enclosure must be at least 16,200 square feet in
size.
69.
Instead, the elephant enclosure at the San Antonio Zoo is
approximately 14,520 square feet in size, a significant disparity when considering
Lucky’s size and the space she would likely travel in the wild.
70.
As a result of being maintained in an enclosure that is much too small,
Lucky’s natural movements have been significantly restricted and she has developed
arthritis and joint degeneration, a leading cause of premature death for elephants in
captivity. These issues have contributed to causing her to develop an abnormal gait
that prohibits her from engaging in a full range of motion.
71.
Because the Zoo fails to meet the AZA size requirements for Asian
elephant enclosures, the Zoo is harming and harassing Lucky in violation of the
ESA. The Zoo continues to expose her to conditions that cause her physical and
psychological injuries and that significantly interfere with her ability to engage in
- 18 -
normal behavioral patterns.
72.
As demonstrated by the AZA’s standard, keeping an Asian elephant in
an enclosure that is too small is not a generally accepted husbandry practice within
the meaning of the ESA definition of “harass” as applied to captive wildlife. 50
C.F.R. § 17.3.
73.
As a result of being kept in this small enclosure, Lucky exhibits
stereotypic behavior: she engages in repetitive swaying and head-bobbing. This
indicates poor welfare, physically manifests stress, physical and psychological
discomfort, and severe emotional injury caused by the conditions in which Lucky is
forced to live, and demonstrates that she is being both harmed and harassed by said
conditions.
COUNT III
Depriving Her of Adequate Shelter from the Sun
74.
75.
Although the San Antonio Zoo is exposed to intense, year-round
sunlight, there are few trees in Lucky’s enclosure under which she can seek refuge.
Upon information and belief, there are certain parts of the day in which Lucky
receives no shade. The shallow pool in her enclosure is not deep enough to allow
Lucky to immerse herself to escape exposure to the sun and cool her entire body.
76.
Standards promulgated under the Animal Welfare Act require that
“[w]hen sunlight is likely to cause overheating or discomfort of the animals,
- 19 -
sufficient shade . . . shall be provided to allow the animals kept outdoors to protect
themselves from direct sunlight.” 9 C.F.R. § 3.127(a).
77.
Denying Lucky adequate shelter from the sun both harms and harasses
Lucky within the meaning of the ESA definition of “take.” The Zoo’s lack of
compliance with the Animal Welfare Act standards for protection from sunlight
significantly disrupts Lucky’s ability to engage in normal elephant behaviors,
including sheltering herself, and exposes her to constant direct sunlight injurious to
her overall health.
78.
As a result of being deprived of adequate shelter, Lucky exhibits
stereotypic behavior, engaging in repetitive head-bobbing and swaying of her body
back and forth. This indicates poor welfare, physically manifests stress, physical
and psychological discomfort, and severe emotional injury caused by the conditions
in which Lucky is forced to live, and demonstrates that she is being both harmed and
harassed by these substandard conditions.
COUNT IV
Forcing Her to Live on a Hard, Unnatural, Species-Inappropriate Substrate
79.
80.
The enclosure in which Lucky lives is made of an unnaturally hard and
unyielding substrate. The substrate is concussive and not appropriate for Asian
elephants.
81.
Lucky’s enclosure fails to provide her with access to the variety of
- 20 -
natural terrains she would experience in the wild or at a sanctuary. This further
suppresses her instincts to move around. Therefore, the hard, unnatural, speciesinappropriate substrate harms and harasses Lucky in violation of the ESA by likely
contributing to her painful arthritis, calcification in her joints, and other leg, foot,
and joint diseases that all greatly inhibit Lucky’s ability to engage in natural
elephant behaviors.
82.
As a result of being kept on a hard substrate, Lucky exhibits stereotypic
behavior, engaging in repetitive head-bobbing and swaying. This indicates poor
welfare, physically manifests stress, physical and psychological discomfort, and
severe emotional injury caused by the conditions in which Lucky is forced to live, and
demonstrates that she is being both harmed and harassed by those conditions.
COUNT V
Declaratory Judgment
83.
84.
Plaintiffs bring this suit for declaratory relief pursuant to the
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202. Declaratory relief is
available because this is a civil case of actual controversy for which this Court can
declare rights and legal relations of the interested parties.
85.
An actual controversy exists between Plaintiffs and the Zoo regarding
whether the Zoo’s treatment of Lucky violates Section 9 of the Endangered Species
Act.
86.
Plaintiffs seek a declaration that the San Antonio Zoo’s current
- 21 -
treatment of Lucky violates Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act.
Conditions Precedent
87.
All conditions precedent to Plaintiffs’ claims for relief have been
performed or have occurred.
Demand for Jury Trial
88.
Plaintiffs, pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
request a trial by jury of any issues so triable.
Prayer for Relief
The conditions under which the San Antonio Zoo maintains Lucky, including:
(a) keeping her alone without the companionship of other Asian elephants; (b)
restricting her to a small enclosure; (c) failing to provide her with adequate shelter
from the sun; and (d) requiring her to live on a hard, unnatural, speciesinappropriate substrate, take Lucky in violation of Section 9 of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. §
1538(a)(1)(B). These unlawful activities injure Plaintiffs as described in paragraphs
3-18.
For the same reasons, the San Antonio Zoo is currently in possession of an
endangered Asian elephant who has been unlawfully taken, in violation of Section 9
of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. § 1538(a)(1)(D). These unlawful activities also injure Plaintiffs
as described in paragraphs 3-18.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that this Court enter a judgment:
1.
Declaring that the San Antonio Zoo’s treatment of Lucky violates
Section 9 of the ESA;
- 22 -
2.
Enjoining the San Antonio Zoo from continuing to violate the ESA with
respect to its treatment of Lucky;
3.
Enjoining the San Antonio Zoo from continuing to possess Lucky in
violation of the ESA;
4.
Awarding Plaintiffs their reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs in this
action pursuant to 16 U.S.C. § 1540; and
5.
Granting Plaintiffs such other and further relief as may be just and
proper.
Date: December 1, 2015
Respectfully submitted,
DENTONS US LLP
/s/ Matthew T. Nickel____________________
Matthew T. Nickel
Texas Bar No. 24056042
Blake J. Brownshadel
Spencer D. Hamilton
Marina Stefanova
2000 McKinney Avenue, Suite 1900
Dallas, Texas 75201
Phone: (214) 259-0900
Fax: (214) 259-0910
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Anthony T. Eliseuson
(Pro Hac Vice Application Forthcoming)
233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 5900
Chicago, Illinois 60606
- 23 -
Phone: (312) 876-8000
Fax: (312) 876-7934
[email protected]
- and Carney Anne Nasser
Jeffrey Pierce
(Pro Hac Vice Application Forthcoming)
Animal Legal Defense Fund
170 East Cotati Avenue
Cotati, California 94931
Phone: (707) 795-2533
Fax:
(707) 795-7280
[email protected]
[email protected]
- and Melissa Lesniak
4839 San Cristobal
San Antonio, Texas 78251
Phone: (210) 706-0592
Fax: (210) 569-6369
[email protected]
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
- 24 -
Case 5:15-cv-01054 Document 1-1 Filed 12/01/15 Page 1 of 60
EXHIBIT A
Melissa Lesniak, Esq.
Attorney & Counselor at Law
4839 San Cristobal
Phone: 210-706-0592
Fax: 210-569-6369
Email: [email protected]
VIA U.S. CERTIFIED MAIL
Tim Morrow, Director
San Antonio Zoological Gardens & Aquarium
3903 N. St. Mary's Street
San Antonio, Texas, 78212-3199
Steve McCusker, Resident Agent for Service
San Antonio Zoological Gardens & Aquarium
3903 N. St. Mary's Street
San Antonio Zoological Society Executive Board:
On Information and Belief:
Chris Bathie, President
607 Ivy Ln.
San Antonio, Texas 78209-2826
Norborne P. Cole, Jr., 1st Vice-President
605 Terrell Rd.
Terrell Hills, Texas 78209-6130
Frank Z. Ruttenburg, 2nd Vice-President
6200 Utsa Blvd Apt. 2
William Freed, Treasurer
1920 Nacogdoches Rd
Todd Brockwell
155 Hillview Dr.
San Antoni0o, Texas 78209-2119
Becky Canavan
6338 N. New Braunfels Ave
Elizabeth Feldman
19115 W. Birdsong
Brandon Grossman
200 Patterson Ave
Richard Kleberg III
PO Box 17777
Robert Miggins
309 E. Hermosa Dr.
Mike Molak
131 W. Agarita Ave
Jim Satel
418 Harrison Ave
Caroline Walker
700 E. Hildebrand Ave Ste. 100
San Antonio, Texas78212-2569
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Hon. Sally Jewell, Secretary
U.S. Department of the Interior
1849 C Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20240
Email: [email protected]; [email protected]
Daniel M. Ashe, Director
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
1849 C Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20240
2
April 9, 2015
Re: NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE SUIT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
Dear Director Morrow, Mr. McCusker, President Bathie, Vice President Cole, Vice
President Ruttenberg, Treasurer Freed, Mr. Brockwell, Ms. Canavan, Ms. Feldman,
Mr. Grossman, Mr. Kleberg, Mr. Miggins, Mr. Molak, Mr. Satel, Ms. Walker,
Secretary Jewell, and Director Ashe:
This letter and the accompanying declaration of Scott D. Blais are provided
pursuant to Section 11(g) of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C.
§1540(g), on behalf of Jim Graham, Jacqueline Fonseca, Noah B. Khoshbin, and
Elizabeth Wymer (“Complainants”), on behalf of Lucky the Asian elephant, by and
through their attorneys Melissa Lesniak, Esq., and the Animal Legal Defense Fund
(“ALDF”). Complainants invite the San Antonio Zoo to retire Lucky to sanctuary, at
no cost to the Zoo, but are prepared to sue for the violations described herein and in
the accompanying declaration if the Zoo fails to remedy and abate those violations
within sixty days.
I.
Statutory and regulatory requirements of the Endangered Species
Act
The ESA is “the most comprehensive legislation for the preservation of
endangered species ever enacted by any nation.” 1 Finding that fish, wildlife and
plants “have been rendered extinct as a consequence of economic growth and
development untempered by adequate concern and conservation,” 16 U.S.C. § 1531,
Congress “afforded endangered species ‘the highest of priorities.’” 2
Persons violating the ESA risk facing civil and criminal penalties. 3 Private
parties may bring enforcement actions in court so long as they provide adequate
notice of sixty days to both the violator and the Secretary of the Interior. 4
A. Section 9 “Take” Provision Defined
ESA Section 9 prohibits the “take” of an endangered species by any person,
and makes it unlawful for any person to “possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport or
ship, by any means whatsoever, any such species” so taken. 5 Congress defined the
term “take” broadly to mean “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, wound, kill, trap,
Tenn. Valley Auth. v. Hill, 437 U.S. 153, 180 (1978).
Defenders of Wildlife v. Adm’r, EPA, 882 F.2d 1294, 1300 (8th Cir. 1989).
3 See 16 U.S.C. § 1540(a)-(b).
4 Id. § 1540(g).
5 Id. § 1538(a).
1
2
3
capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. 6 The Supreme
Court of the United States upheld the term “take” as defined in the ESA “to include
every conceivable way in which a person can ‘take’ or attempt to ‘take’ any fish or
wildlife.” 7
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“FWS”), which oversees
enforcement of the ESA, further defined “harass,” in regulations it promulgated
pursuant to the ESA, to include acts that “create the likelihood of injury to wildlife
by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavioral
patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding or sheltering.” 8
FWS likewise further defined “harm” to mean “an act which actually kills or injures
wildlife.” 9
B. Section 9 “Take” Provision applies to both wild and captive
species
Section 9’s take prohibitions apply equally to all members of listed species
whether living in captivity or in the wild. The term “fish or wildlife,” which are
protected by the prohibition of “take” of listed “fish or wildlife,” is defined as “any
member of the animal kingdom.” 10 FWS has repeatedly explained that “the Act
applies to both wild and captive populations of a species”. 11 Indeed, courts have
come to the same conclusion regarding the unlawfulness of assigning captive
wildlife a legal status different from that assigned to non-captive wildlife. 12
Id. § 1532(19).
Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Cmtys. for a Greater Or., 515 U.S. 687, 704 (1995).
8 50 C.F.R. § 17.3 (2014).
9 50 C.F.R. § 17.3 (2014).
10 16 U.S.C. § 1532(8).
11 44 Fed. Reg. 30044 (May 23, 1979), see also 63 Fed. Reg. 48634, 48636 (Sept. 11, 1998) (explaining
that “take” was defined by Congress to apply to endangered or threatened wildlife “whether wild or
captive” and the “statutory term cannot be changed administratively”); 79 Fed. Reg. 4313, 4317 (Jan.
27, 2014) (proposed rule to list the captive orca Lolita as a member of the Endangered Southern
Resident Killer Whale Distinct Population Segment) (“The ESA does not support the exclusion of
captive members from a listing based solely on their status as captive. . . . Section 9(a)(1)(A)-(G) of
the ESA applies to endangered species regardless of their captive status.”); id. (“Further, based upon
the purposes of the ESA and its legislative history, the USFWS has recently concluded that the ESA
does not allow captive animals to be assigned different legal status from their wild counterparts on
the basis of their captive status.”). (quoting Tenn. Valley Auth., 437 U.S. at 174); 80 Fed. Reg. 7380,
7388 (Feb. 10, 2015) (final rule listing Lolita as a member of the Endangered Southern Resident
Killer Whale Distinct Population Segment) (“Congress recognized the value of captive holding and
propagation of listed species held in captivity but intended that such specimens would be protected
under the ESA, with these activities generally regulated by permit.”).
12 See, e.g., Safari Club Int’l v. Jewell, 960 F. Supp. 2d 17 (D.D.C. 2013) (upholding FWS listing of
captive-bred antelope as endangered in the face of challenge by commercial hunting outfits).
6
7
4
II.
Factual Background – Affected Species
FWS has listed Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) as an endangered species
since 1976. 13 The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (“CITES”) lists Asian elephants in Appendix 1, i.e. the most
endangered of all CITES-listed animals and plants. 14
Asian elephants inhabit grasslands, semi-evergreen forest, most deciduous
forest, dry thorn forest, and tropical evergreen forest. 15 Lacking sweat glands, they
rely on other physical and behavioral adaptations to keep their massive bodies from
overheating and to prevent sunburn. 16 Asian elephants are active primarily during
twilight, the coolest part of the day. 17 Shade and water are essential during the
hottest parts of the day. 18 Asian elephants require shade to regulate their body
temperatures. 19 Known as a water-dependent species, Asian elephants submerge in
water to regulate their body temperature when it rises above normal. 20
According to former Association of Zoos and Aquariums (“AZA”) Conservation
and Science Director Michael Hutchins, “[Elephants] need to walk throughout the
day for exercise and muscle tone.” 21 Asian elephants living in the wild are moving
approximately 20 out of 24 hours of the day, actively engaged in foraging, exploring,
socializing and searching for other Asian elephants. 22 The home range for wild
female Asian elephants extends up to 96 square miles, some 62,000 acres. 23 Asian
elephants are extremely social creatures. 24 By nature they live in strong family
groups composed of interrelated individuals, primarily females and preadolescent
Endangered Species Act, 41 Fed. Reg. 24062, 24066 (June 14, 1976).
CITES, Appendix 1.
15 A.U. Choudhury, Status and Conservation of the Asian elephant Elephas maximus in north-eastern
India. Mammal Review 29, 141–73 (1999); see also generally Jeheskel Shoshani, Elephants, Majestic
Creature of the Wild, 46–51 (2000).
16 Natalia Elias, What Adaptations Help Elephants Keep Cool? (2015), available at
htttp://animals.pawnation.com/adaptations-elephants-keep-cool-7475.html.
17 Jeheskel Shoshani & John F. Eisenberg, Elephas maximus, Mammalian Species No. 182, 1-8 (Jun.
18, 1982), available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/3504045.
18 Id.
19 Robin C. Dunkin, Dinah Wilson, Nicolas Way, Kari Johnson, & Terrie M. Williams, Climate
Influences thermal balances and water use in African and Asian elephants: physiology can predict
drivers of elephant distribution, The Journal of Experimental Biology, 2939 (2013), available at
http://job.biologists.org/content/216/15/2939/full.
20 Id.
21 Jeffery P. Cohn, Do Elephants Belong in Zoos?, BioScience, Vol. 56 No.9 (Sept. 2006).
22 Id.; Declaration of Scott D. Blais, ¶ 15 (hereinafter “Blais Declaration”), attached hereto.
23 Blais Declaration, ¶ 17.
24 Jeheskel Shoshani, Elephants, Majestic Creatures of the Wild, 106-08 (2000).
13
14
5
males within a matriarchal society. 25 Estimates of herd size vary, ranging from as
few as six to as many as 100. 26 The family units are well organized and integrated
both socially and structurally. 27 Members of the family are rarely separated from
other members. 28 Asian elephant family members rely heavily on the matriarch for
knowledge and guidance to survive in their environment. 29 Elephants have one of
the longest lifespans of any mammal, living well into their sixties and seventies. 30
III.
Conditions of the San Antonio Zoo Elephant Exhibit create
continuing violations of the Endangered Species Act
Lucky is an Asian elephant born in, and captured from, the wilds of
Thailand. 31 She arrived at the San Antonio Zoo in April 1962 and has spent 53
years on display 32 in an exhibit that bears no resemblance to her natural home in
the forests of Thailand. 33 Lucky lives in a tiny, barren enclosure that does not
provide the space, natural conditions, or companionship that elephants need. 34
Lucky’s solitude inflicts special harm, since keeping a member of such a highly
Id. at 107; see also Blais Declaration, ¶¶ 15, 19 (estimating family size at 12 to 25 members but
sometimes coalescing into larger, extended family groups as large as 100 individuals).
26 Asia [sic] Elephants, WORLD WILDLIFE FUND,
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/asian_elephants/ (last visited Apr.
8, 2015) (“Asian elephants are extremely sociable, forming groups of 6 to 7 related females that are
led by the oldest female, the ‘matriarch’.”); Asian Elephant (Elephas Maximus), SAN DIEGO ZOO
GLOBAL (July 2008), available at
http://library.sandiegozoo.org/factsheets/asian_elephant/asian_elephant.htm (“Herds consist of about
8-12 individuals, but sizes can vary.”); Blais Declaration, ¶ 15 (“Asian elephants live in strong family
groups composed of interrelated individuals, primarily females and preadolescent males, ranging in
size from 12 to 25 members, but sometimes coalescing into larger extended family groups that reach
over 100 members”).
27 Jeheskel Shoshani, Elephants, Majestic Creatures of the Wild, 107 (2000).
28 Id.
29 Id.; Blais Declaration ¶ 19.
30 Jeheskel Shoshani, Elephants, Majestic Creatures of the Wild, 100, 106 (2000); see also Jaimi
Dolmage, Exposed! The San Antonio Zoo: One of the Worst Zoos in America (Aug. 26, 2014),
available at http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/san-antonio-zoo-one-of-the-worstzoos-in-america/.
31 Asian Elephant North American Regional Studbook, ASSOC. OF ZOOS AND AQUAR..,p. 58, available
at http://www.elephanttag.org/professional/2010AsianElephantStudbook.pdf.
32 Zoo elephant celebrates 53 years in San Antonio, Fox 29 (April 4, 2015,) available at
http://www.foxsanantonio.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/zoo-elephant-celebrates-53-yearssan-antonio-11731.shtml#.VSFpVNOYYtE.
33 Blais Declaration, ¶ 17; Jaimi Dolmage, Exposed! The San Antonio Zoo: One of the Worst Zoos in
America, (August 26, 2014) available at http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/sanantonio-zoo-one-of-the-worst-zoos-in-america/;see also Lucky, ONE WORLD CONSERVATION,
http://oneworldc.org/portfolio/lucky/ (last visited Apr. 8, 2015).
34 Blais Declaration, ¶ 17; Jaimi Dolmage, Exposed! The San Antonio Zoo: One of the Worst Zoos in
America, (August 26, 2014) available at http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/sanantonio-zoo-one-of-the-worst-zoos-in-america/; see also Lucky, ONE WORLD CONSERVATION,
25
6
social species by herself results in unmistakable psychological pathology, which
Lucky exhibits 35.
The species-inappropriate conditions to which Lucky the Asian elephant is
subjected at the San Antonio Zoo amount to and will almost certainly continue to
constitute a “take” under the Endangered Species Act. Stress caused by her intense
confinement, boredom from her barren environment, and social trauma caused by
her lack of appropriate socialization produce aberrant behaviors. 36 The
inadequacies of Lucky’s enclosure, a lack of social and psychological stimulation,
her physical discomfort, and a lack of emotional support all contribute to Lucky’s
repetitive neurotic behavior. 37 So also do these conditions, along with others
described below and in the accompanying declaration, collectively undermine
Lucky’s physical health and wellness.
A. Inadequate Shelter of the Elephant Exhibit violates the ESA
The species-inappropriate barren enclosure in which Lucky the Asian
elephant lives at the San Antonio Zoo amounts to and will almost certainly continue
to constitute a “take” under the Endangered Species Act. Elephants require shade
for protection from the sun. 38 There are no trees within the Zoo’s elephant exhibit,
and the exhibit provides insufficient shade. 39 The pool of water available to Lucky
likewise provides only limited refuge from the sun and heat of the Texas climate,
especially its hot summers. The pool’s inadequate depth prevents Lucky from
submerging fully, as elephants do in their natural habitat.
The San Antonio Zoo harasses Lucky by exposing her to the heat and speciesinappropriate weather without adequate shelter. To expose captive wildlife to
inclement weather or otherwise inappropriate climatic conditions is not a generally
accepted animal husbandry practice. Regulations pursuant to the Animal Welfare
Act require that “[w]hen sunlight is likely to cause overheating or discomfort of the
animals, sufficient shade by natural or artificial means shall be provided to allow
the animals kept outdoors to protect themselves from direct sunlight.” 40 Regulations
require moreover that “[n]atural or artificial shelter appropriate to the local climatic
Blais Declaration, ¶¶ 17, 30-31.
Blais Declaration, ¶¶ 20, 30-31; In Defense of Animals, Sanctuaries: Setting the Standard of Care
for Elephants in Captivity Today, available at
http://www.helpelephants.com/pdf/sanctuaries_standard.pdf.
37 Blais Declaration, ¶¶ 17-23, 30-31.
38 Shoshani, J, Eisenberg, & J. F. Eisenberg, "Elephas maximus". Mammalian Species 182 (182): 1–
8. doi:10.2307/3504045. JSTOR 3504045; see also, Jeheskel Shoshani, Elephants, Majestic Creatures
of the Wild, 106 (2000).
39 See Addendum Photos 1-3, 6; Blais Declaration, Addendum Photo 1; see also Jaimi Dolmage,
Exposed! The San Antonio Zoo: One of the Worst Zoos in America, (Aug. 26, 2014), available at
http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/san-antonio-zoo-one-of-the-worst-zoos-in-america/;
Lucky, ONE WORLD CONSERVATION, http://oneworldc.org/portfolio/lucky/ (last visited Apr. 8, 2015).
40 9. C.F.R. § 3.127(a) (2014).
35
36
7
conditions for the species concerned shall be provided for all animals kept outdoors
to afford them protection and to prevent discomfort to such animals.” 41 Denying
Lucky the means to protect herself from the sun and to cool herself from the heat
harms and harasses her, and will almost certainly continue to constitute a “take”
under the Endangered Species Act.
B. Inappropriate Substrate of the Elephant Exhibit violates the
ESA
The species-inappropriate substrate on which Lucky the Asian elephant lives
at the San Antonio Zoo amounts to and will almost certainly continue to constitute
a “take” under the Endangered Species Act. Luck’s exhibit consists of a thin layer of
sand compacted on a hard undersurface of limestone. 42 An inappropriately firm
substrate can cause orthopedic issues in elephants, including arthritis, joint
calcification, and osteomyelitis. 43 Such orthopedic issues may in turn cause
inactivity, weigh gain, loss of muscle mass and muscle tone, foot infections,
abbreviated gate or loss of range of motion, and decreased physical and
cardiovascular health. 44
Indeed, Lucky exhibits many of these very problems, 45 which cause harm to
her physical health and wellbeing—in other words, which injure her. To expose
captive wildlife to injury-inducing substrata is not a generally accepted animal
husbandry practice. The Zoo’s inappropriate substrate therefore harms and
harasses Lucky, and will almost certainly continue to constitute a “take” under the
Endangered Species Act.
C. Inadequate Space of the Elephant Exhibit violates the ESA
The species-inappropriate size of the enclosure in which Lucky the Asian
elephant lives at the San Antonio Zoo amounts to and will almost certainly continue
to constitute a “take” under the Endangered Species Act. The AZA’s minimum space
requirement for an elephant in captivity is only 5400 square feet (approximately
1.23967 acres). 46 The San Antonio elephant exhibit, in contrast, consists at most of
9. C.F.R. § 3.127(b) (2014).
Lucky, ONE WORLD CONSERVATION, http://oneworldc.org/portfolio/lucky/ (last visited Apr. 8, 2015).
43 Id.; see also Blais Declaration, ¶¶ 28-29; Jaimi Dolmage, Exposed! The San Antonio Zoo: One of the
Worst Zoos in America (Aug. 26, 2014), available at
http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/san-antonio-zoo-one-of-the-worst-zoos-in-america/
44 Blais Declaration, ¶¶ 26-28.
45 Id. at ¶¶ 26-28, Addendum Photos 3 and 4.
46 Jaimi Dolmage, Exposed! The San Antonio Zoo: One of the Worst Zoos in America (Aug. 26, 2014)
available at http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/san-antonio-zoo-one-of-the-worstzoos-in-america/ (citing AZA Standards for Elephant Management and Care, ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS &
AQUARIUMS (Mar. 2011), available at
http://www.aza.org/uploadedFiles/COnservation/Commitmnet_and_Impacts/Elephant_Conservation/
ElephantStandards.pdf).
41
42
8
approximately one half acre, and may consist of as little as one third of an acre,
considerably smaller than the AZA requirement. 47
Even if the substrate were species-appropriate, such a miniscule enclosure—
an extraordinary fraction of an Asian elephant’s natural range of 62,000 acres 48—
clearly provides insufficient space for Lucky to exercise her joints properly and to
maintain a healthy weight, which together may lead to arthritis and joint
degeneration. 49 Sadly, zoos euthanize elephants as a result of arthritis at least as
often as for any other reason. 50
Additionally, such limited space offers limited psychological and emotional
stimulation. 51 Lucky’s resulting inability to exercise or express her natural
migratory behavior reduces her lifespan and affects her overall health and
wellbeing—in other words, the size of her enclosure injures her. 52 To expose captive
wildlife to grossly insufficient space is not a generally accepted animal husbandry
practice. Maintaining Lucky in such an inadequately sized enclosure at the San
Antonio Zoo harms and harasses Lucky, and will almost certainly continue to
constitute a “take” under the Endangered Species Act.
D.
Inadequate Social Opportunities violates the ESA
Finally and most significantly, the species-inappropriate isolation to which
Lucky the Asian elephant is subjected at the San Antonio Zoo amounts to and will
almost certainly continue to constitute a “take” under the Endangered Species Act.
Perhaps insurmountably, the San Antonio Zoo lacks the space to house the number
of elephants sufficient merely to approximate the kinship groups that wild
elephants form, let alone to encourage the natural behaviors wild elephants display.
Elephants are social creatures, exhibiting the same tendency as other social
creatures sometimes to engage socially and sometimes, space permitting, to
disengage or to withdraw when circumstances or mood require. The amount of
space in an elephant’s environment therefore directly affects his or her social
behavior and social, psychological, and emotional wellbeing. 53
Blais Declaration, ¶ 17, Addendum Photo 1; see also Lucky, ONE WORLD CONSERVATION,
50 Id., ¶ 18.
51 Id., ¶ 17.
52 Id., ¶¶ 17-18.
53 See Catherine Doyle and Suzanne Roy, Comments of In Defense of Animals on USDA Docket No.
APHIS-2006-0044 “Captive Elephant Welfare” (Dec. 11, 2006) (describing observations of social
incompatibility at Riverbanks Zoo in Columbia, South Carolina), available at
http://www.helpelephants.com/pdf/captive_elephant_welfare.pdf.
47
9
The San Antonio Zoo once maintained another Asian elephant, Ginny, along
with Lucky. 54 Photographic and video evidence make clear that Ginny and Lucky
bonded together, 55 attested by at least one former zookeeper. 56 Ginny died in May
2004. 57 Lucky was kept alone in her exhibit for nearly six years until the Zoo
acquired an African elephant, Alport, who died in November 2007. 58 Lucky was
again left alone in the exhibit for nearly two and a half years after Alport’s death.
Thereafter the San Antonio Zoo obtained another Asian elephant, Boo. 59
Before arriving at the San Antonio Zoo, Boo performed in circus acts, and suffered
from age-related illnesses. 60 Contrary to the experience between Lucky and Ginny,
it was evident that Boo and Lucky did not bond and that, as a result of the
inadequate space they shared, conflict emerged between them. 61 Lucky attempted
to befriend or at least to coexist with Boo, but Boo behaved aggressively toward
Lucky, posturing for dominance and intimidation, a direct consequence of the
inappropriately sized enclosure and the inappropriately unnatural living conditions
thereof. 62 Lucky has remained alone since Boo’s death in March 2013. 63
The Zoo maintains that Lucky is a “weird” elephant, claiming that she
dislikes other elephants and prefers to be with people. 64 The Zoo therefore
Asian Elephant, North American Regional Studbook, ASSOC . OF ZOOS AND AQUAR., at 59 (Jul. 17,
2007- Aug. 31, 2010), available at
http://www.elephanttag.org/professional/2010AsianElephantStudbook.pdf.
55 See generally Lucky, ONE WORLD CONSERVATION, http://oneworldc.org/portfolio/lucky/(last visited
Apr. 8, 2015.
56 Anonymous; See, e.g., Letter of Nicole Meyer to Jim Maddy, President and CEO of Association of
Zoos and Aquariums, Apr. 25, 2013 (“Lucky has had several companions over the years and was
reportedly bonded with Ginny, who died in 2004.”), available at http://www.idausa.org/ida_aza/.
57 Asian Elephant, North American Regional Studbook, Association of Zoo & Aquariums, 59 (Jul. 17,
2007- Aug. 31, 2010).
58 Campaigns – San Antonio Zoo, IN DEFENSE OF ANIMALS,
http://www.helpelephants.com/san_antonio_zoo.html (last visited Apr. 8, 2015).
59 Asian Elephant, North American Regional Studbook, ASSOC . OF ZOOS AND AQUAR., at 103 (Jul. 17,
2007- Aug. 31, 2010)
60 MySA, Elephant, 59, Dies at San Antonio Zoo (March 11, 2013), available at
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Elephant-59-dies-at-San-Antonio-Zoo4345048.php.
61 Blais Declaration, ¶ 20; see also Joyce Poole, PhD, Behavioral Observations: Lucky and Boo, San
Antonio Zoo (Dec. 4, 2010), available at
http://www.helpelephants.com/JPoole_ElephantVoices_SAZ_Lucky_Boo_observations_Nov2010.pdf
(describing her observations that “Lucky is being terrorized by Boo” and concluding that “the
primary cause of this undesirable situation is that the elephants have too little space.”).
63Lucky the elephant to stay at the SA Zoo despite protests (ABC KSAT broadcast, Nov. 3, 2014),
available at http://www.ksat.com/content/pns/ksat/news/2014/11/02/protesters-call-for-freedom-ofelephant-at-sa-zoo0.html.
64 Michelle Koidin Jaffee, Lucky to remain lone elephant at S.A. Zoo, MySA Express News (Apr. 23,
2013), available at http://www.mysanantonio.com/life/article/Lucky-to-remain-lone-elephant-at-S-AZoo-4456116.php; see also Lucky the elephant to stay at the SA Zoo despite protests (ABC KSAT
54
10
intentionally denies Lucky the opportunity to bond with other elephants. Contrary
to the Zoo’s claims that “philosophy and science” advise keeping Lucky alone, 65
moving her to a sanctuary where she has the opportunity to socialize and to exert
some autonomy over the terms of her engagement with other elephants will greatly
improve Lucky’s psychological and physical health alike. 66
Even putting aside the natural size of kinship groups of elephants in the
wild, the AZA’s accreditation standards require that “[e]ach zoo holding elephants
must hold a minimum of three females (or the space to hold three females), two
males or three elephants of mixed gender.” 67 The San Antonio Zoo is accredited by
the AZA. 68 Although the AZA has granted the Zoo a variance to maintain Lucky
without any other elephants until 2016, such a variance from a private third party
accreditation body does not—and indeed cannot—constitute a permit to violate the
Endangered Species Act. Only FWS may grant a permit to violate the ESA, and
only then under very limited circumstances. 69
In short, the Zoo is not currently set up to introduce new Asian elephants to
the exhibit. Neither does the Zoo intend to introduce new Asian elephants (see
below). The inadequately sized and constituted enclosure injures Lucky’s health and
welfare. While Lucky’s social, psychological, and emotional needs require the
introduction of additional Asian elephants as companions, the San Antonio Zoo
lacks sufficient space to introduce such companions in a way that benefits, rather
than harms, both Lucky and whatever elephants might be introduced. As a result,
such inadequate space and the solitude and the inevitably species-inappropriate
group interactions that would result therefrom violate the ESA. To confine an
intensely social and emotionally complex animal in isolation is not a generally
accepted animal husbandry practice. Maintaining Lucky in solitary confinement at
broadcast, Nov. 3, 2014), available at
http://www.ksat.com/content/pns/ksat/news/2014/11/02/protesters-call-for-freedom-of-elephant-at-sazoo0.html.
65 Rebecca Salinas, San Antonio Zoo's only elephant will remain, despite relocation rule,
MySanAntonio.Com (Jul. 16, 2014), http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Elephant-willremain-at-zoo-despite-new-5625295.php.
66 Blais Declaration, ¶¶ 22-23, 30-32.
67 Standards for Elephant Management and Care, ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS & AQUARIUMS (Mar. 2011),
available at
http://www.aza.org/uploadedFiles/Conservation/Commitmnet_and_Impacts/Elephant_Conservation/
ElephantStandards.pdf.
68 List of Accredited Zoos and Aquariums, ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS & AQUARIUMS, available at
https://www.aza.org/current-accreditation-list/#s (San Antonio Zoological Society, Texas Accredited
through March 2018).
69 See Endangered Species Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1539(a)(1) (enumerating permitting requirements for
takes of endangered species for “scientific purposes or to enhance the propagation or survival of the
affected species” or where “such taking is incidental to, and not the purpose of, the carrying out of an
otherwise lawful activity”).
11
the San Antonio Zoo therefore harms and harasses her, and will almost certainly
continue to constitute a “take” under the Endangered Species Act.
IV.
Proposed Solution abating violations of the ESA
The AZA Elephant Taxon Advisory Group & Species Survival Plan
(“TAG/SSP”) Regional Collection Plan indicates that the San Antonio Zoo intends to
change the Asian Elephant Exhibit to an African Elephant Exhibit. 70 The San
Antonio Zoo has indicated it does not intend to acquire another Asian elephant;
rather, “[t]he Zoo will eventually have African elephants as part of the Africa Live
exhibit.” 71 Since the Zoo intends to hold African elephants in its new Africa Live
attraction, Lucky, who has spent nearly her entire life on display, should be retired
to a sanctuary.
The Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee has already promised to welcome
Lucky into their facility and to integrate Lucky into their herd of Asian elephants.
Moreover, the Animal Legal Defense Fund has agreed to pay the cost of relocating
Lucky from San Antonio to the Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee. According to
Scott Blais, an expert in the rehabilitation of captive elephants, contrary to the
Zoo’s claims, Lucky is neither too old nor too “weird” to be relocated. 72 In retiring
Lucky to sanctuary, the San Antonio Zoo, at no cost to itself, will gain the
opportunity to update their elephant exhibit to house African elephants and
simultaneously to come into compliance with the Endangered Species Act by
abating their harm and harassment of Lucky the Asian elephant.
V.
Conclusion
This letter and the accompany declaration of Scott Blais are notice under
section 11(g) of the ESA, 16 U.S.C.§1540 (g), of violations of the ESA on behalf of
Jim Graham, Jacqueline Fonseca, Noah B. Khoshbin, Elizabeth Wymer, and Lucky
for the violations of the ESA discussed herein. Unless these ongoing and imminent
violations described herein are remedied and abated with sixty (60) days,
Complainants intend to file suit against the San Antonio Zoological Society and the
San Antonio Zoo to enforce the ESA.
Association of Zoos & Aquariums, AZA Elephant TAG/SSP Regional Collection Plan 2nd ed., 30
(2007) (indicating “Future Maximum # of Asian Elephants” is “0”).
71 Get the Facts about Lucky the Elephant, SAN ANTONIO ZOO, http://www.sazooaq.org/get_the_facts/faq/ (last visited Apr. 8, 2015).
70
12
Complainants urge you to come into compliance with the ESA by moving
Lucky to the Elephant Sanctuary. During the sixty day notice period,
Complainants, by and through their attorneys, are willing to discuss effective
remedies for the violations addressed in this letter and settlement terms. If you
wish to pursue remedies and settlement in absence of litigation, please contact
Complainants’ attorney Melissa Lesniak, Esq., to initiate discussion, within ten
business (10) days of receiving this notice to arrange a meeting to begin
negotiations.
Sincerely,
Melissa Lesniak
Melissa Lesniak, Esq.
Attorney & Counselor at Law
4839 San Cristobal
Phone: 210-706-0592
Fax: 210-569-6369
Jeffrey Pierce, Esq.
Animal Legal Defense Fund
170 East Cotati Avenue
Cotati, California 94931
Phone: 707-795-2533
Fax: 707-795-7280
Enclosures:
Addendum of Photographs
Declaration of Scott D. Blais
13
ADDENDUM
Photo 1
Photo Credit One World Conservation, September 11, 2014: view of the speciesinappropriate tree-less, barren, and unprotected nature of Lucky’s enclosure.
14
Photo 2
Photo Credit One World Conservation, September 11, 2014: view of Lucky’s
retreating to the only part of her enclosure that provides shade, requiring that she
stand still in one place to gain protection from the Texas sun and heat.
15
Photo 3
Photo Credit One World Conservation, November 20, 2010: additional view of the
barren nature of Lucky’s enclosure and the species-inappropriate tightly packed,
injury-inducing substrate thereof.
16
Photo 4
Photo Credit One World Conservation, September 13, 2014: view of the inadequate
submersion pool in Lucky’s enclosure in which Lucky cannot fully submerge herself.
17
Photo 5
Photo Credit One World Conservation, October 13, 2014: additional view of Lucky’s
inadequate submersion pool.
18
Photo 6
Photo Credit Margaret Coyle Goff, posted to “Protest to Free Lucky the Elephant”
Facebook Page, September 28, 2014: aerial view of the entirety of Lucky’s speciesinappropriate small, barren enclosure, taken at a time when Boo was still alive.
19
Photo 7
Photo Credit One World Conservation, September 24, 2010: ground-level view of
Lucky’s small, barren enclosure, taken at a time when Boo was still alive, showing
the entire distance the elephants had to retreat from one another.
20
Photo 8
Photo Credit One World Conservation, September 11, 2014: view of probable
mismanagement of Lucky’s toenails and overall foot health, essential to captive
elephant welfare and survival.
21
Photo 9
Photo Credit The Elephant Sanctuary, March 30, 2015: 67-year-old Asian elephant
Shirley taking a swim in the pond near The Elephant Sanctuary’s Asia Barn.
22
Photo 10
Photo Credit The Elephant Sanctuary, November 22, 2014: the same Asian
elephant Shirley, at 66-years-old, “making great use of her 2100-acre Asia habitat
at Sanctuary”.
23
Photo 11
Photo Credit The Elephant Sanctuary, February 14, 2015: Asian elephants Tarra,
Shirley and Sissy encountering various enrichment opportunities in the Asia
habitat, with the photograph demonstrating the opportunity Asian elephants enjoy
at The Elephant Sanctuary not only to bond but also to choose when and how to
engage with one another.
24
Photo 12
Photo Credit The Elephant Sanctuary, February 7, 2015: Asian elephants grazing
in the Asia habitat.
25
Photo 13
Photo Credit The Elephant Sanctuary, January 21, 2015: Asian elephant Billie
exploring enrichment her caregivers provided, a tire sprayed with honeydew scent
and stuffed with hay.
26
Photo 14
Photo Credit The Elephant Sanctuary, May 22, 2014: the 17,000 square foot stateof-the-art Asian Elephant Barn, completed in September 2005 at a cost of
$10,730,000; the Asia facility expanded at that time to provide 2200 acres of habitat
with a 25-acre spring-fed lake.
27
Declaration of Scott D. Blais
1. My name is Scott Blais.
I am the founder and CEO of Global
Sanctuary for Elephants, a US-based nonprofit organization dedicated
to the development of expansive natural habitat sanctuaries for
captive elephants worldwide.
My complete curriculum vitae is
attached to this declaration.
2. This declaration does not represent the views of the organizations with
whom I have worked previously nor with whom I am currently
working, nor am I speaking on their behalf. However, I do draw on my
over 25 years of experience with these organizations to support my
analysis in this declaration.
3. In brief summary, I have worked with elephants for more than 25
years.
I have worked within all aspects of captive elephant care,
including working at zoos, circuses and sanctuaries, utilizing both free
contact and protected contact.
I started my career at African Lion
Safari (“ALS”) in Rockton, Ontario, Canada, learning from two revered
elephant trainers, Charlie Grey and Jody Watkins. In these formative
years I assisted with all aspects of care, observation, medical testing,
training and handling of the breeding herd of elephants. I assisted
with consultations and onsite training and I have visited and observed
1
elephants at several notable zoos including, Rosamond Gifford Zoo in
Syracuse NY, Bush Gardens in Tampa FL, Miami Metro Zoo FL,
Toronto Zoo, Ontario Canada and Oakland Zoo in California. In the
early years of my career I also volunteered behind the scenes with
several circuses, assisting colleagues with training and foot care and
offering behavioral analysis of elephants from multiple circuses,
including Ringling Brothers Barnum and Bailey, Circus Vargas,
Hawthorne Corporation and Garden Brothers Circus.
4. I have worked directly with more than 50 captive elephants, ranging
from a newborn calf to geriatric individuals, both males and females,
African and Asian alike. During my time at ALS, the park had three
adult male elephants, including one that would enter into a full Musth
period each year, a time of heightened aggression and testosterone. As
a breeding facility, ALS frequently received elephants on breeding loan
that needed to be integrated into the herd and we accommodated
visiting circus elephants that would remain segregated but required
daily care and husbandry.
I conducted weekly blood collections to
monitor reproductive cycles, provided prenatal care, aided with
birthing and rearing, offered geriatric care, medical treatment,
training and husbandry, and conducted elephant rides, performances
and public demonstrations.
2
5. Subsequently, while I was working at The Elephant Sanctuary (see
below), the Sanctuary accepted 24 elephants, many of whom the
attending veterinarian or—in the case of USDA confiscation—a USDA
inspector had listed in dire condition with some of the worst ailments
on record, including gross malnourishment, progressive foot disorder,
arthritis, osteomyelitis, gross psychological ailments, and excessive
neuroses.
Among these two dozen were elephants that had been
confiscated by the USDA and placed in our care and some that had
been in solitary conditions for decades before their arrival.
I was
directly responsible for their full assimilation into their new life,
including medical evaluation and treatment, positive reinforcement
training, introduction to the existing herd, daily care and husbandry,
and behavioral evaluations.
6. In 1995, in an effort to create a more natural lifestyle for captive
elephants, and to provide a solution to the common maladies that
plague captive elephants, I co-founded The Elephant Sanctuary in
Tennessee. As Director of Operations and active member of the board
of directors, for over 16 years, I managed and trained elephant care
staff, oversaw rescue and transport, and participated daily in the care
and the recovery of the 24 resident Asian and African elephants.
3
7. Our primary objective at the Elephant Sanctuary was to provide for
ailing elephants with physical, psychological and social complications.
Through proper facility design—encompassing 2700 acres—and by
employing experienced and knowledgeable care staff, the Sanctuary
offers elephants the autonomy to choose their own path, to make their
own decisions, and to live more natural lives focused around social
interactions and natural foraging, all while being monitored and
receiving unrivaled medical care.
This basic principle of increased
autonomy and natural foraging for animal health is now viewed by
zoos and zoo exhibit designers as pivotal to animal happiness and wellbeing. 1
8. The Elephant Sanctuary has observed complete transformations with
virtually every elephant that has resided within the facility.
Elephants that zoo professionals had labeled antisocial, aggressive,
crippled and even autistic recovered and thrived, each becoming
pivotal to the herd and to the social dynamics therein. I personally
witnessed the resilience and recovery of elephants on whom many zoo
and veterinary experts had given up, some who were given only a year
Alexandra Ossola, The Future of Zoos Is Being Nice to the Animals – Not making it
easy to watch them (Feb. 25, 2015) http://www.fastcoexist.com/3042458/the-future-ofzoos-is-being-nice-to-the-animals-not-making-it-easy-to-watch-them. Zoo exhibits are
being redesigned for the animals’ physical and psychological well-being. As the trend
continues, zoos may one day be unrecognizable.
1
4
to live. In one case, this determination was made by a USDA inspector
in 2000, and the elephant is still alive and thriving more than 15 years
later.
These experiences are the impetus for a change that is
redefining how the world views captive elephants.
The Elephant
Sanctuary is the model for a progressive and elevated standard of care
that is now being emulated around the globe.
9. My work with The Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee has been well
documented in numerous publications, news programs, magazines and
scientific literature.
Recognition of the physical, emotional and
psychological transformations elephants undergo through sanctuary
life has opened minds to the full extent of trauma induced by captivity
and the need to offer captive elephants a more complete life. This
pioneering work has been featured in mass media around the globe,
including, but not limited to: the Boston Globe, People Magazine, CNN,
BBC, Dateline NBC, 20/20, the New York Times Magazine, Animal
Planet, National Geographic, and three documentaries, The Urban
Elephant, How I became an Elephant, and One Lucky Elephant. The
work has also contributed to literary publications, through direct
consultation, referencing Sanctuary literature, co-writing, factual
editing, etc. including:
i. Lisa Kane et al., Optimal Conditions for Elephants in
Captivity, Appendix I in An Elephant in the Room: The
5
Science and Well-Being of Elephants in Captivity (Debra
Forthman et al. eds, 2009); Lisa Kane et al., Best
Practices by the Coalition for Captive Elephant WellBeing, Appendix II in An Elephant in the Room: The
Science and Well-Being of Elephants in Captivity (Debra
Forthman et al. eds, 2009).
ii. Lori Gruen, Ethics of Captivity (2014).
iii. G.A. Bradshaw, Elephants on the Edge: What Animals
Teach Us about Humanity (2010).
iv. Mark Bekoff, The Emotional Lives of Animals: A Leading
Scientist Explores Animal Joy, Sorrow, and Empathy—
and Why They Matter (2008).
v. Ronald B. Tobias, Behemoth: The History of the Elephant
in America (2013)
vi. Carol Bradley, Last Chain On Billie: How
Extraordinary Elephant Escaped the Big Top (2014)
One
vii. Ross Clubb and Georgia Mason, A review of the Welfare of
Zoo Elephants, commissioned by the Royal Society for the
Protection of Animals (2006).
10. In September of 2011 I resigned my role as Director of Operations at
The Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee to work as an international
consultant for the well-being of elephants. In 2013, I cofounded Global
Sanctuary for Elephants, a US-based non-profit organization dedicated
to the development of expansive sanctuaries worldwide. There is a
rapidly growing need for healthy alternatives to zoos and circuses. Zoo
elephants are ailing, and zoos lack the space to adequately expand to
meet these elephants’ needs. Many zoos are choosing to close their
exhibits and relocate their elephants, including Detroit Zoo, Woodland
6
Park Zoo, Cheehaw Wild Animal Park, Philadelphia Zoo, Calgary Zoo,
Toronto Zoo, Lincoln Park Zoo, London Zoo, Edinburgh Zoo and the
San Francisco Zoo. In addition, more than 18 countries around the
globe have banned or limited the use of performing animals, including
elephants.
All of these elephants need solutions in the form of
expansive habitats that meet the core needs of the species while
providing proper medical care to enable their full recovery from
decades of inherent neglect.
11. Based on my more than 25 years of experience in all realms of captive
elephant care, I have served as an expert analyzing more than 500
hours of film of elephants in zoos and circuses for more than twelve
civic representatives and animal advocacy organizations.
I have
presented expert testimony in front of House and Senate committees in
Rhode Island and Massachusetts, and I have provided written
testimony for city, county, and state level legislation in the US and in
South America.
12. In 2012 I served as an expert for the relocation of an elephant who
had been confiscated from a circus in Chile.
Following two failed
attempts by others, I was able to safely move the elephant to a new,
healthier facility.
In 2013, I was part of a team of experts that
7
collaborated to move three elephants from the Toronto Zoo in Toronto,
Canada, to the Performing Animal Welfare Society in San Andreas,
California.
13. As a direct result of my experience, and with a comprehensive
understanding of captive elephant management, its inherent problems
and viable solutions, as well as firsthand knowledge of elephants’
resilience and recovery, I am offering my expertise with regard to
Lucky.
14. I have followed Lucky since 2010, monitoring her behavioral and
physical health. I assessed Lucky’ social interactions during the three
years she lived with Boo (a.k.a. Queenie), and I have also assessed her
behavior as a solitary elephant following Boo’s death. My assessment
comes from viewing photos and analyzing more than 200 hours of video
as well as from direct inquires with individuals who have observed
Lucky’s behavior.
15. Lucky is an Asian elephant (Elephas maximus).
By nature, Asian
elephants live in strong family groups composed of interrelated
individuals, primarily females and preadolescent males, ranging in
size from 12 to 25 members, but sometimes coalescing into larger
8
extended family groups that reach over 100 members.
Generally
speaking, Asian elephants are a forest dwelling species, frequently
observed grazing in meadows and along rivers and streams in tropical
and subtropical Asia. Asian elephants can live up to 70 years, and
they are migratory by nature, walking 10 to 30 miles while grazing
and foraging for up to 20 hours daily. Elephants are large brained;
they have high cognitive ability, complex social interactions and an
emotional aptitude that matches if not exceeds that of a human being.
Elephants are sentient, conscious, intentional beings who are selfaware. They are autonomous, empathetic and cooperative. They can
experience stress, and they have the ability to suffer greatly.
16. Lucky is 55 years old (Asian elephant Studbook #226).
She was
captured from the wild as an infant and has been residing at the San
Antonio Zoo since 1962.
Her life in the zoo has not offered any
semblance of normalcy for her species.
17. The home range for wild female Asian elephants extends up to 96
square miles roughly 62,000 acres. 2 Lucky has spent more than five
decades on one third of one acre. According to the Zoo, Lucky’s exhibit
occupies half an acre, though Google Earth Pro approximates the area
R. Sukumar, The Living Elephants: Evolutionary Ecology, Behaviour and
Conservation (2003).
2
9
of Lucky’s exhibit to be .32 acres. 3 Such limited space offers limited
psychological, emotional and physical stimulation and is known to be a
root cause of many of the ailments that plague captive elephants.
Elephants’ extensive cognitive abilities can be observed in wild
elephants by watching the end or their trunk, the movement of their
ears and the posture of their bodies, which are always changing,
inquisitive, watchful, and listening. As a direct result of her under
stimulating environment, Lucky does not generally exhibit these
nuanced behaviors. The primary aspect of her life that changes is the
different people walking past whom Lucky appears to tune out or
dismiss, as she frequently stands with her back to the public. Lucky’s
enclosure is limited and sterile and has changed little since her arrival
in 1962.
18. Female Asian elephants in the wild walk anywhere from 10 to 30 miles
in one day, at an average of 1.25 to 2.5 miles per hour (though they can
reach up to 16 miles per hour). If Lucky walked the maximum length
of her yard at 1.25 miles per hour—the lowest end of this spectrum—it
would take her less than 90 seconds. This has detrimentally impacted
Lucky, as she rarely walks in full strides. 4 These abbreviated steps no
See Addendum Photo 1.
One World Conservation, Keeper Connection – Lucky- S.A. Zoo (01/17/15, 11:30
am), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3drZYhp05c. This video shows that Lucky
is mobile but her strides are shortened, she does not exhibit full joint extension or
3
4
10
longer extend to her full range of motion, which has contributed to the
chronic development of arthritis and joint degeneration.
Presently,
arthritis is one of the leading causes for zoo elephants to be euthanized
in captivity. Lucky’s existing arthritis can be dramatically improved
with access to increased space with diverse terrain that will encourage
Lucky to walk farther. In her current habitat Lucky has no motivation
to walk quickly, but in a larger, more natural setting, with companions
and stimulation, Lucky will experience an increased desire to walk
faster and significantly further, extending her range of motion that
will benefit her physical health. This simple but fundamental form of
exercise will slowly increase her range of motion while developing
muscle groups that are fundamental to support the large frame of an
elephant’s body, decreasing pressure on key joints such as shoulders,
hips, knees and elbows.
19. The social structure of female Asian elephants is a close knit, familial,
matriarchal society with an average of 25, but up to 100, individuals.
Lucky’s social life has been far from normal. Lucky has lived with five
elephants: Ginny, who arrived at the zoo with Lucky in 1962 and
flexion. I have worked with elephants from similar situations, confined to small
enclosures for decades, each had exhibited similar joint restrictions. With every
case, after being moved to a sanctuary, we observed an increase in mobility,
strength, flexibility and stride length and tragically in every case, upon post mortem
examination chronic arthritis and degenerative joint disease was documented.
11
reportedly got along with Lucky quite well; Missy; Wanda, who had a
history of social problems and aggressive tendencies; Alport, an
African elephant; and Boo, who also had social problems and
tendencies toward aggression. In essence, like many zoo elephants,
Lucky grew up without family; there were no elders to show any of the
San Antonio Zoo elephants how to function as a normal society. The
social interactions were further compromised as a result of the mixed
species exhibit, as African and Asian elephants have vastly different
social dynamics. 5 In Lucky’s isolated and limited environment, it is
virtually impossible to accurately determine her true social nature.
20. The San Antonio Zoo has classified Lucky as anti-social, a
determination
that
I
challenge.
A
news
article
posted
on
MySanAntonio.com dated April 23, 2013 reported the San Antonio Zoo
Spokesperson Debbie Rios-Vanskike said:
“The zoo is doing what’s best for Lucky,” Vanskike said.
“We are aware that elephants are social animals. Lucky
According to the AZA’s own elephant care standards, a zoo should never combine
African and Asian elephants in the same enclosure: “Due to multiple species
differences and possible disease transmission issues, when forming new herds, Asian
and African elephants should not be placed together in the same enclosure.”
Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Standards for Elephant Management and Care,
Revised April 2012, Standard 2.2.1.1 (Social Considerations: Group Composition:
Suggested age and sex structure of social group), p. 13, available at
http://www.elephanttag.org/Professional/Revised_AZA_Standards_Elephant_Manag
ement_Care_April2012.pdf. This is the same standard that, recognizing elephants’
inherently social nature, requires that “[e]ach zoo holding elephants must hold a
minimum of three females (or the space to hold three females), two males or three
elephants of mixed gender,” a standard from which the San Antonio Zoo has
obtained a variance until 2016.
5
12
is atypical. She is not a social animal. She prefers to be
alone, by herself, and we know this because of what we
see day in and day out.”
“We know she’s very content and happy being alone,”
Vanskike said. 6
This
position
was
reiterated
in
a
news
article
posted
to
MySanAntonio.com dated July 16, 2014, in which former San Antonio
Zoo Director Steve McCusker stated this about Lucky:
“She’s never been kind of a herd elephant. She’s always
been kind of a weird elephant that would rather be alone
or with people than other elephants,” he said. “That’s
really the philosophy and science behind why we have
kept her.” 7
In my experience, no elephant is inherently weird or abnormal or
antisocial; it is the environment within which they are managed that is
weird and abnormal and is the direct cause for the manifestation of
these atypical behaviors. If you change the environment to one that is
more natural, stimulating and nurturing, the elephant’s behavior will
also change to become more natural. Through video I have observed
atypical social interactions between Lucky and Boo.
Lucky is very
submissive and non-confrontational, and makes multiple attempts to
befriend Boo. Lucky’s actions are typical and quite normal for a female
Michelle Koidin Jaffee, Lucky to remain lone elephant at S.A. Zoo,
MYSANANTONIO.COM, Apr. 23, 2013,
http://www.mysanantonio.com/life/article/Lucky-to-remain-lone-elephant-at-S-A-Zoo4456116.php.
7 Rebecca Salinas, San Antonio Zoo's only elephant will remain, despite relocation
rule, MYSANANTONIO.COM, July 16, 2014,
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Elephant-will-remain-at-zoodespite-new-5625295.php.
6
13
Asian elephant.
Conversely, Boo demonstrated moderate to severe
aggressive behavior, hording food, posturing for dominance and
intimidation, exhibiting limited signs of nurturing or empathy. 8
9
These are abnormal behaviors in wild Asian elephants, and they are a
direct consequence of limited space and unnatural living conditions.
21. Most animals—elephants and humans included—become increasingly
defensive in direct relation to the space they are confined within, i.e.
smaller space with no escape causes an increase in self-protection that
can manifest as overt aggression or cowering and meek posturing. By
nature, female Asian elephants are passive and gentle; they are a
society built around natural born leaders, protectors and nurturers. In
captivity, elephants display an increased level of aggression that has
led many zoo personnel to wrongfully classify an aggressive elephant
as the matriarch. Many times with circus elephants, similar to the
One World Conservation, Aggressive Behavior Lucky and Boo – S.A. Zoo (11/21/10,
9:45 am) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcT8h0j8pV0. In this video, Lucky is
exhibiting passive behavior; she clearly tries to give Boo extra space. Unprovoked,
Boo runs at Lucky and pushes her into the rock wall. With nowhere to flee, Lucky
retreats to stand in the swimming pool. Later, while Lucky is submissive in the pool,
Boo touches Lucky inquisitively and affectionately. This dichotomous behavior from
Boo is abnormal and leaves Lucky confused with how to appropriately respond and
engage.
9 One World Conservation, Aggressive Behavior Lucky and Boo – S.A. Zoo (11/21/10,
11:19 am) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdsJrSf6j_Y. This video was taken
some 90 minutes after the previous video. Boo is still posturing, and Lucky is being
submissive and clearly trying to pacify Boo. Lucky’s action discourages Boo from
lashing out and the interaction ends after a passive and mutually positive physical
exchange. Lucky is clearly trying to engage in normal, healthy and positive
relations.
8
14
environment from which Boo arrived, this aggression is encouraged
and sometimes provoked. In reality a true matriarch is a leader, not a
bully. They do not rule through intimidation and force; they manage
through positive leadership.
22. For Lucky, the space to be a true leader or a follower has never been
offered.
The extreme confines of her enclosure have caused her to
manifest overly passive behavior that is atypical yet understandable
given the gross inadequacy of her living conditions. With nowhere to
flee when feeling insecure, she exhibited behavior that to some captive
elephants (who are also damaged and exhibit atypical behavior) can be
perceived as weakness. Within a space that is more adequate for the
species and in an environment where elephants exhibit nurturing
behavior that more closely resembles normal species behavior, I
believe that Lucky would be highly social. Within a sanctuary, I have
observed new elephants act in a similar, overly passive and submissive
manner.
The resident elephants, who have had the opportunity to
recover from mistreatment and neglect, respond passively in return,
nurturing the insecurities and protecting the new individual while the
new resident adjusts and learns to trust. This behavior is typical of
wild herd dynamics, in which relationships are based on protection of
one another.
15
23. The San Antonio Zoo has neglected Lucky’s social development. In the
videos that I observed, when Boo was aggressive, zookeepers did not
show up to offer protection.
Without support, protection, and
nurturing, Lucky was forced into a fight or flight scenario and, as a
passive elephant, she chose to flee, to stay reclusive as her only means
of self-protection.
elephants
Within an expansive sanctuary, I have observed
previously
labeled
as
aggressive,
submissive,
antisocial, and even autistic change dramatically.
bully,
On several
occasions, former keepers visited six months later and stated that the
elephant was unrecognizable; that they never would have imagined
how social, calm or cooperative the elephant could be. In some cases
the only word the former keepers could use was ‘happy,’ a phrase that
goes against the anti-anthropomorphic philosophy of zoos, but the
positive transformation is undeniable, even to those who were initially
reluctant to support a relocation to a sanctuary.
24. In this passage from an article posted on MySanAntonio.com, dated
June 16, 2014, a number of statements make it apparent that the San
Antonio Zoo does not understand the nature of Asian elephants nor do
they comprehend the level of care elephant sanctuaries provide.
Lucky will stay in San Antonio until she dies, McCusker
said, which he predicts will happen in a few years. Lucky
16
is on her last set of teeth, meaning it is harder for her to
eat. Therefore, zookeepers chop Alfalfa hay and water
grain to make a mush so it is easier for her to eat. “Don’t
take that to mean that she’s not healthy, she’s fine, but
she wouldn’t be if she weren’t here. She’d be really
hungry, because she would be trying to eat tree bark
when she can't even chew jelly beans,” he said. 10
Elephants go through up to six sets of teeth over the course of their
lifetimes; the last set emerges between 35 and 40 years of age and can
last for up to three decades, but wear down over time, losing their
surface area and shrinking toward the gum line. I have not examined
Lucky’s teeth but I will say that the best solution is natural forage, in
the form of fresh grass. It is tender, more palatable, easier to digest,
and requires less chewing than dried hay.
That Mr. McCusker
imagines Lucky would have to eat tree bark if transferred to sanctuary
demonstrates a complete lack of understanding respecting both
elephant behavior and the conditions of sanctuary. Within sanctuary
and within many wild herds of Asian elephants, their primary food
choice is soft, supple grass and leaves, not bark, limbs. Further, within
sanctuary, when grass hay is offered as a supplement, it too can be
ground. In fact, one elephant arrived from an AZA accredited zoo more
than 1000 pounds underweight. The zoo stated that she had a poor
appetite and was susceptible to colic.
During our preliminary
examination we noticed poorly masticated hay in her feces, making it
harder for her body to break down and digest her feed, and we found
10
Salinas, supra note 7.
17
one molar that was grossly overgrown. We immediately modified her
diet and started to shred her hay, and within 36 hours she was
ingesting more than two times the volume of hay she had been
ingesting while at the zoo. 11 In addition Mr. McCusker states that
they feed Lucky alfalfa. This is not ideal and not recommended for
Asian elephants. Alfalfa can be difficult for Asian elephants to break
down, exacerbating digestive issues and, in some cases with older
elephants suffering from renal fatigue, the high nutrient concentration
in alfalfa can exacerbate health complications. Finally, Mr. McCusker
stated that Lucky cannot chew “jelly beans,” but in video taken on
January 17, 2015, Lucky is provided hay that is not chopped, which
she quickly ingests. 12 In this same video, the zookeepers appear to
offer pieces of produce larger than jelly beans, as a food reward for the
behaviors Lucky performs, which she readily and easily eats.
25. That same article posted to MySanAntonio.com on July 16, 2014
further reported:
That [applying for a variance on the requirement to house
elephants in groups] is the case with the San Antonio Zoo,
Director Steve McCusker said, because relocating Lucky
See Addendum Photo 2.
One World Conservation – Keeper Connection – Lucky- S.A. Zoo (01/17/15, 11:30
am), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3drZYhp05c. This the same video as in
footnote 4, supra. At 3:55 minutes into the video, Lucky is provided with unchopped hay that she places in her mouth and proceeds to masticate without any
sign of abnormal chewing motion or physical discomfort typically associated with
advanced tooth erosion.
11
12
18
may kill her and “there’s no right thing to do with her
except leave her where she is.” He said at around 55
years old, travel causes stress on her old age, even though
she is in good health. 13
There is no merit to substantiate Mr. McCusker’s claim that relocating
Lucky may kill her. There are two renowned sanctuaries that have
transported more than 40 elephants from zoos and circuses. Some had
not traveled in more than four decades, others were geriatric, some
were confiscated and given months to live, one was flown—in an
airplane—from Alaska, and still others traveled more than 2000 miles.
In every case, the elephants tolerated transport with relative ease. In
the past ten years, the only elephants who have died in transit were
those whom the zoos themselves transported. In both cases, lack of
preparedness and ill-considered decisions to prioritize making good
time over stopping to take care of ailing elephants led to the deaths of
the elephants. This claim that the elephant will die in transit is one
that many zoos make when they do not want to move an elephant, yet
elephants are frequently shipped across the country for breeding
without a second thought. In 2013, I participated in the relocation of
three African elephants from the Toronto zoo to a sanctuary in
California, a trip that was deemed ill-advised by those who fought to
keep the elephants at the zoo. The team, which included two notable
zoo veterinarians and five elephant experts, was prepared for all
13
Salinas, supra note 7.
19
scenarios and the trip was accomplished without a hitch.
26. Lucky is in moderate physical condition.
She appears to be a few
hundred pounds overweight, which needs to be remedied to prevent
compounding the negative impact of the existing arthritis in her joints.
There also appears to be moderate muscle loss that is typical of a
captive elephant of her age.
These issues need to be addressed
through increased exercise over varied terrain to encourage the
development of a broad array of muscle groups critical to support her
massive frame, reducing the pressure on her joints and increasing
range of motion.
27. Some photos indicate swelling in her feet, most easily observed around
her back toes. 14 This is not necessarily a problem; it may simply be a
result of her excess weight, but it needs to be monitored as it could be
linked to infections in these extremities or other health complications.
28. One of my major concerns for Lucky’s physical well-being is Lucky’s
abbreviated gait; she does not exhibit a full range of motion with many
of her joints when walking.
This is likely due to arthritis and
calcification in her joints; both are directly related to a lack of natural
movement and prolonged life on atypical substrates. If Lucky remains
14
See Addendum Photos 3 and 4.
20
in this environment, and if she does not lose weight and increase her
physical and cardiovascular health, her condition will only continue to
decline, likely leading to a debilitating and incredibly painful and
premature demise.
29. I have observed mobility issues with other elephants that have spent
decades in similar severely confined enclosures, relatively devoid of
stimulation and with an absence of physically challenging undulations.
Some with even greater decrease in range of motion than Lucky have
exhibited a near full recovery of joint articulation when placed in an
environment that encourages exploration over vast and varied terrain.
Through increased motivation to explore, muscles are toned and core
strength is developed, both of which contribute to improved overall
health. In one case, a 58-year-old elephant was confiscated by USDA
from a circus due to inadequate veterinary care and transported to The
Elephant Sanctuary. She suffered from severe osteomyelitis in both
front feet as well as chronic arthritis. One zoo veterinary expert said
that she was not likely to wander, and questioned if she would live
another year.
Within days she ran, played and explored; when
released from quarantine, she climbed to the top of hills that many
people would struggle to scale. Her resilience and the positive impact
of natural behavior allowed her to live for another five years.
21
30. Lucky exhibits stereotypic behavioral patterns, like head-bobbing and
swaying, that are typical for captive elephants but atypical for the
species in the wild. 15 Tragically, these behaviors have become accepted
as “normal” in zoos and falsely labeled to create an illusion of
positivity.
On its website, the San Antonio Zoo classifies this as
“anticipatory behavior.” 16 This has a slight element of truth as she is
waiting for food or keeper interactions, but the stereotypic actions exist
primarily because she is bored, she does not have any autonomy, and
there is little positive stimulation in her life.
For many captive
elephants, the origin of this neurotic behavior is stress, anxiety and
boredom; it becomes habitual and can become soothing as endorphins
are released into the body.
This comfort to the elephant does not
equate to a positive behavior; it is coping mechanism when the
elephants can’t meet their own desires. The inadequacies of Lucky’s
enclosure, the lack of social and psychological stimulation, physical
One World Conservation –Asian Elephant – Lucky – Stereotypic Behavior S.A. Zoo
(02/13/15, 11:30 am) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSW1XVBpzF0 . This video
of Lucky demonstrates repetitive, stereotypical behavior that is generally a sign of
stress or discomfort, observed only with captive and confined elephants and more
frequently exhibited with lack of autonomy and control over their own well-bing and
comfort.
16 See Get the Facts About Lucky: Frequently Asked Questions, San Antonio Zoo and
Aquarium, http://www.sazoo-aq.org/get_the_facts/faq/ (“Why does Lucky rock back
and fourth [sic]? This behavior usually indicates an expectation. When Lucky [sic]
is observed swaying back and fourth [sic] or side-to-side, that is her way of
exhibiting an anxious or impatient behavior. She usually does this when she wants
food, enrichment time, a bath, or when she wants access into her barn and
sometimes when she just wants attention by the group of keepers who spoil her
daily.”).
15
22
discomfort and lack of emotional support all contribute to Lucky’s
repetitive neurotic behavior. This has been described as similar to the
repetitive and sometimes self-damaging behavior exhibited by autistic
children who becomes stressed when they are unable to express their
needs, desires or discomforts clearly. With a change of environment,
within the complex stimulating and nurturing life of an expansive
sanctuary, these stereotypic behavior patterns are generally reduced
by up to 80%, and in some individuals they are eliminated entirely.
31. Elephants are highly adaptable beings. Lucky is proof of this. Her
natural behavior and activity has been modified grossly to survive and
cope with clearly abnormal living conditions.
This adaptability is
survival; it does not indicate that the inherent needs of the species are
being met.
As an intensely social, highly intelligent, emotionally
complex migratory animal, living in essential solitude, in absence of
emotional nurturing, with limited psychological stimulation and
prison-like confinement, Lucky has suffered incredible harm as a
result of her confinement in the San Antonio Zoo. I am convinced that
Lucky’s life at the San Antonio zoo has caused great psychological and
emotional impairment as well as physical damage and compromise.
There is still time for her to recover, maybe not fully but enough for a
dramatic, much needed improvement in her quality of life.
23
It is
impossible to say to what degree sanctuary can extend Lucky’s
longevity, but I have already presented two cases that clearly
demonstrate the incredible potential offered by an appropriate life that
meets the inherent needs of the species. Authorities expected both of
these individuals to die within a year.
One was a 58-year-old
confiscated circus elephant, ailing from severe osteomyelitis (chronic
bone infection) in both of her front feet. She never fully recovered but
her condition improved enough to allow wandering across hundreds of
acres, and she lived for another five years. The other elephant arrived
to
sanctuary
grossly
underweight
and
severely
compromised,
physically and psychologically; she had previously been labeled as
autistic and antisocial by authorities at two AZA accredited zoos. Now,
more than 15 years later, she continues to explore more than 1800
acres and has played an integral role in the recovery and support of the
entire herd she lives within.
32. Based on my experience, there is still time to make a difference with
Lucky. She is fit enough for travel, her social responses indicate a
strong desire for elephant companionship and her physical limitations
are not yet beyond recovery.
I highly recommend an immediate
transfer to a facility specifically designed to meet the inherent needs of
24
Asian elephants, living in an environment that is as close to nature as
captive life allows.
April 8, 2015
_________________
Date
_________________________________________
Scott D. Blais
Founder & CEO, Global Sanctuary for Elephants
Co-Founder & Former Director of Operations, The
Elephant Sanctuary
25
ADDENDUM
Photo 1
26
Photo 2
Sissy, a female Asian Elephant, while living at the El Paso Zoo (left) and 2
years later at The Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee (right.) Labeled by some
zoo officials as antisocial and a killer. Upon her arrival to The Elephant
Sanctuary, one USDA inspector said that he would be surprised if she lived
more than one year due her tragic state. During a subsequent inspection, one
year later, he stated directly to me that he was shocked, that she was
recognizable as she grazed among the rest of the herd. Today, more than 15
years later, she continues to thrive as an integral member of the sanctuary
herd.
27
Photo 3
Photo
from
Flickr,
posted
by
One
World
Conservation,
https://www.flickr.com/photos/oneworldconservation/sets/72157624941983265
This photo exhibits swelling in Lucky’s back feet, observed most notably
above her toes. This swelling is less prominent on her front feet but all of her
nails are trimmed excessively, potentially compromising their integrity and
her overall foot health.
28
Photo 4
Photo
from
Flickr,
posted
by
One
World
Conservation,
https://www.flickr.com/photos/oneworldconservation/sets/72157624941983265
This photo of Lucky’s front left foot illustrates signs of a chronic infection.
Lucky’s nails are smaller and flatter than normal. This could be normal for
her genetic confirmation but I believe that they have been chronically overtrimmed, making them more susceptible to health complications.
29
Curriculum Vitae
Scott Blais
April 7, 2015
Qualifications
Work History
8/2013-Present
11/2011-8/2013
Over twenty-five years of experience with all aspects of captive elephant care and management,
nonprofit governance and leadership, and elephant welfare and advocacy with the mission of
improving the lives of elephants around the globe.
GLOBAL SANCTUARY FOR ELEPHANTS, President and CEO:
Brentwood, Tennessee
Co-founder of Global Sanctuary for Elephants, a nonprofit corporation dedicated to improving
the plight of captive elephants through the international outreach, consultations for progressive
captive elephant care and the development of spacious natural habitat elephant sanctuaries
internationally. Responsibilities include management of all ongoing operations such as: public
relations and education, donor development and relations, international relations with animal
welfare groups, concerned citizens and governmental authorities, international consultation for
progressive elephant care including: captive elephant health and behavioral assessments,
transport, facility design, construction and operation and hands on assistance with the
development and management of natural habitat sanctuaries.
INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANT FOR THE PROGRESSIVE CARE OF CAPTIVE
ELEPHANTS:
Oriental, North Carolina
Advise animal welfare organizations on the advanced care of captive elephants including: the
transport of abused or neglected elephants to sanctuaries; beginning and advanced level training
of staff for proper elephant care through comprehensive understanding of elephant health and
psychology; providing expert testimony for elephant protection legislation and providing
assessments of elephant physical and psychological health, coordinating and assisting with
relocation and transport of captive elephant. Clients included the following:
• HSUS & MSPCA - Boston, Massachusetts
Expert Testimony before State Legislature- supporting house and senate bills to protect captive
elephants
• HSUS & PETA – Providence, Rhode Island
Expert Testimony before State Legislature- supporting house and senate bills to protect captive
elephants. Discussing fundamental elements of captive elephant welfare with key House and
Senate representatives.
• Ecopolis/Parque Safari Rancagua: Rancagua, Chile
Transport, Training and Healthcare Management 12/2011- Present
Transported a government confiscated Asian elephant (Ramba) from the circus to a temporary
facility at a Safari Park in Rancagua Chile, where she was to receive full medical assessment.
Responsibilities included: coordinating the humane transport, training new elephant care staff,
initiating positive reinforcement training, establishing general care and safety protocol
operational guidelines, and providing full assessment to the court authorities. Provide ongoing
consultation for Ramba’s ongoing health and maintenance, working with care staff to obtain
pivotal tests, provide necessary foot care, conduct behavioral assessments and to prepare her for
eventual transportation to a sanctuary.
Scott Blais
Page 2
• Performing Animal Welfare Society (PAWS); San Andreas, California
Elephant Transportation to Sanctuary 10/2013
Assisted Active Environments with the relocation of three elephants from Toronto, Ontario
Canada to San Andreas, California. Serving as one of three elephant care and transport experts,
responsibilities included: preparation, loading and unloading, monitoring physical and
psychological comfort of the elephants, care and feeding during transport and coordinating
responsibilities throughout the entire team.
01/1995-10/2011
THE ELEPHANT SANCTUARY OF TENNESSEE, Co-Founder & Director of Operations:
Hohenwald, Tennessee
Implemented the development of a 2700 acre natural habitat elephant refuge from the ground up,
creating a new standard of excellence and helping to shape the model for progressive elephant
care.
While serving as an active board member, I participated in strategic planning, land and elephant
acquisitions, facility design and construction, and development/management of the annual $4
million operating budget. As the Director of Operations, I was responsible for the hiring, training
and management of 20 staff members, development and implementation of safety and operational
protocols, and the oversight and daily coordination of all aspects of elephant care and husbandry
of the 24 resident elephants. Elephant care duties included coordinating veterinary care,
caregiver training, transport and rescue, emergency response and critical care and correspondence
with state and federal regulatory agencies. I was also responsible for all aspects of facility design
and development, including permitting, contractor negotiations and oversight, managing the
development of multi-million dollar state-of-the-art elephant barns and more than 20 miles of
fencing. Significant hands-on work included welding, heavy equipment operations, fiber optic
network installations, electrical and general construction.
Additional responsibilities included acting as a PR spokesperson; development of elephant
educational materials including newsletters, school programs, distance learning video
conferencing; and serving as an expert consultant for animal welfare groups and advocacy
efforts, media referrals and legislative efforts.
5/1993-12/1994
TARRA PRODUCTIONS, Elephant Handler & Trainer:
Ontario Canada/ Nashville, Tennessee USA
Provided daily elephant care, including prenatal observations and health assessments;
participated with public entertainment and educational programs.
4/1989-5/1993
AFRICAN LION SAFARI, Elephant Handler & Trainer:
Rockton, Ontario Canada
Responsible for all levels of elephant training and husbandry, utilizing free and protected contact
practices to manage male and female Asian elephants. Participated in public demonstrations and
actively engaged with the park guests. Worked closely with veterinarians and researchers from
the University of Guelph, collecting biological samples and recording behavioral observations.
Played an active role in their comprehensive breeding program for Asian elephants.
Scott Blais
Page 3
Additional Work History
5/2012-2/2014
INNERBANKS SAILS AND CANVAS, Sail Makers Assistant:
Oriental, North Carolina
Performing all duties associated with the repair and fabrication of sails, including installations,
customer relations and professional services.
Education
York University
Physical Education/Physical Therapy
Toronto, Ontario Canada
Galt Collegiate Institute
Cambridge, Ontario Canada
Graduated 1992
Publications
Scott Blais, Guest View: Elephant Sanctuary is Better Option, South Coastal Today (April 2014)
CIVIL COVER SHEET
(SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS
DEFENDANTS
Ö¿³»- Ù®¿¸¿³ô Û´·¦¿¾»¬¸ É§³»®ô Ò±¿¸ Õ¸±-¸¾·²
Í¿² ß²¬±²·± Æ±±´±¹·½¿´ Í±½·»¬§
Þ»¨¿®
(b)
Þ»¨¿®
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)
(c)
(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
(If Known)
(Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number)
Ó¿¬¬¸»© Ò·½µ»´ô Þ´¿µ» Þ®±©²-¸¿¼»´ô Í°»²½»® Ø¿³·´¬±²ô Ó¿®·²¿
Í¬»º¿²±ª¿æ Ü»²¬±²- ËÍ ÔÔÐô îððð Ó½Õ·²²»§ ßª»òô Í«·¬» ïçððô Ü¿´´¿Ì»¨¿- éëîðïô îïìóîëçóðçðð
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
Ü¿ª·¼ Ðò Í³·¬¸ô Ó¿¬¬¸»© Þ¿«³¹¿®¬²»®ô Ü¿ª·¼ ßò Õ·²¹æ Ù®¿ª»-ô
Ü±«¹¸»®¬§ô Ø»¿®±² ú Ó±±¼§ô ÐòÑò Þ±¨ çèô ß«-¬·²ô Ì»¨¿- éèéêé
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only)
PTF
and One Box for Defendant)
PTF
DEF
DEF
(U.S. Government Not a Party)
or
and
(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
CONTRACT
TORTS
PERSONAL INJURY
FORFEITURE/PENALTY
BANKRUPTCY
PERSONAL INJURY
PROPERTY RIGHTS
LABOR
SOCIAL SECURITY
PERSONAL PROPERTY
REAL PROPERTY
CIVIL RIGHTS
PRISONER PETITIONS
Habeas Corpus:
FEDERAL TAX SUITS
IMMIGRATION
Other:
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
(specify)
(Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity)
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION
Û²¼¿²¹»®»¼ Í°»½·»- ß½¬ô ïê ËòÍòÝò yy ïëíïóïëìì
Ü»½´¿®¿¬±®§ ¿²¼ ·²¶«²½¬·ª» ®»´·»º -±«¹¸¬ º±® ¬¿µ·²¹ ¿²¼ ¸¿®³·²¹ ±º »²¼¿²¹»®»¼ -°»½·»-
VII. REQUESTED IN
COMPLAINT:
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
IF ANY
ïîñðïñîðïë
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
CLASS ACTION
DEMAND $
JURY DEMAND:
(See instructions):
ñ-ñ Ó¿¬¬¸»© Ò·½µ»´
OTHER STATUTES

Graham v. San Antonio Zoo (Lucky the Elephant) Complaint 2015

Transcription

Similar documents

English progamme here

Oulton College Newsletter 2015-2016

CommunityConnection

October, 2009

TROPICAL BUILDING BAG The following items should be in the bag

JOIN THE HERD - International Fund for Animal Welfare

FIREBALL RUN comes to the Zoo!

Elephant Reserves - Centre for Environmental Studies

- Top Draw Animation

Lynx – Zoo