Thank you so much for bringing attention to this. From what I understand from the Non-Human Rights Project (NhRP), the Tulsa zoo has been ranked among the ten worst zoos in the country for animal welfare— so this seems to be more about zoos closing ranks in the face of criticism than about what’s best for Billy and Tina. I’d encourage anyone who’s interested in helping them to check out the NhRP website to see what they’re doing to try to get Billy and Tina to a sanctuary.
Thank you, Danielle. I appreciate you highlighting the work of the Non-Human Rights Project—it's an important resource for anyone who wants to dig deeper or get involved. You're absolutely right: this move feels more like institutional self-preservation than genuine concern for Billy and Tina's welfare. Let’s keep the pressure on.
Thanks for this thoughtful take, Ed. Indeed, this is not just about two elephants, it is about our relationships with other species, and the ludicrous idea that we have a right to hold members of them captive so that we can gawk at them.
Thank you, Karen. I couldn’t agree more—Billy and Tina’s story is part of a much larger reckoning with how we relate to other species. The idea that captivity is justified by our curiosity is long overdue for serious reexamination. I always appreciate hearing your voice in this conversation.
Seems the AZA is as bad as the other corrupt non profits. They clearly did not have the elephants best interest at heart. They could have had a great retirement in San Andres or Tennessee. It’s all about money and profit to these people. I hope future generations treat animals better than the current generation because we are doing a lousy job at seeing other beings as worthy of dignity and a life.
Thank you, Kelly. You captured the heart of the issue—so much of this comes down to institutional priorities, and sadly, dignity and compassion too often get left behind. I share your hope that future generations will do better by the animals who rely on us.
Excellent article. Thanks for sharing. One small but important correction. TINA and JEWEL were circus elephants exploited by a private owner. They were confiscated by the USDA and relocated to San Diego then SD "Loaned" them to LA.
Thank you, Cora. I appreciate the correction. That’s an important detail about Tina and Jewel’s background that adds even more context to their story. I’ll make sure it’s noted moving forward.
Thank you for this piece Ed. “ Today’s technology offers powerful alternatives: immersive virtual reality, interactive exhibits, and high-definition wildlife storytelling—from Planet Earth to Our Planet—that inspire empathy without captivity. Institutions like the Smithsonian and the American Museum of Natural History are already moving in that direction.”
Please add Light Animal to the list of powerful alternatives
I live in Tulsa and frequent the zoo. The Tulsa Zoo has been doing extensive renovations for decades now to provide much better environments for the animals that come to stay. You failed to note that 10 acres of this new elephant preserve is raw, natural wooded area not viewable to guests. They also have private yards for birthing and nursing mothers, as well as geriatric elephants. Very little of this preserve is actually viewable and accessible to spectators. Public education and breeding are both vital to the survival of this endangered species. While miniscule compared to the preserve in Tennessee (the largest elephant sanctuary), limited space can also be ideal - especially for a geriatric elephant experiencing arthritis issues. Limited space can also reduce stress. I'd also like to mention that the 3000 acres in Tennessee accessible to Asian and African elephants is already inhabited with 11, which is more than the area allows for.
Thank you for sharing your perspective, Raelynn. It's valuable to hear from someone with firsthand experience at the Tulsa Zoo. You're absolutely right that Tulsa has invested in improving its elephant facilities, including space that's not visible to the public. That’s an important detail worth acknowledging.
That said, many animal welfare advocates raise concerns not just about space, but about autonomy, choice, and the kind of unstructured, natural living that true sanctuaries aim to provide. Sanctuaries like Tennessee’s don't have fixed capacity limits in the same way zoos do, as they manage space based on the elephants' needs rather than public access or breeding goals.
It’s a complex issue, and I appreciate your thoughtful contribution to the conversation.
Raelynn, I am so relieved, for Tina and Billy's sake, to learn that the Tulsa zoo is so much better than LA! 10 acres out of public view sure sounds better. Thank you for sharing that. Nevertheless , knowing what the weather is like at the PAWS sanctuary in Northern California as compared to Tulsa, and, more importantly, knowing that Tina's previous herd mates are now there makes me wish that is where they had gone, so that those broken bonds could have been restored. I believe that if the number one concern had been their welfare, especially their emotional welfare, that's where they would have gone. And I think it is time we let go of the idea that watching elephants standing around in zoos has education value worth depriving them of freedom.
Thank you, Karen. You expressed that beautifully. While it’s encouraging to hear that Tulsa offers more space and privacy than LA, you're right—true welfare includes emotional well-being and the chance to reconnect with familiar companions. The missed opportunity to reunite Tina with her former herd at PAWS speaks volumes. And yes, it’s long past time we rethink what meaningful education about wild animals really looks like.
Hi Raelynn, I appreciate you providing your opinion regarding holding elephants captive in zoos. I would like to know what you base this statement on, "Public education and breeding are both vital to the survival of this endangered species". The reason I ask is because it is categorically false. Captive-held, captive bred elephants are not reintroduced into the wild. They continue to be held in zoos for the entirety of their lives. According to zoo research, zoo held elephants live a much shorter life than their wild counterparts. The reason is that even 17 acres is insufficient to provide the space, diversity, and opportunity for elephants to engage in natural behavior. This results in constant low level stress, which coupled with unnaturally hard substrate, constant keeper intervention, lack of natural vegetation, cold climate, confinement to barns and isolation, causes pain, suffering and premature death. As another person pointed out, weather is key to an elephants overall health. Tulsa is too cold! But your statement that really caught my attention was "The 3000 acres in Tennessee accessible to Asian and African elephants is already inhabited with 11, which is more than the area allows for." I'm sure this is a typo because if you can defend seven elephants living in seventeen acres, eleven elephants living in 3000 acres would suggest there is plenty of room for more.
Honestly, it would be so much more humane to do away with all zoos or circuses because more modern ways for the general public to have virtual experiences with wild animals in their natural living environments are available and can also a more up close experience with wild animals, while not traumatizing them in captivity.
Ed, Tina is owned by the San Diego Zoo, which had already transferred ownership to the Tulsa Zoo, and the Tulsa Zoo has already made arrangements for her transfer. I just wanted to make sure that detail was offered to your reading audience that it was not entirely the decision of the LA Zoo. https://timesofsandiego.com/life/2025/05/15/la-zoo-elephants-dispute-san-diego/
Thank you so much for bringing attention to this. From what I understand from the Non-Human Rights Project (NhRP), the Tulsa zoo has been ranked among the ten worst zoos in the country for animal welfare— so this seems to be more about zoos closing ranks in the face of criticism than about what’s best for Billy and Tina. I’d encourage anyone who’s interested in helping them to check out the NhRP website to see what they’re doing to try to get Billy and Tina to a sanctuary.
Thank you, Danielle. I appreciate you highlighting the work of the Non-Human Rights Project—it's an important resource for anyone who wants to dig deeper or get involved. You're absolutely right: this move feels more like institutional self-preservation than genuine concern for Billy and Tina's welfare. Let’s keep the pressure on.
Thanks for this thoughtful take, Ed. Indeed, this is not just about two elephants, it is about our relationships with other species, and the ludicrous idea that we have a right to hold members of them captive so that we can gawk at them.
Thank you, Karen. I couldn’t agree more—Billy and Tina’s story is part of a much larger reckoning with how we relate to other species. The idea that captivity is justified by our curiosity is long overdue for serious reexamination. I always appreciate hearing your voice in this conversation.
Seems the AZA is as bad as the other corrupt non profits. They clearly did not have the elephants best interest at heart. They could have had a great retirement in San Andres or Tennessee. It’s all about money and profit to these people. I hope future generations treat animals better than the current generation because we are doing a lousy job at seeing other beings as worthy of dignity and a life.
Thank you, Kelly. You captured the heart of the issue—so much of this comes down to institutional priorities, and sadly, dignity and compassion too often get left behind. I share your hope that future generations will do better by the animals who rely on us.
Excellent article. Thanks for sharing. One small but important correction. TINA and JEWEL were circus elephants exploited by a private owner. They were confiscated by the USDA and relocated to San Diego then SD "Loaned" them to LA.
Thank you, Cora. I appreciate the correction. That’s an important detail about Tina and Jewel’s background that adds even more context to their story. I’ll make sure it’s noted moving forward.
Thank you for this piece Ed. “ Today’s technology offers powerful alternatives: immersive virtual reality, interactive exhibits, and high-definition wildlife storytelling—from Planet Earth to Our Planet—that inspire empathy without captivity. Institutions like the Smithsonian and the American Museum of Natural History are already moving in that direction.”
Please add Light Animal to the list of powerful alternatives
https://www.lightanimal.net/?fbclid=IwQ0xDSwKj2wpleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHuq8ehnsQTf1xqWc_BA6QgZOX-3UlaqASBSFmzXDSgqyGcQLU7iQOjQMKXH1_aem__87QRloAa6v9QKN8SBHh_g
I live in Tulsa and frequent the zoo. The Tulsa Zoo has been doing extensive renovations for decades now to provide much better environments for the animals that come to stay. You failed to note that 10 acres of this new elephant preserve is raw, natural wooded area not viewable to guests. They also have private yards for birthing and nursing mothers, as well as geriatric elephants. Very little of this preserve is actually viewable and accessible to spectators. Public education and breeding are both vital to the survival of this endangered species. While miniscule compared to the preserve in Tennessee (the largest elephant sanctuary), limited space can also be ideal - especially for a geriatric elephant experiencing arthritis issues. Limited space can also reduce stress. I'd also like to mention that the 3000 acres in Tennessee accessible to Asian and African elephants is already inhabited with 11, which is more than the area allows for.
Thank you for sharing your perspective, Raelynn. It's valuable to hear from someone with firsthand experience at the Tulsa Zoo. You're absolutely right that Tulsa has invested in improving its elephant facilities, including space that's not visible to the public. That’s an important detail worth acknowledging.
That said, many animal welfare advocates raise concerns not just about space, but about autonomy, choice, and the kind of unstructured, natural living that true sanctuaries aim to provide. Sanctuaries like Tennessee’s don't have fixed capacity limits in the same way zoos do, as they manage space based on the elephants' needs rather than public access or breeding goals.
It’s a complex issue, and I appreciate your thoughtful contribution to the conversation.
Raelynn, I am so relieved, for Tina and Billy's sake, to learn that the Tulsa zoo is so much better than LA! 10 acres out of public view sure sounds better. Thank you for sharing that. Nevertheless , knowing what the weather is like at the PAWS sanctuary in Northern California as compared to Tulsa, and, more importantly, knowing that Tina's previous herd mates are now there makes me wish that is where they had gone, so that those broken bonds could have been restored. I believe that if the number one concern had been their welfare, especially their emotional welfare, that's where they would have gone. And I think it is time we let go of the idea that watching elephants standing around in zoos has education value worth depriving them of freedom.
Thank you, Karen. You expressed that beautifully. While it’s encouraging to hear that Tulsa offers more space and privacy than LA, you're right—true welfare includes emotional well-being and the chance to reconnect with familiar companions. The missed opportunity to reunite Tina with her former herd at PAWS speaks volumes. And yes, it’s long past time we rethink what meaningful education about wild animals really looks like.
Hi Raelynn, I appreciate you providing your opinion regarding holding elephants captive in zoos. I would like to know what you base this statement on, "Public education and breeding are both vital to the survival of this endangered species". The reason I ask is because it is categorically false. Captive-held, captive bred elephants are not reintroduced into the wild. They continue to be held in zoos for the entirety of their lives. According to zoo research, zoo held elephants live a much shorter life than their wild counterparts. The reason is that even 17 acres is insufficient to provide the space, diversity, and opportunity for elephants to engage in natural behavior. This results in constant low level stress, which coupled with unnaturally hard substrate, constant keeper intervention, lack of natural vegetation, cold climate, confinement to barns and isolation, causes pain, suffering and premature death. As another person pointed out, weather is key to an elephants overall health. Tulsa is too cold! But your statement that really caught my attention was "The 3000 acres in Tennessee accessible to Asian and African elephants is already inhabited with 11, which is more than the area allows for." I'm sure this is a typo because if you can defend seven elephants living in seventeen acres, eleven elephants living in 3000 acres would suggest there is plenty of room for more.
Amen Carol! And, thank you for the incredible work you've done for elephants.
Honestly, it would be so much more humane to do away with all zoos or circuses because more modern ways for the general public to have virtual experiences with wild animals in their natural living environments are available and can also a more up close experience with wild animals, while not traumatizing them in captivity.
Ed, Tina is owned by the San Diego Zoo, which had already transferred ownership to the Tulsa Zoo, and the Tulsa Zoo has already made arrangements for her transfer. I just wanted to make sure that detail was offered to your reading audience that it was not entirely the decision of the LA Zoo. https://timesofsandiego.com/life/2025/05/15/la-zoo-elephants-dispute-san-diego/