Zoo Vs. Sanctuary: An Ethical Consideration
An Animal Rights Article from All-Creatures.org

October 2004

Introduction by Maureen Adams

I hope you get a chance to read through the links below. This is another example of the differences between genuinely caring individuals versus those of course with the hidden agenda of the nation's qualified sanctuaries and the exploitive, power-driven attitudes of an organization that abuses their position in deciding the fate of the animals under their control; The American Zoo and Aquarium. An ongoing and heated debate continues while suffering elephants brace for another cold winter.

Both the Detroit Zoo and The San Francisco Zoo face the possibility of revoked accreditation as well as ethics charges by the AZA for making the compassionate decision to retire their ailing elephants to sanctuaries, opposing the recommendations of the AZA to relocate them to other US zoos, back into the SSP (Species Survival Plan) system.

The Detroit Zoo, a facility superior to many other AZA accredited zoos, made the precedent-setting decision to retire their elephants solely on ethical grounds. The AZA bases their response, a blatant act of extortion, on their determination that the best place for these post-reproductive elephants is in their SSP program, which is essentially a "breeding" program. This is about ticket sales, fundraising and subsidies.

For more, please read:

Ed. Note: Maureen Adams worked with All-Creatures.org to develop our Elephant Animal Exploitation Photo Journal and several elephant articles as part of our mutual efforts to end elephant exploitation.

Return to Animal Rights Articles