Episode 59: Tamy's Passing

Summary

Global Rumblings Podcast: Episode 59 – Tamy's Passing

Release Date: July 22, 2025
Host: Nadia Mari
Guests: Kat and Scott Blais, Co-founders of Global Sanctuary for Elephants

---

I. Introduction

In this poignant episode of Global Rumblings, host Nadia Mari delves into the heartbreaking news of Tamy's passing, a solitary male Asian elephant who died on June 23rd at the Mendoza Eco Park in Argentina. Joined by Kat and Scott Blais, co-founders of the Global Sanctuary for Elephants (GSE), the discussion navigates the multifaceted challenges surrounding elephant captivity, sanctuary efforts, and the bureaucratic hurdles that impede their rescue and rehabilitation.

---

II. The Passing of Tamy: Circumstances and Emotional Impact

The episode opens with Nadia expressing the somber tone of the discussion ahead, setting the stage for a heartfelt exploration of Tamy’s demise. Scott reflects on the emotional toll, stating:

Scott [01:25]: "It's heavy, it's hard, it's frustrating."

Kat echoes these sentiments, highlighting the complexity of processing such losses while striving to advocate for better elephant welfare.

---

III. Bureaucratic Obstacles in Elephant Rescue Efforts

A significant portion of the conversation centers on the bureaucratic challenges that GSE faces in relocating elephants from captivity to sanctuaries. Scott paints a picture of a systemic impediment, describing it as:

Scott [02:43]: "It's called the bureaucracy of our society."

He explains that the licensing process alone can take three to four years, a stark contrast to the expedited six-month period GSE experienced in Brazil. This delay is exacerbated by limited sanctuary spaces—only one sanctuary in Europe can currently accept new elephants, accommodating just one more at the time of the discussion.

Moreover, Scott draws parallels to similar struggles in the United States, referencing Lucy’s campaign, which has been ongoing for 15 years without resolution. The rarity of available sanctuaries worldwide intensifies the frustration, leaving many elephants languishing in inadequate conditions.

---

IV. Ethical Dilemma: Captivity vs. Sanctuaries

The ethical implications of elephant captivity versus sanctuary life form the crux of the debate. Scott emphasizes the detrimental effects of confinement:

Scott [05:45]: "Poor diet, small space, all the things that captivity contribute to compromise health."

He highlights Tamy's suffering due to inadequate care—improper diet, limited space, and lack of foot maintenance—as symptomatic of a broader systemic neglect. Kat adds that elephants cannot be valued merely as educational tools but deserve to exist and thrive for their intrinsic worth:

Kat [06:32]: "They are valuable when they can be tools of education because people can stare at them and see this unnatural life that doesn't even educate them to what the reality of an elephant is."

This perspective underscores the necessity of sanctuaries not just as temporary refuges but as essential havens for genuine healing and well-being.

---

V. Critique of Zoos and Their Justifications

Kat and Scott critically assess the role of zoos, challenging their purported missions of conservation and education. While zoos claim to contribute to elephant welfare, the reality often starkly contrasts with these assertions. Scott cites the tragic death of an African elephant male in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, who suffered from severe health issues unaddressed by inadequate care:

Scott [09:13]: "There's another elephant that just died in Belo Horizonte, which is in Ministry dais in Brazil. 29 year old African elephant, male, who has skin and bones abscesses on his body."

Kat further critiques the superficial value placed on elephants, arguing that their presence in zoos primarily serves human entertainment rather than their own needs:

Kat [08:13]: "Tammy was in that zoo because people wanted to be able to see elephants."

This critique extends to the broader societal acceptance of such practices, where elephants are commodified for visitation rather than respected for their inherent worth.

---

VI. Challenges in Implementing Sanctuary Solutions

The discussion highlights the resistance to change driven by institutional pride and fear of admitting wrongdoing. Kat attributes the failure to adhere to sanctuary recommendations to ego and a reluctance to recognize the flaws in current captivity practices:

Kat [12:00]: "A lot of it comes back to ego. The people not wanting to feel like there are other people that know better, that what they're doing is wrong."

This resistance manifests in neglectful practices, as illustrated by Tamy's lack of training and inadequate care, ultimately contributing to his untimely death. Scott underscores the inefficiency and delays caused by bureaucratic red tape, which often result in critical intervention being too late to save affected elephants.

---

VII. Advocacy and Legal Battles

Legal obstacles play a pivotal role in the sanctuary efforts. Scott outlines the legal battles GSE faces, citing judges' hesitance to make decisive rulings without deferring to panels or fearing public backlash. For instance, a judge handling another elephant case remarked:

Kat [22:12]: "He doesn't want to make the decision because he's been told she might die in transport."

This hesitation underscores the systemic fear of making potentially controversial decisions, even when evidence supports the necessity of relocation to a sanctuary.

Nadia questions the consistency of judicial decisions, especially given South America's progressive laws on elephant confiscation. Scott responds by highlighting the ongoing struggle with legal delays and misinformation campaigns that hinder swift action:

Scott [22:26]: "They're using data excerpts to make their arguments... There's nothing to support these delays."

The dialogue emphasizes the need for judicial systems to prioritize animal welfare over institutional inertia and public pressure.

---

VIII. Emotional and Personal Reflections

The emotional weight of the discussion is palpable as Nadia shares her personal heartbreak over Tamy's death:

Nadia Mari [30:13]: "I don't know what to say. I'm crying now."

Scott offers a blend of sorrow and hope, reflecting on the positive changes witnessed in other relocated elephants and the enduring spirit of those still fighting:

Scott [28:38]: "There's something that is incredibly, I guess, beautiful, knowing that there's no more elephants in that concrete hole."

This balance between grief and optimism encapsulates the resilient spirit of the sanctuary community.

---

IX. Call to Action and Future Efforts

As the episode draws to a close, the guests emphasize the importance of continued advocacy and public support. Kat expresses a cautious optimism, urging listeners to educate themselves and support sanctuary efforts:

Kat [27:17]: "We just all have to keep doing what we're trying to do and hope that somebody listens at some point."

Scott reaffirms GSE's commitment to fighting for every elephant's well-being, regardless of setbacks:

Scott [30:16]: "We don't stop that fight. We don't stop pushing in that direction to give these elephants whatever it is for however long it is."

---

X. Conclusion

Global Rumblings Episode 59 serves as a powerful testament to the ongoing struggle for elephant welfare. Through the lens of Tamy’s tragic passing, the podcast sheds light on systemic issues within elephant captivity, the relentless pursuit of sanctuary solutions, and the emotional resilience of those dedicated to these majestic animals. Listeners are left with a profound understanding of the complexities involved and a call to support meaningful change.

---

XI. Notable Quotes

• Scott [01:25]: "It's heavy, it's hard, it's frustrating."
• Scott [02:43]: "It's called the bureaucracy of our society."
• Scott [05:45]: "Poor diet, small space, all the things that captivity contribute to compromise health."
• Kat [06:32]: "They are valuable when they can be tools of education because people can stare at them and see this unnatural life that doesn't even educate them to what the reality of an elephant is."
• Scott [09:13]: "There's another elephant that just died in Belo Horizonte... who has skin and bones abscesses on his body."
• Kat [12:00]: "A lot of it comes back to ego. The people not wanting to feel like there are other people that know better, that what they're doing is wrong."
• Nadia Mari [30:13]: "I don't know what to say. I'm crying now."
• Kat [27:17]: "We just all have to keep doing what we're trying to do and hope that somebody listens at some point."
• Scott [30:16]: "We don't stop that fight. We don't stop pushing in that direction to give these elephants whatever it is for however long it is."

---

Thank you for reading this summary of Episode 59: Tamy's Passing. For more in-depth discussions on elephant welfare and sanctuary life, subscribe to the Global Rumblings Podcast and join Nadia, Kat, and Scott in their mission to create safe, healing spaces for elephants worldwide.

Transcript

[Nadia Mari]

Hello and welcome to Global Sanctuary for Elephants podcast. Global Rumblings. Global Sanctuary for Elephants, or GSE for short, is a non profit organization with a mission to create vast safe spaces for captive elephants where they are able to heal physically and emotionally, emotionally, often from very traumatic pasts. I'm your host, Nadia Mari, and I'll be taking you to the lush jungle of the Mato Grosso region in central Brazil, home of GSE's initial project, Elephant Sanctuary Brazil, where Asian and African elephants, lovingly referred to as the girls, live their best lives. Hello, everyone. Welcome back to a new episode of Global Rumblings. Thanks for tuning in again this week. Today's podcast is a sad one and as we will be talking about the recent passing of Tami, the solitary male Asian elephant, at the Mendoza Eco park in Argentina on the 23rd of June. So let's head over to Brazil to say hi to Kat and also to Scott, who's currently in Argentina. Hi, you two.

[Scott]

Hi, Nadia. How are you?

[Nadia Mari]

Yep, I'm okay. Not really looking forward to today's discussion.

[Scott]

But yeah, yeah, it's definitely a somber note. You know, it's hard as you know, Kat was just saying to me, you know, we are still trying to make sense of it all ourselves and trying to process the feelings and so still trying to go through all that and, you know, accepting this reality that it is, then, you know, we're gonna try to put on a smiley face and speak about it and it doesn't really work that way. You know, it's. It's heavy, it's hard, it's frustrating. There's a lot of elements that make it all frustrating. Not only the fact that he didn't make it, which is, you know, knowing that he spent his last days concrete hole, but also the considerations were all that led to this point.

[Nadia Mari]

I think frustrating is a, is a good word. I was reading some of the comments under your website post and also on Friends of Global Sanctuary for Elephants. I think for me personally, I wasn't angry. I was just incredibly sad. And then I was just so frustrated because we have talked about just this time aspect, so maybe we can talk about that. Or is is there a bigger picture that we all are missing? Obviously it can't be down to you as an organization not doing enough because you are. But what is the bigger picture apart from, let's say, permits or is it politics? Why does it take so long not only to try to rescue Temi, when Pocha and Gijamina were rescued in May 2022? I mean, that's three years ago, but also all the other elephants. What is happening? The spanner in the woodworks?

[Scott]

Oh, it's called the bureaucracy of our society. You know, if, you know, Kat, you can jump in and call it something different, but I mean, the reality is that this is not the only facility that is trying to get elephants out. You know, we're trying to get elephants out of these. These scenarios. I mean, in the United States, these things go on for years. We've talked about it before. And then all of a sudden, because we're the might and transparent ones, people think that we are the ones taking longer. I mean, we're what, 15 years into Lucy's campaign, you know, and not even close to end in sight, you know, but if you want to bring it back to a substantial element of the problem is the long history is when we first talked to them, we didn't even have a property yet. You know, when they first approach us, there's no solutions in the world. You know, going back to Europe, there is one sanctuary that can accept elephants right now, and they have two elephants and don't have space for. I think that may have space for one more right now. There aren't solutions, you know, so when this all came up here with this transformation, there wasn't even elephant sanctuary Brazil property, There wasn't even elephant sanctuary Brazil organization. We were there trying to make it happen. But then there's all the elements of it. It's the fundraising, it's the licensing. You know, going back to the conversations before. When we first started in Brazil, they moved our licensing forward in six months. And they said, normally this type of licensing takes three to four years. It could have been three to four years before we received our first elephant because of how long that process can take. So there's a lot of elements to it. You know, then there is the. Our society that seems to be working against progress, the bureaucracy that works against progress, the bureaucracy that continues to allow elephants to move to zoos knowing the negative impact that they cause. But that same processing, the same licensing, prevents them from being able to go to a sanctuary that is proven to have substantial benefit. There's people in society and all over social media that are working against these rotations right now with Sandro, you know, they have active campaigns, social media campaigns, talking about all the reasons why he should stay on 1500 square meters where he spends 16 to 18 hours locked inside a tiny little space of less than 200 square meters with no human interaction. You know, and this is the justification of, oh, this is what he knows. Look, he's doing so well. There was something from the veterinarian there just this week saying, you know, they say he's not doing well, but look, he's 43 years old. Sure. Can you tell what's going on inside of them? Nope. There's not a diagnostic tool in the world that's going to tell you what's going on with them inside. Not to the extent that you need to understand. What we do know is that poor diet, small space, all the things that are captivity contribute to compromise health. Let's bring it back to Tammy. Small space, improper diet, not enough care, not enough maintenance on his feet. And five years ago, probably somebody could have said, look, he's doing fine. He's over 50 years old. That doesn't mean he's doing fine. Just because he's alive doesn't mean he's fine. Just because Sandra's alive doesn't mean he's fine. And you have a chance to make a positive difference, a known, measurable positive difference. And people are more comfortable continuing with the. Our society approved negligence, our society approved and accepted mistreatment, inherent mistreatment, than making positive changes.

[Nadia Mari]

Why do you think that is? Because you said it's a measurable success. I mean, all the relocations of the elephants to your sanctuary, to other sanctuaries have shown they can thrive. Kat in recent podcast said that you didn't teach Pupi how to. How to scrape bark off the tree. She was doing it instinctively on her first night. So I don't know, is it just ignorance? Is it that easy to say it's ignorance that they just don't want to see it, what's staring in their face, that elephants after captivity in zoos can adapt in sanctuaries?

[Kat]

I think part of it goes back to the bigger picture of people. Not truly, not everybody, but a lot of people not truly being able to value elephants for just being elephants. It is. They are valuable when they can be tools of education because people can stare at them and see this unnatural life that doesn't even educate them to what the reality of an elephant is. You know, it's. Everybody wants to point the finger at somebody else. Tammy is. Was in that zoo because people wanted to go see him. And I doubt there are many people who are listening who haven't gone to a zoo and who haven't paid to go see some animal they wanted to see. Mostly because people say that they love these animals, and I get that, but that's why he was there. So, yes, it is the fault of bureaucracy and all of the other nonsense that has gone on with the people in Argentina only caring about their elephants when their elephants were supposed to go somewhere else, and so on and so forth. But the reality is he was there because people want to be able to see elephants. And it's all of our faults. We have supporters who say they love our work, they love that we don't let people come see our elephants, that it is their home. And then they donate, they don't donate to us and they donate to other facilities that allow them to go see their elephants and touch their elephants. It all comes down to, for me, people not genuinely being able to value them, just for being them.

[Scott]

It's critical to understand, as Kat's saying, our involvement and it's our society's involvement. Zoos are still looked at as these education conservation programs and they are glorified for this. They're allowed to take animals out of the wild for conservation and education. Irrelevant to the fact that many of them get sequestered into very substandard facilities. We've talked about it before with the elephants that were imported from Africa back to San Diego and with this multi generational herd, well then you have too much breeding, too many elephants and then you get sent off to in a facility that has one or two males and they have less than an acre. Legal. It's completely legal and our society accepts it. We have another elephant that just died in Belo Horizonte, which is in Ministry dais in Brazil. 29 year old African elephant, male, who has skin and bones abscesses on his body.

[Kat]

Oh my gosh.

[Scott]

And their, their statement is, how tragic we lost our elephant. He was this old. He's been with us since he was 2 years old. But we are the only facility that ever bred elephants in captivity.

[Kat]

Mind you, they had three stillborns and the third one killed the mother who was carrying the baby. And the reason that the male actually did die was because they wanted to give him a more thorough examination and take blood work from him because they didn't know what was wrong with him. And instead of trying to train him for blood draw and to comply with an exam, they decided to sedate him instead. And he died under sedation.

[Scott]

He had been there since he was 2 years old. There's no reason, there's no excuse to not have training. Let's go to Mendoza. There's no reason why he did not have training all these years. There's people available that can help. You know, we paid people to help train this Team here to do the same thing to help them understand how to better care for those elephants while trying to make sanctuary happen. As soon as they were gone, nothing happened here. No diet was changed, nothing was modified in a positive direction until we had people here committed full time to try to help nurture him, to get him to a place where he could go to sanctuary. But this elephant administer ice in Belo Horizont. No excuse to not have him trained, you know, but everyone, what people hang on to, wow, what an amazing zoo. They are the only ones to reproduce in captivity. What a great conservation effort. Not what went wrong. They look at this glorified zoo again. And this is not to put all zoos in the same pocket by any means. There are programs that are substantially improved, without a doubt. But going back to what Cass said, their value is still, I want to see them, I want to be close. I was talking to somebody at the sanctuary the other day. He said, what if you just let people in and could view from a distance? I said, there's still a price tag on their presentation to humans. As long as we have that, elephants are going to continue to suffer. Not just elephants, all these animals, they are compromised because we want to see.

[Nadia Mari]

Them going back to Tami. You said that after you'd left and you'd made suggestions, something that Kat said before as well in our other podcast. They are not your elephants until they come to your sanctuary, so you can only give recommendations and suggestions. So why didn't the zoo then adhere to your advice if they were committed to relocating Tami as well? Is that then again because it's a city owned zoo, because it's bureaucracy or. Or because, I don't know, some people wanted to keep him there after Poacho and Gijamina had been relocated. What happened?

[Kat]

I am going to be such a ray of sunshine in this podcast. I'm sorry. I think a lot of it comes back to ego. You know, it is the people not wanting to feel like there are other people that know better, you know, that what they're doing is wrong, that they should change things. You know, we've been asked multiple times to give recommendations and we've given them in all different forms to all different people, but it doesn't matter because I don't believe there was ever this desire to change anything except for to get him out of the zoo. But it completely lacks the understanding that without changing what was going on with him and taking better care of him, he was never going to make it out of the zoo. And yes, it was always a fear we had. It's a fear we have with pretty much every elephant we are trying to get out of the facility they're in. None of them are healthy. I mean, to different degrees. But, you know, there is always this fear that it's not going to happen soon enough. And we've had elephants that haven't been able to get here and it hasn't happened soon enough. But it doesn't mean we give up on them.

[Scott]

No, that goes with everybody. Let's go back to Rhomba. I mean, everybody knows Rambo was sick for years before she came. Does that mean you're not going to try? No. She was given a year to live. Does that mean you don't give her the chance and don't fight and don't raise money and don't build for her? No, you give them a chance. You. We are fighting every day for to get things done as quickly as possible, you know, on our end. And our end is sometimes restricted by the bureaucracy. You know, let's go back to all the delays that happen here. Pochin, Gijamina. How long was their process delayed because citizens, not because of the zoos, but it started with citizens within the country that said, we don't want our elephants to leave. And then because they couldn't get any traction, they started to fabricate information. Mar is dead, all the elephants are diseased, all these things that were false claims. And then our governments have to investigate, which takes time. How many times did they have to come and count that we had six elephants? You know, multiple times. And then a delegate from Argentina comes and they do a. We talked about this before with voting. You know, they come out with how many people that came and they do a report that's fully falsified information. You know, we didn't give them access to records, we didn't give them access to mar. All that was crazy. Until we had to fight back and say, no, here's all the proof that shows this was not the case, you know, and then eventually, because of enough public outcry, their licenses were liberated. That was from the Argentine side. And then with Kuki and Pupi, that was from the Brazil side. Again, because of fear of the unknown and what we're all about. Well, the only fear, the only reason why there's anything unknown is because they're not spending the time to investigate. We're there. We're an open book. Come see us, come see us, come see us. All the paperwork is there, all the things in line. But your fear of what might. Could possibly go wrong at some point stops you from being able to emit a permit that is outside of your jurisdiction, actually, you know, so these things that happened that we have no control over, that was two years again, going back to Poopy and Kooky. The day before. I mean, the same day we got the notice that the license had been admitted, Kuki slipped and fell and died in her enclosure. You know, so we are. We've started the paperwork for. For Tammy, you know, the licensing for Bambi, knowing that it can take some time while we are in these next stages of his development and his. His. His care and his. His training. Unfortunately, again, and tragically, again, too little, too late because of all these hurdles, because we couldn't move forward with Kami until we got the others. We couldn't even apply for another permit until we got the permits resolved for Bupi and Kooky in Kenya. Once they were resolved and we had that finalized, then we could start the process for Cami, but we couldn't throw another process on top of the one that was already delayed. So all these things can't happen simultaneously. Sometimes it's infuriating. I mean, we. How many times do we sit back and say, you know, what the f. You know, this is absolutely absurd. What do we have to do to help these elephants? We do everything on our part, but our society is set up against progress.

[Kat]

And I got. Not that I. I'm definitely whatever with the government in Brazil and how ridiculous they were. I'm not giving them an out, but at least I understand the fear of saying it's fine and then having something happen and that being thrown back upon you. But the group, a very small group in Argentina that caused these issues in the first place for me, you know, they've done this under the guise of we care so much about them. You know, they're a piece of Argentina. The sanctuary is this terrible place. Well, I hope. I really hope that you feel terrible that this is how this went, because all the nonsense that you did and the delays that you created, all for selfish reasons. I mean, when you didn't do anything with poor Shurima who died in her 20s in a zoo in Argentina or the same zoo that had another elephant die in their 20s just before that, nobody cared then. But all of a sudden, when somebody wants to offer your elephants a nice life, you do this. You were the reason he's dead and that he died there. Totally you. I hope you feel good about it.

[Scott]

And that's Argentina. But that's Also what's going on in other locations. Also again, going back to Sandro and Son Caba, there are people that are saying he's part of our cultural heritage. Come on. Your cultural heritage is based around a captive elephant. This is something to be proud of and let's just fight for that so he stays here and get a better life. You can't do blood work, you can't do footwork, you can't do medical exams, the same as what happened with Jumbo. So if something does happen with Sandro, you're going to sedate him too and say a sick elephant to sedate him to try to do exams. He might die as well, you know. But there are solutions, there are answers, there's progress that can be made. We just have to be open to that and stop doubting because of fear of what could possibly happen, when what is happening is worse than what could possibly happen if you take a chance on something positive.

[Kat]

I mean, this veterinarian that's talking about Sandro, it's so ridiculous that you are a veterinarian and you are. He did this like 8 minute long video on TikTok talking about. The people that are saying he should go are just activists and vegans and they have no idea what they're talking about. And Sandra is the equivalent of a hundred year old man and you know, he's shouldn't be moved, it's so dangerous. But of course there's no, nobody ever gives any evidence of elephants that have died in transport, that were sedation and a car accident. There was actually one of those that weren't involved. You know, you talk about him being 100 years old, he's getting such good care. Like Scott just said, they can't do blood work, you know, they can't do foot trimming. We still know that. Foot disease, joint disease, top killer of elephants in captivity. So you're completely ignoring the fact that they can't provide him with that sort of. The zoo has decided that he has tooth issues and that's why he was losing so much weight and so much muscle mass. Have they actually looked at his teeth? No. Have they actually done any tests? No. Are they treating him appropriately? Even if that's what's wrong with him? They're cutting up his food, which would be appropriate, but they're giving him a bunch of soybean oil to counteract his caloric loss, which is absolutely absurd. And this is a veterinarian claiming, look, he gets such good care. I mean, this is people who are essentially lying through their Teeth to back up a facility just because it's a zoo and they don't want an animal to go to sanctuary. And we've heard this before, that it starts with elephants and then it goes to primates, and then it's big cats, and then what else? And then the zoos aren't going to have any animals and it's going to be this tragedy and blah, blah, blah. That is not what any of us are doing. At least that's not what we're doing. Clearly, I'm not going to talk for everybody, but we're not trying to take every elephant everywhere. We don't want zoos to be emptied. Although, love the model of Buenos Aires, but it's just absurd that people are willing to sell out their ethics and morals and, like, completely invest themselves in bashing this whole situation just because it's absurd.

[Scott]

And then the argument of, you know, what's next, you know, the, the big cats, the baboons, or whatever it is. Where does Sandro tie into that? Still, you know, this is supposed to be a Sandro, not about the zoo philosophy. It's not about the closing of zoos. This is about Sandro. You guys are saying that he matters most, but then you're throwing all these other animals and the culture of zoo, and what's going to happen? You're going to close our zoo and lose our job. So, okay, that's not the argument. The argument is Sandro. What does Sandro need? You know? And that gets lost in it. And no one cared. No one cared. Until there's a campaign to give him to a better life. And once there's a campaign and a judge decision to give him a better life, oh, my God, now we have to save our Sandro. He matters so much to us.

[Nadia Mari]

So talking of judges, I mean, the first podcast we started and talking about why you established elephant sanctuary Brazil in Brazil was the fact that South America had very progressive laws confiscating elephants from circuses at the time due to bad handling. So what do these judges say if they then see the elephants in the zoo not being treated accordingly? Or is the outside influence so strong to. To counteract a judge's decision making?

[Scott]

Alessandro's judge did say the zoo has 45 days to send him and they have the right to appeal or they have the right to the ability to comply. And we're waiting for that determination. They asked for an extension. They are working through that process right now and playing a game while going through that. Some members of the city are playing a Game as they go through that process. But then you have another case, like with Mason, who the judge is afraid to make the decision.

[Kat]

And he literally said, I don't want to make it by myself. So they moved it to a three judge panel. It's like, how absurd is that? That's your job. You don't want public backlash. So you're just not going to decide at all. Great. Awesome.

[Scott]

And why doesn't he want to make the decision? He doesn't want to make the decision because he's been told she might die in transport. Where's the data to support that? It doesn't exist. But all it takes is somebody. He might die in transport. He's not going to adapt. Oh, I don't want to be responsible for an elephant not adapting. I don't want to be responsible for an elephant dying in transfer. Well, you're not. You're responsible for giving Adele chance at a better life. You're giving an elephant chance for proper care because she doesn't get it. She doesn't get foot care. She doesn't get anything. And then they have, quote, unquote, experts. You know, I think you talked about this earlier, Nadia, before that call about a report that was done by an expert to show that Mason is in perfect health using a chart that is for African elephants. And even within that misrepresented chart saying she's a five. Well, five is obese. But that's the data that's being sent to the judges. And the judges say, oh, wow, a biologist said this, a veterinary said this. And you can say a biologist as a veterinary set. And everyone's like, oh, wow. But looking at the facts, not the opinion of a biologist or veterinarian. And if these scientists, as they say they are, are using scientific data, there is no question about what is the right thing. But they're not using the data that is showing the fact. They're using excerpts from the data to make their arguments. And there's nothing to support him staying or her staying or anybody staying. There's nothing to support these delays. And this has been going on for several years with Sandro and talking of.

[Nadia Mari]

Bambi, I mean, the judge ruling that he doesn't want to make the decision on his own. What about the judge that ruled that Bambi could go because Bambi and Mason were together? And I mean, they can look at the video. I mean, you know, knowledge and information is. It's ubiquitous. It's everywhere. You know, there's no excuse not to have information. There's videos of Bambi being relocated, of Pupi being relocated. So I find it so difficult. It's just this logical side of me. I find it so difficult to understand that people are so ignorant that they just sort of disregard all the information out there showing that, yes, a transport is a long time, maybe five days in a lorry, but they can make it. And they do make it. And when they get to sanctuary on day one, the transformation begins.

[Kat]

Nobody ever complains about an elephant being able to be transported when it's zoo to zoo. Zoos do it all the time. All the time. And do you ever hear, oh, you know, it's dangerous, maybe we shouldn't do it? No, they do it with 50 year old elephants, they do it with 60 year old elephants. They've done it cross country. I mean, they do it all the time. It's only a concern when it's sending a zoo elephant to a sanctuary that all of a sudden it comes up that, you know, oh, they could die. But even in this report, one of the things that was in this report was a photo of Bambi where she had tears under her one eye. And they literally said, see? Clearly, sanctuary doesn't make everything better. It's like, are you kidding? That's because we wash her eye. I mean, there's literally a report in there about Mason from the ophthalmologist who says they can't even do topical eye meds on Mason because she doesn't allow it. It's like Bambi actually allows us to treat her eye and on some days we rinse it with sterile saline so she has tears down her face. And this is just the level of absurdity we deal with when it comes to this stuff. And a judge doesn't know any better. And they're under public pressure. They don't want to make anybody unhappy. They have government officials who are pressuring them in one direction. You know, you have these idiots on social media that get all this support because people think they actually know what they're talking about when they're just talking out there. You know what, it's, it's just a combination of all of it.

[Scott]

And elephants eyes tear, that happens. They get dust in their eyes, they weep. This is normal, you know, but these things, the things that they use counter sanctuary are so barbaric, but they have traction because everyone's afraid of change. Everyone's afraid of progress, everyone's afraid of something new. We're more comfortable keeping the same old derelict, negligent history than making positive change.

[Nadia Mari]

So to wrap up before we get cut off. What is the solution? I mean, Brazil, you know, Brazil, be proud. You have got a fantastic elephant sanctuary. You know, send your elephants there. And when you talked about culture, it reminded me of elephants in Japan, where people said, well, yes, you know, I've been visiting Hanako all my life, and she makes my life happy. And I think to myself, well, yeah, great, but you leave the zoo at the end of your visit, and Hanako spent 60 years on a concrete slab. And as you talked about moving elephants. Yeah, they get moved around in Japan as well for little breeding. Yes, let's move them from the, you know, from the southernmost southern island in Japan right up to Kobe for her to, you know, for this elephant to breed with the male, it's ridiculous. But. Well, back to South America. What is the. The solution?

[Kat]

I don't think there necessarily is a solution. I mean, we just all have to keep doing what we're trying to do and hope that somebody listens at some point, that we get the right judge, that somebody chooses to open their mind and acknowledge that maybe what they're seeing isn't the best for these animals. I mean, they talked to in this video that this boob did on TikTok, it was from a news piece, and they talked to people who were there visiting Sandro, and the people in the piece said, you know, I really like seeing him, but if it means that he gets to be happier, I'm okay with him going. So it's just more progress, educating more people, hoping that the world continues to progress in a way where we learn to value things not for what they do for us, But. And I say things. I'm not talking just about elephants, but for who they are, what they are in general. But I do want to bring it back to Tammy for a minute, and I'm not going to be able to share this story. Scott can share it. He didn't get here, clearly, but that doesn't mean that things weren't different for him there. And, Scott, you can talk about both the chick, the eco park, and what Augustina said.

[Scott]

First off, I am here in Mendoza following up with Tammy, and then also chicken on Kenya. I will say that it's.

[Nadia Mari]

It's.

[Scott]

It's tragic and sad and horrific to not see him there, knowing that his future is not going to be sanctuary. But there's also something that is incredibly, I guess, beautiful, knowing that there's no more elephants in that concrete hole. I was walking around that space today, and it's horrific. But the fact that he's not there is absolutely amazing coming here the other day, somebody said from the office, said these elephants didn't have anything for years until you guys got involved. And as little as it may have seemed, we saw the change in these elephants. We saw the light, we saw their interaction. We can see in them. And she's like, we don't know elephants, but you can see in them. With Kenya and with Tammy and with Augustina cat. I'm not sure which one you're talking about, but one of the most beautiful things with Tammy the other day, he started vocalizing, he started rumbling, which we've never heard, never heard him rumble. And you know, those folks that were here allow these elephants to be seen and they bring sanctuary to him. Because we've talked about sanctuary being more than the space. The sanctuary is a culture of respect. It's a culture of listening to them and seeing them and letting their voice be heard and never giving a little bit of that. Kenya's opening up more and more all the time. She's so much more comfortable now. Tammy rumbled, if that's the least he gets, if that's the least that we could do, at least he's held. Scene.

[Nadia Mari]

I don't know what to say. I'm crying now.

[Scott]

Well, that wraps up our cadcast for this week. Join us in two weeks time. You know, we don't have to wrap this up. You know, just sit with the emotion of knowing that we are trying to do the right thing for the right reasons and there are things going to stand in our way and there's going to be elephants that don't make it. We don't stop that fight. We don't stop pushing in that direction to give these elephants whatever it is for however long it is, whether it's five days in sanctuary or two months of just being seen in the hellhole within which they live. But the fight doesn't stop. Our work continues on, trying to do as much as we can for whoever we can.

[Nadia Mari]

Thank you for that. Yeah, let's just send out positive hope and that the judges rule in favor of the elephants that you are fighting for. And yeah, we'll catch up for our next episode. Bye, you too.

[Scott]

Thank you, everybody.

[Nadia Mari]

Bye.

[Kat]

Bye.

[Nadia Mari]

That's all that we have time for this week. We hope you enjoyed the podcast and if you did, don't forget to subscribe. Hit the notification bell so you never miss an episode. Another great zero cost way to support the podcast is by leaving a five star rating or a glowing review, as this helps other people discover the podcast thank you so much for your support. And until we meet up for our next episode. Take care, Sam.