Happy is a 51-year-old Asian elephant that was born in the wild in Asia and was caught at the age of 1 and brought to the United States. It has lived at the Bronx Zoo since 1977 and now occupies four acres of its own.
Not many people agree that Happy should be at the Zoo. In fact, 1.4 million people from 90 different countries signed a Change.org petition for the Bronx Zoo to end solitary confinement and release it to an elephant sanctuary. These sanctuaries allow elephants to roam freely with other elephants in a more natural environment. Like humans, elephants are known to experience emotional and physical problems when living in small and isolated areas.
Alongside this petition, there is also a big campaign using the hashtag #FreeHappy.
Under current animal welfare laws, it is acceptable to confine an elephant to a small display. But Happy is a little different from other animals. Experiments and research found that Happy was able to demonstrate self-awareness with the mirror test in 2005. This test involved repeatedly touching the white “X” on his forehead while looking into a large mirror.
By the Nonhuman Rights Project, this was part of the evidence Happy presented to the courts at the habeas corpus rights hearing to determine the legality of her captivity. Habeas corpus rights can be defined as a way for people to oppose any illegal restraint.
“(Happy) is interested in exercising her choices and deciding who she wants to be with, where to go, what to do and what to eat,” Monica Miller, attorney for the Project, told the Associated Press in May. The zoo prevents him from making any of these choices himself.”
The Bronx Zoo does not participate in the Non-Human Rights Project and says it is a well-cared and respected elephant, not illegally imprisoned or human. Following the court battle this week, the New York Court of Appeals dismissed the case in a 5-2 decision, saying he was not a “person” in illegal detention.
In the court decision, it was stated that “No one can dispute that elephants are intelligent beings who deserve proper care and affection.” However, “nothing in our precedent, or indeed in any other state or federal court, provides support for the notion that the habeas corpus order is or should be applicable to non-human animals”
However, there are some opposing views, and Judge Jenny Rivera He said: “A gilded cage is still a cage. Happy may be an honorable creature, but there is nothing honorable in his captivity.”
19513
