Lawsuit Against City of New Bedford Over Buttonwood Park Zoo Elephants Dismissed

BOSTON ( WBSM ) — A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought against the City of New Bedford regarding the care of the Asian elephants at the Buttonwood Park Zoo, stating that Emily and Ruth "received consistent and high-quality veterinary care."

The lawsuit, first filed in 2021, was brought forth by plaintiff Joyce Rowley, the second time she has sued the City while alleging mistreatment of the elephants.

In the most recent decision, handed down on October 31, U.S. District Court Chief Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV wrote that Rowley failed to present any evidence that the zoo failed to properly care for the elephants.

"Plaintiff also contended that one of the elephants, Ruth, was suffering from certain physical and other issues as a result of the conditions at the zoo," Saylor wrote. "She did not, however, offer any expert veterinary or other evidence as to either the existence of those conditions or their cause."

Rowley told WBSM she is appealing the decision.

Buttonwood Park Zoo Recently Announced Ruth Had Entered Hospice

Ruth, the 66-year-old Asian elephant who has been at the BPZoo since 1986, will live out her final days in end-of-life care , the zoo announced on October 22.

"The team knows that every day with Ruth is a gift," said Shara Rapoza, BPZoo's Assistant Director and Elephant Manager. "We are taking our cues from her, allowing her to guide us on next steps."

According to the zoo, the animal care team "made the decision to focus on end-of-life care based on (Ruth's) age-related health issues and discussions with outside elephant veterinarians and large animal specialists."

New Bedford's Beloved Ruth the Elephant Enters Hospice Care

What Rowley Alleged in Her Lawsuit Against the City

Rowley alleged that she had seen radiographs that suggested that Ruth had "lost two of her toe bones in her left foot" due to neglect. She also claimed that Ruth had sores on her body due to conditions at the zoo.

Rowley also alleged that Ruth "is experiencing a condition called 'learned helplessness" in which she "stays frozen in a spot for hours at a time." Rowley claimed she herself had stood up for five hours in and around the zoo and that she had "observed Ruth standing still, perfectly still for up to three hours."

What Judge Saylor Said About Rowley's Claims

Judge Saylor ruled that Rowley failed "to prove that Ruth lost any bones in her toes" and added that Rowley "is neither a veterinarian nor a radiologist, and therefore is not qualified to interpret radiographs of an elephant's foot."

He said that in regards to the sores Rowley claimed were on Ruth's body that the "plaintiff offered no evidence, expert or otherwise, to support the sores were caused by a failure" to deliver proper care and conditions.

As for the claim of "learned helplessness," Judge Saylor wrote that "even though (Rowley) states that 'there's no other explanation for Ruth just standing there,' she has not proved that Ruth is suffering from a particular mental health condition."

Judge Saylor Noted Rowley's Courtroom Behavior

In his dismissal of the lawsuit, Saylor noted that Rowley became "increasingly agitated and disputatious" during cross-examination on the third day. She then emailed a court employee on the morning of the fourth day to say she would not be attending that day.

Rowley then filed a motion for recusal of Judge Saylor, which was denied. The court then asked her to show why the case should not be dismissed with prejudice, and she responded with another motion for recusal, which was also denied.

The court then determined Rowley had rested her case, the City's attorney, John A. Markey Jr. of the New Bedford law firm Markey & Walsh, filed a request for a direct verdict.

Saylor gave Rowley two weeks to file an opposition to the direct verdict request. He wrote in his decision that Rowley "did not file an opposition, either by the deadline or at any point after."

Based on the testimony and evidence, Judge Saylor recently ruled in favor of the City, writing that "the City has neither harmed nor harassed the elephants within the meaning of federal law. ... As to the plaintiff's allegation that Ruth received either poor care or no care at all for her foot, the Court finds the opposite to be the case."

Rowley Previously Sued the City Over the Elephants in 2017

In September 2017, Rowley first filed suit claiming the City of New Bedford was neglecting Emily and Ruth in violation of the Endangered Species Act by failing to provide sufficient shelter, space, social opportunities, veterinary care and nutrition.

Then-Zoo Director Keith Lovett said the lawsuit was "entirely lacking in merit." An independent review of the zoo's elephant program in 2015 was favorable and advised against moving the elephants to a sanctuary, something Rowley has long desired.

In 2019, U.S. District Court Judge William G. Young found in favor of the City, stating "the City has supported its zoo with an adequate budget; had attracted a cadre of dedicated, professional, empathetic, and innovative zookeepers; and had employed top-notch veterinarians wherever necessary."

Mayor Jon Mitchell on Judge Saylor's Decision

"The Court's ruling vindicates the Zoo's hard-working and skillful employees who have maintained their professionalism in the face of these specious lawsuits," Mitchell said. "The City is grateful for the care they provide the Zoo's inhabitants."

Rowley Said She Has Appealed the Decision

Rowley told WBSM that "the case is on appeal at the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit."

"I have also filed a motion for a stay and for an injunction to prevent the City from euthanizing Ruth and/or transferring Emily out of the reach of the court," Rowley said.

"The City arbitrarily put Ruth in hospice, and did not have the courtesy to give me prior notice," she said. "Requests for documentation have gone unanswered. I find the situation highly suspect."