Over the last month, sister publication Travel Daily has covered the treatment of the endangered animals in Indonesia.
In January, Bali Zoo announced it was ending elephant rides at the park.
It joined TSI Bogor, TSI Prigen and A’Famosa in prohibiting the riding of the animals, albeit more than a year after the decision was made at those respective establishments.
Prior to this, it was reported that Bali’s Mason Elephant Park had been accused of allegedly abusing elephants, with PETA and the World Animal Protection (WAP) launching scathing attacks on the park, before the park launched a defence of its own.
WAP now has another country in the crosshairs though, with its latest report pointing the finger at Thailand for its elephant tourism industry, in what it calls “a troubling shift toward misleadingly marketed sanctuaries and ‘ethical’ elephant washing”.
The report, ‘Bred to Entertain’, examined the living conditions of 2,849 elephants across 236 tourism venues in Thailand over a 15-year monitoring period.
According to WAP, with 2,849 elephants kept in tourism venues in Thailand currently, it is slightly higher than in 2019.
It also found that two out of three elephants are kept in poor living conditions at elephant tourism venues and that more than half of all of the animals were kept on short chains during the day.
In a positive, elephant riding and entertainment shows declined significantly in Thailand compared to the 2010 survey, but the numbers remained high with more than 1,200 elephants (42% of all elephants) still used for rides.
The report admitted that elephant riding and entertainment shows have decreased greatly in their prevalence in Thailand, compared to 2010. But research found that venues offering elephant rides and shows were the most likely to offer poor living conditions.
It said that “experiences offering close-contact activities such as washing (42% of elephants), hand feeding (92%) and ‘care taking’ (11%) have surged, marketed as ethical alternatives”.
WAP argued that venues with these experiences are often promoted as ‘sanctuaries’, ‘rescue centres’ or ‘refuges’, which contributes to tourists being misled, as the reality was that “these practices also require punishment-based training, regular restraint and unnatural visitor interactions”.
It said that observation‑only experiences remain niche (7% of elephants in our survey), although these venues consistently achieved the highest welfare scores in our study’s assessment.
travelBulletin approached the Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT) for comment and, refreshingly, it didn’t back away from the issue at hand.
Pichaya Saisaengchan, director at TAT, said, “Elephant tourism does exist in Thailand. While some operations focus primarily on tourist entertainment, others are structured to benefit both visitors and elephants.”
“At TAT, we believe that animal entertainment constitutes animal cruelty. As such, we work closely with relevant organisations dedicated to the welfare of both domestic and wild elephants to help ensure that interactions between tourists and elephants are ethical, responsible, and constructive.
“While TAT Sydney does not promote any form of animal entertainment, we acknowledge that thousands of domestic elephants and their mahouts currently rely on tourism for their livelihoods.
“We hope that more sustainable and welfare-focused alternatives will continue to be developed to support them. In the meantime, for travellers who choose to visit elephant tourism operators, we strongly encourage selecting ethical providers and making informed decisions that prioritise animal welfare.”
Saisaengchan continued by asserting that when it came to unethical operators, TAT supported strict enforcement under Thailand’s Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and Provision of Animal Welfare Act B.E. 2557, which criminalises acts of animal cruelty and neglect.
“Operators found in violation of the law are subject to legal penalties. We also urge any tourists who witness malpractice or mistreatment of animals to report the matter to the relevant Thai authorities so that appropriate action can be taken,” he said.
WAPO said that the travel industry itself can do more.
“The travel industry’s influence extends beyond the experiences it sells. By providing travellers with clear information on what responsible elephant tourism looks like, companies can empower them to make better choices – even when exploring the country independently. This is particularly important because elephant experiences are easy to find and book on their own.”
It said that while it was encouraging that more than 200 companies have committed to wildlife-friendly policies, ceasing to sell exploitative elephant and other wild animal experiences, many others continued to sell elephant rides or promote washing and hand feeding interactions under misleading marketing, enabling harmful practices to persist.
