Alberta's Court of Appeal released a written decision Thursday that dismisses an appeal that would force a trial on the fate of Valley Zoo elephant, Lucy.
Zoocheck, PETA, and Voice for Animals have been fighting to have Lucy moved to a sanctuary in the U.S. In a two to one decision, the court ruled that the groups didn't go through the right channels when they moved forward with their legal action against the city.
"I think it's becoming clear that Lucy is suffering and I don't think
most people want to see that," said Tove Reece with Voice for Animals
Reece has been part of the battle to move Lucy since 2005. The cause got a lot of attention when former game show host Bob Barker came to see Lucy in person. He joined the fight trying to force the city to transport the elephant to a southern climate.
The 36-year-old elephant has had some health issues, including a breathing problem. But the Valley Zoo says Lucy is stable.
"We're keeping her weight under control, she's back down to lower weight, which I'm very happy about," said Dr. Milton Ness, Valley Zoo veterinarian.
Some zoo visitors feel it's in Lucy's best interest to stay put.
"I mean think of a dog living in your home for years and years and all of a sudden you decide to give them to someone else, it'd be too hard for her," said Marcie Syme.
Coun. Kim Krushell says she grew up near the San Diego Zoo and if she felt it was in Lucy's best interest to send her south, she would support such a move.
"In the very beginning when we were dealing with this debate I did ask the question why would we have elephants at our zoo," she said.
Reece says they'll consider taking their case to the Supreme Court of Canada because they still maintain the city is violating the Animal Protection Act.
"This was not a case about Lucy's care, this was a case about the
process for determining how complaints about Lucy's care would be dealt
with," said Steven Phipps, the lawyer representing the city.
The city says the zoo will continue to make decisions in the best interests of Lucy.
This decision supports a lower court ruling preventing animal rights groups from taking the city to court.
