Wendy the Elephant at the Odesa Zoo: why have they been so determined about her?

The issue of moving the elephant Wendy has been present in Odesa for more than a year. As city council deputies first told me, and later confirmed in conversation with former mayor Hennadiy Trukhanov himself, Andriy Kyslovskyi has for years been trying to take Wendy from the zoo to his own “Biopark.” Years 7–10 ago he tried at least to “buy” her from the city for 1 million hryvnias, and received a “no” from the then-mayor, but, as we see, he can’t abandon the idea, so now the same haters of the Odesa zoo, whom my investigation has long connected with the Kyslovskyi family, are simply trying to “give” the elephant to someone—even without money.

The first investigation in the series about the zoo is at the link.

“Activists” tried to push the issue of various animals, but after local businessman Yuriy Dehas began funding improvements for some animals, the “haters” returned to the elephant question. Why? Because elephants belong to species subject to a special international protection regime. Moving Wendy outside the zoo cannot be considered an ordinary administrative decision: it potentially touches at once on wild animal protection rules, CITES requirements, veterinary and permitting procedures, and the zoo’s own special nature-protection regime. That is why, in the context of a possible takeover or change of control over the zoo, the question of removing the elephant takes on principled importance: without Wendy it is much easier to physically change the designation of a part of the territory and present it not as an active exhibition and place of housing for a particularly valuable wild animal, but as an ordinary business asset.

When I started investigating the scandal around the municipal institution “Odesa Zoo,” Anzhelika Karapetyan (KarapetianMedia) and Oleksandra Harbar (NGO “A-Chimsa”), having obtained places in the working group on improving animal-keeping conditions, tried to get in to check on Wendy themselves. Of course, they were joined by Roman Varshynidze (media “Alternativa”), Olesya Chubatyuk and Volodymyr Samoychuk, whom I’ve already written about in the articles “Haters of the Odesa Zoo” part 1 and part 2.

The “activists” were told that an elephant is not a toy, it is an animal that weighs 3 tons and is dangerous to humans: with its trunk an elephant breaks spines in the wild, and with its foot can turn a person into thin minced meat. At that time, the basis for such an unprofessional inspection and access to Wendy’s location were claims that she was “freezing.” It should be noted that at the time of these claims it was already spring in Odesa and the temperature was +15. If you look even at Discovery, it quickly becomes clear that in the wild elephants live at night at 0–+5 degrees, and the very fact of hypothermia for an elephant means death. So, if Wendy still excites the public, there was no “freezing.” There was also the question of embezzlement of public funds on boilers to warm the animals, but court hearings are already underway on that matter, and the municipal institution “Odesa Zoo” and its staff are victims, not the accused.

In March 2026 veterinarians from Kyiv were invited to the municipal institution “Odesa Zoo”; they presented their observations during a meeting of the working group on 6 March, created at the initiative of Karapetyan and Harbar. For unknown reasons the recording of that meeting was “lost” by the Department of International Cooperation, Culture and Marketing of Odesa City Council, even though everyone present reported that the meeting had been recorded. Only the minutes of the meeting remain, which, as it turned out from conversations with all attendees, did not capture everything. But even in Protocol No. 2 of the working group meeting to assess the effectiveness of the activities of the municipal institution “State-significant Odesa Zoological Park” dated 06 March 2026 year, it is clearly stated: “Inna Vasylkovska, responding to a question from Anzhelika Karapetyan, added that to move any animal it is necessary to meet veterinary requirements, such as vaccinations and disease testing. However, veterinary examinations always require manipulations that negatively affect the animal’s condition. Therefore, before making a decision to move an animal to another location, it is necessary to weigh all the risks that may arise during transportation. Special attention is required for an elderly animal, such as the elephant Wendy – the oldest in Ukraine, who may not survive any medication intervention. One should also not forget the great stress for the animal when changing its place of residence and the person who cares for it.”

The elephant Wendy was born in 1979, and on 14 September she turned 47 years old. Scientific studies indicate that for Asian (Indian) elephants the average lifespan can be approximately 50–70 years, so Wendy is already “of advanced age.” Any transportation of wild animals (except giraffes and horses) is carried out under anesthesia. Not only does this drug put a very large strain on the heart, but in practice, if the antidote is injected even a few minutes later than necessary, the animal is already gone. Of course, this is a very superficial overview, but just so you understand that such “games” with transportation can easily end in tears. That is why it is so important that experts, not impostors in this field, handle animals.

In April 2026 volunteer Nicole Sherwinski, a German who represented the European Elephant Group, was also invited to the municipal institution “Odesa Zoo”; she donated a net for Wendy made by Harry White of Modern Elephant Management Consulting. As it turned out, she was invited by Karapetyan, and she was met at the M1 hotel, which, by coincidence, is associated with the activities of the same Andriy Kyslovskyi.

Under any zoo director, even imagining that someone might agree to move Wendy, an internal director’s order alone would be insufficient, because for a specific move the law requires veterinary, conservation, or international documents. The State Service of Ukraine on Food Safety and Consumer Protection separately emphasizes that the movement of wild animals is carried out only with appropriate veterinary documents, and for animals that are CITES-listed there are also special international rules. If an animal is part of a permanent exhibition and kept in an institution that has special status as a protected area, its removal should not be treated as an ordinary administrative relocation, but as an act that must simultaneously comply with laws on wildlife, animal protection, keeping wild animals in captivity, veterinary rules and, depending on the species and nature of the move, CITES requirements.

Now about the petition that, thanks to funding by bloggers, nevertheless gathered the required 1000 signatures among Odesa residents. This petition’s text has no addressee, which means, according to the service rules, it will be considered by City Council. And despite the obvious links of all the zoo haters with acting mayor Ivan Koval—Ihor Koval—he has no powers to decide the elephant’s fate. In theory, the City Council could decide to sell the elephant, because any animal has a price and is someone’s property, but then the question is: to whom exactly and where would the money go? What city authorities can definitely do is allocate funds to improve Wendy’s conditions, but there is a nuance here as well. One of the deputies of Odesa City Council, Anastasiia Bolshedvorova, has already allocated 1,6 million hryvnias specifically to improve the elephant house, but under unclear circumstances Mr. Krylenko, who heads the department responsible for the zoo, is by all available means “delaying” the start of work on this matter.

For those who have been following the conflict around the zoo in Odesa, Anastasiia Bolshedvorova is well known. She was one of the first to come to the zoo with proposals for improvement, not to overwhelm workers with an incredible number of inquiries like Babenko and Kvasnytska. By the way, it was she whom Andriy Babenko, the attention-seeking regional council deputy I have already written about, tried to publicly humiliate. His promises to improve the life of the Siberian ibex remained hype without real action.

Real wildlife rescuers have a telling story. In 2019 a request arrived for Natalya Popova, owner of Wild Rescue Animals Center, to evacuate a homeless elephant in Kharkiv. Once again – a HOMELESS ELEPHANT. Unfortunately, the war has shown much foolishness in people, and Natalya’s team found totally unexpected privately owned animals, but an elephant…

Another interesting fact: even a small elephant eats 100 kg of food per day and poops 100 kg per day. So the fact that no one knew about someone’s elephant already looked suspicious. There are many sick people, so people logically thought it was fake. But within an hour more reports about an elephant on Kharkiv streets arrived, with video and photos. Organizing such an evacuation costs unreal amounts of money, so Natalya contacted Kharkiv rescuers, then the circus director, and it turned out the circus was located near a kindergarten, and employees had released the elephant onto an enclosed area, but people filmed it so that the enclosure didn’t show. So it turned out there was no need to “rescue” a homeless elephant… I really hope that the Wendy question will finally close in your minds, because I’m even a little ashamed of us that we, little humans, wanted to touch the poor granny.