The San Francisco Zoo Unravels
Leadership chaos. Rumors of resignations. A story that changed. Welcome to another week at the San Francisco Zoo.
Multiple sources confirm that longtime leaders at the Zoo have announced their resignations—a senior board member and key department head. Names that have been fixtures for years now appear to be out.
The Zoo’s longtime head of animal care—one of the most polarizing figures inside the institution—has reportedly put in his notice. For years, he has been closely linked to what many staff describe as a retaliatory, top-down culture that punished dissent and pushed out respected caregivers. If true, this marks a seismic shift—the kind that doesn’t happen quietly... unless someone doesn’t want anyone asking questions.
At the center of it all is Tanya Peterson, the Zoo’s embattled CEO, who now appears to be clinging to control as the structure around her begins to fracture. Rather than stepping aside, she’s digging in—trying to replace leadership with loyalists, reshaping the narrative, and holding the reins tighter than ever.
But in an institution in freefall, even the firmest grip can only hold so long.
The Chronicle Story That Changed
On May 15, the San Francisco Chronicle published what looked like a long-overdue reckoning. A bold headline declared that Tanya Peterson was facing removal by the Zoo’s board. Internal backlash. Former and current staff were reportedly being rallied to send letters urging her ouster.
It felt like accountability had finally arrived.
But within hours, the story changed. The headline softened. And with it, the clarity faded.
Tanya Peterson—who had appeared on the verge of being removed—was suddenly front and center in the updated version of the article. Not defending herself, but shaping the story. Now, it was the Melinda Dunn, the board chair who had resigned. Or maybe hadn’t. Conflicting reports surfaced about a resignation and retraction, while Peterson moved swiftly to name a replacement—one of her good friends.
What had been framed as a fall from power was quickly rebranded as a strategic realignment. A near-ousting rewritten as a consolidation of power.
The fingerprints of spin were unmistakable. Tanya Peterson had taken what looked like a breaking point—and tried to flip the script.
And for those who’ve watched this pattern repeat itself over the past two decades, the message is clear: at the San Francisco Zoo, controlling the story matters more than confronting the truth.
A Zoo in Crisis—and Freefall
Let’s recap what we know—and what we don’t:
Key leadership figures have disappeared. Longtime board member Ed Poole is out. So is the Zoo’s head of animal care. The latter departure has not been acknowledged publicly.
Internal power is shifting fast. The board chair reportedly resigned but is still planning to lead a vote to oust Peterson—who is now attempting to install a close ally in their place.
Staff morale is plummeting. The culture remains one of fear and retaliation. Employees say that raising concerns—especially about animal welfare—comes with professional risk.
And the person at the top? Tanya Peterson. Still there. Still clinging to control. Even as the walls close in.
The question isn’t just what’s happening behind the scenes—it’s whether this leadership can hold on much longer. And more importantly, should it?
Because when a public institution built on the ideals of care, education, and conservation starts operating like a private fiefdom, we have to ask:
Who is this zoo really serving?
The animals—and the public—deserve better.