L.A. Zoo supporters to rally for elephant exhibit

Hundreds of Los Angeles Zoo employees, children and community members, including rock guitarist Slash, are expected today at an 11 a.m. City Hall rally in support of completing the zoo’s Pachyderm Forest.

The planned future home to 23-year-old Billy the elephant, the Pachyderm Forest is a $42-million, 6-acre proposal that began in 2006 but was put on hold a month ago. Some animal-rights activists said the area still would not provide enough roaming room, and Councilman Tony Cardenas proposed that Billy, the zoo’s lone Asian elephant, be sent instead to a sanctuary in San Andreas.

After spending $12 million, the city stopped the project to reconsider. But L.A. Zoo supporters, including Councilman Tom LaBonge, believe the best interest of the endangered elephant lies in finishing the Pachyderm Forest, which is 30% complete. Celebrities including actress Betty White, TV host Jack Hanna and musician Slash have gotten behind the project.

“It’s really well done,” Slash said on a YouTube video posted last week. “It gives the elephants an amazing amount of room to be able to move around and activities and so on. Plus it’s a beautiful exhibit for the patrons to be able to come see the elephants.”

-- Corina Knoll

Comments

[Alejandro Salazar]

I had Zoo membarship for years. I still take my kids couple times a year. I will not visit Zoo that has no ELEPHANTS. Period. I will drive to San Diego. By the way for the same reason my kids never seen the Curcus. Circus without animals, especialy Elephants is a fraud. I may as well go to the movies. That is what is left. In the future do not expect support for animal rights from generations that never seen one.

[nan]

this elephant exhibit is too small for the health and well being of the elephant!
it should be stopped and reconsidered for a smaller animal!
save the money and help the poor elephant!

[bwunderlick]

If Slash says it's big enough, it has to be!

[sandra m]

Zoos are relics from a bygone era when keeping animals in captivity was as unquestioned as human slavery and subjugation of women. Many progressive ideas of the 20th century took root in Los Angeles. But if the city goes forth with its proposed elephant exhibit, L.A.'s place as the nation's cultural trend-setter will be lost. We should step out as San Francisco did, to close down our elephant exhibit, send our remaining elephant to a sanctuary, and once more be a beacon to the rest of society for enlightened policies.

[Carlos Dill]

The Zoo staff is right. The new home for Billy is one of, if not the, best places in the world for Asian elephants. The care is superlative, the design is great for elephants with everything they need to stay active and thrive. Who are these people who would deny Billy a wonderful and productive future???

[Ana Castaneda]

Go Zoo! Build it for Billy!! Come on, L.A., we need to show our support for this wonderful zoo.

[Larry]

Alejandro,
Go to the movies then!
These animals are not here for your pleasure and entertainment!
Imagine yourself kept in an area far too small...that's what it's like for an elephant who can travel up to a hundred miles a day. Right now, BILLY has .4 acre. Less than 1/2 an acre. They want to make this new exhibit 3.5 acres. But that's not just for Billy. That's with bringing in anywhere from 4 to 8 more elephants. Which will then give them pretty much the same amount of space Billy has right now. It is not enough space for the world's largest land mammal.
Think about more than just yourself.
We are better than this.
www.helpbilly.org

[Lisa]

What about the tigers, zebras, chimps and all the other animals on exhibit there? The amount of land all the animals are provided are fractional compared to what they are use to in the wild.
Modern zoo's make due with what they are given, and have improved vastly in the veterinary and psychological care that they give their animals.
The LA zoo educates the children of metro Los Angeles on the needs and welfare of these animals, and can be quite influential on children who have never been exposed to wild animals.
I understand that elephants are exceptionally intelligent animals with particular needs, but the the zoo is attempting to remedy their shortcomings in caring for the animal. Give them a chance to prove themselves before shutting them down at least for the sake of the children of Los Angeles, many of which do not have to means to take a trip to San Diego's zoo.
Perhaps in the long run exposing these children to the wonders of live elephant will drive some to become veterinarians or animal specialists, and will in turn help in the welfare of local zoo animals in the future.

[Ed C.]

All the animal rights activists want is to DEPRIVE future generations of touching wildlife without going to Africa. Finish the exhibit!

[maira]

I would love to keep the elephant in LA, but with so many people going unemployed this year it is hard to believe that $42 million are going towards building a home for a couple of elephants in LA when they could live perfectly well and happy elsewhere. I've been to the zoo plenty of times and love it, Also, I understand the importance of children and the public to have access and learn to appreciate these creatures, But above that, I feel the money will be very much needed in giving jobs to those thousands to be unemployed within the next month or into the education system which has already suffered sever budget cuts. The luxury of an elephant neighbor is not reasonable in the mids of an economic crisis.

[Mike]

right on, sandra m. the point shouldn't always be what we humans want or think we "need" to have. we're talking about other beings who have a right to their own lives in their own habitats. enough with capturing them, caging them, moving them to unnatural settings and climates, and putting them on display for us to gawk at. as for the children who go to zoos and just have to have those animals there to learn from, a good number of them, in my experience, race around, scream, and taunt, if not throw things at, the animals. this seems to be neither humane to the animals nor any real learning experience for the children. let's be done with it.

[Informed]

At City Hall today-
In Defense of Antagonism...oops I mean Anthropomorphism, ooops I mean Animals- 10 people max.
Zoo Supporters- 150+ people.
Do the math.
Do not let these misinformed extremist fanatics speak for you.
Do not look to them as the experts.
I can assure you that you are hearing from the same 10 people on their side over and over again, just like you will on this blog. The only 'experts' they can get to speak for them are former disgruntled zoo employees and people that they PAY. Oh yah, and whacky loudmouth celebrities who have never even been to the Zoo.
Zoos are not relics. Menageries are relics.
Modern Zoos are places of conservation, education, research and yes, recreation. Heaven forbid people have fun! Especially while they learn!
Ask IDA how many species they have saved. Or how many schoolchildren they have inspired to go into conservation oriented careers. Or how many families of LA they have welcomed and served- no matter what socio-economic demographic or belief system they are part of.
Don't get misdirected by people who just want to live in the past. Come along into the present and future with us proud Zoo supporters.
And as was asked in a prior posting- please do think more than just about yourself. Think about Asian elephants in what is left of the wild getting their feet blown off by leftover landmines, or hit by trains, or roaming the streets of Thailand unemployed and sick.
Think of Billy, able to be a father, with his own herd of cows in a beautiful new spacious habitat with waterfalls and mud wallows. And with qualified keepers and vets providing him with round the clock care and exercise.
Think of the kids and families who will get to see Billy- not a movie, or a poster- but this real life magnificent animal- up close and right here in LA- where he can inspire the awe and appreciation in people who wouldn't otherwise be able to see a real elephant.
This is going to be a great new habitat and Billy will be happy. Much happier than castrated and alone in a sanctuary. Or in a "sanctuary's" barn with concrete floors- locked up for 12-16 hours a day.
So, like I said- you do the math.

[kristin]

If it was not for zoos, many species would be extinct today. A zoo will never provide enough room for its animals as the wild. But it has a more important function: public awareness. If children and adults do not see these animals, they will most not likely care if their habitat is paved over or cleared for farm land. By raising public awareness, zoo exhibits are directly helping the future of the animals. It is a price for the animals to pay, but it benefits those still in the wild.

[ScottFX]

They keep saying it isn't enough space, but isn't the area the elephants can actually use bigger than the space at San Diego Wild Animal park? How are those elephants doing, and if they are fine space wise then it seems like a no brainer that they should complete...If it isn't enough space there then case closed the other way

[Pound smart]

Maria-
The funds appropriated for the elephant exhibit can only be used for capital projects. Not salaries or anything like that. In fact, shutting down the exhibit will eliminate more jobs- which is why the unions have come out in full support of finishing the zoo project.
Millions would be drained from the City's general fund if the project doesn't move forward- and those funds DO go towards salaries.
One of the main reasons the cost of the exhibit has inflated so much is due to the interference of animal rights groups. So thank them for that.
The City's CAO (Chief Administrative Officer) has provided a document that clearly demonstrates the negative impact that NOT finishing this exhibit would have on the City's finances. Many Councilmembers have chosen to ignore it. Also- the Zoo's fundraising arm- GLAZA- has stepped up to pay any debt service on the bonds issued.
So, the financial concerns of this project have been answered clearly.
We can have our elephant exhibit, and jobs too.

[Charles Dews]

Animals in zoos are a travesty. They are sad slaves for the entertainment of people who could just as easily watch them on television with quite a bit of background and information that no zoo ever provides. Get with it, LA. Get out of the caged animal business. No amount of space a zoo provides is anything like the wild, and no animal in a zoo acts like an animal in the wild. If you want to see them in the wild, watch Discovery Channel or National Geographic Channel. If you want to go outside and stroll around, go to Griffith Park or Hollywood Blvd or Muscle Beach and watch human animals in their actual environs.

[mike]

Ed C, you couldn't be more wrong. depriving future generations [of humans] is not all, or even part of, what animal rights activists want. what animal rights activists want is to "deprive" OTHER members of the animal kingdom, of which we are one small part, the misfortune of being held on display in unnatural settings. since these are mutually exclusive options (having one handy place for everyone to go to "touch" wildlife and having wildlife live in the, you know, wild), you think we, the humans, need to get our way. that's all. so, do you think that we should bring norwegian people here and hold them in exhibits so that you don't have to go all the way to norway to see some?

[Melanie]

42 million dollars when we have a budget crisis? Love Elephants...but let's be reasonable...

[Alex Datig]

We love Billy! The children love Billy! Support Tom LaBonge! Billy the elephant will be very happy in his new exhibit at the L.A. Zoo. Some people may not realize this, but it may take a trip to the L.A. Zoo on a Sunday afternoon to reflect on what the Zoo really means to all of us. I went to visit Billy just a few weeks ago. He is very well taken care of and very deserving of his new exhibit. I saw more children with their parents than I had ever seen anywhere in Los Angeles. Zoo animals are domesticated and have come to rely on humans to take care of them. Billy the elephant is no different. To even think of Billy in a 60 acre pasture is sad to me. He does not seem like the kind of elephant who would enjoy being in a wide open area away from the human care he has become accustom to. Los Angeles is a great city that does great things for people every day. Billy deserves to stay here in L.A. and have his new home. He has brought joy, respect and understanding to many children and it is our great city that will give him the precious home he deserves here at the L.A. Zoo no matter the cost. We owe him the best life has to offer as he has given so much to us.

[Amy]

Alejandro and Ed C.,

You both seem to be under the mistaken impression that animals exist in order to entertain humans, and therefore future generations have a right to see and touch them in captivity. Animals belong in the wild or, when necessary due to injury or low population, in sanctuaries. For me, it doesn't matter how large the proposed space is; wild animals do not belong in zoos.

[david]

I would prefer that Billy stay, however, if he goes I think they should reconfigure that area for the lions, tigers, hippo and kangaroos. Their pens are tragically small and would prefer to see them more active and able to move about in larger areas.

This Elephant issue is never going to be settled as both sides have valid points. As much as I want my son to see Billy ( the highlight of our visits to the zoo ), Elephants need larger spaces and preferably live with other elephants as they are highly sensitive and social. ( at least African elephants, Billy is an Asian elephant ) but i am no expert.

[Kathie K]

"Informed" says that sanctuaries lock elephants in barns with concrete floors for 12-16 hours per day? Sounds like misinformation.

Have you visited the web page for "The Elephant Sanctuary" in Tennessee? http://www.elephants.com/

Try it, and see if you still feel that the LA Zoo can humanely have multiple elephants in 3.5 acres, in a metropolitan area.

The LA Zoo has a horrible history with elephants, with most of them dying. Also, the foot problems encountered in zoos do not occur in the wild, nor in sanctuaries. These creatures wander miles each day, walking on the earth, and their feet do not deteriorate.

These smart and sensitive creatures deserve better.

A caring and curious person can appreciate nature's creatures from all of our coverage of them in their natural surroundings. Documentaries do a wonderful job of exposing the natural balance, not some poor creature standing around for the rest of it's life. Our convenience simply is not the most important thing to consider. Nor is our entertainment. Let's consider the whole planet and all the species.

[Joe]

While many in the country struggle to pay their heat and electric bills,Californians worry about an elephant exipit.Absurd in the extreme.

[richard schumacher]

Is there good evidence that zoos teach people and encourage them to value wild nature? If so then zoos are worthwhile even if the exhibit animals suffer. But if not then they are mere amusements and are immoral unless they keep animals under approximately natural conditions.

[Samilton]

I'm sorry -- PEOPLE come before animals and animal exhibits! That $$ can be used to help in some other area that involves PEOPLE.

In this environment - get real!