Haste, Waste and Mammoth Misconceptions

The Los Angeles City Council voted 13-2 to build a costly ($40 - $60 million) elephant enclosure at the LA Zoo. Only Councilmembers Dennis Zine and Bill Rosendahl voted with activists who wanted the exhibit closed and the three elephants freed...

_______________________________

How logical it would have been to save both the elephants and taxpayer dollars by voting against the proposed 3.5-acre elephant exhibit and sending our imprisoned pachyderms to paradise in a spacious sanctuary in Northern California. But City Councils do not always make logical decisions as we painfully discovered on Wednesday morning.

 

The second most rational approach would have been to postpone the decision for a few weeks until results had been tallied on Assemblyman Lloyd Levine’s pending bill which would require California elephant exhibits to have more acreage than the LA plan provides.

 

Postponement would also have given Neighborhood Councils an opportunity to poll their stakeholders and make a formal recommendation to the city. Many councils have the elephant issue agendized for their May meetings due to a presentation about the topic at the LANC Congress earlier this month.

 

Unfortunately, haste, waste and misconceptions about the needs of massive animals have prevailed while the voiceless pachyderms and obviously equally voiceless taxpayers have been shoved aside.

 

______________________

First update on the elephant situation 4-21-06:

Assemblyman Lloyd Levine's elephant bill is slated for the City Council meeting on Tuesday, April 25, 2006. One wonders whether the LA City Council is trying to slip something over on their constituents by sneaking it onto a supplemental agenda at the last minute.

 

The language of the agenda is biased and inaccurate and serves merely to reinforce their own action of wasting $40 million plus in taxpayer dollars in order to perpetuate cruelty to elephants.

 

The Council agenda states that the recommendation is to support Levine’s legislation "AS LONG IT IS AMENDED TO BE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE AMERICAN ZOO AND AQUARIUM ASSOCIATION WHICH IS BASED ON SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH."

 

Based on scientific research? 

AZA standards are that elephants need no more than 1800 square feet outdoors and 400 square feet indoors.

 

This leaves barely enough room for an elephant to turn around. Why all this discussion about 3.5 acres if they are supporting the pathetic standards of AZA, which is arguably nothing more than a rubber stamp organization?

 

According to Catherine Doyle, founder of Los Angeles Alliance for Elephants, “It is ridiculous to promote AZA space standards. AZA space standards for elephants establish an area less than half of the area legally required by the city of LA for horses.

The List No. 1 of Uses Permitted in Various Zones in the City of Los Angeles, 2003 states: "Equine Keeping ­ 17,500 square foot minimum lot area; 4,000 square feet of lot area per animal."


AZA allows a minimum 1800 sq ft outdoors for elephants, with 900 sq ft for each additional animal. 1800 sq ft is the size of a 3-car garage.  Indoor requirement is 400 square feet per, which is a 20x20 space for an animal that ranges from 8,000 to 13,000 pounds. It is better (for the City Council) not to take a position on what is essentially a poorly thought out resolution. I feel support of that resolution would be an embarrassment to the city and a solid step backwards in the care of elephants ”

_____________

Second update on the elephant situation 4-25-06:

I went to speak to the City Council about agenda item 81. This relates to AB 3027, Assemblyman Lloyd Levine's Elephant Protection Act.

 

Councilmember LaBonge opted to send this matter back to the Government Relations committee. Perhaps he realized the resolution was a mistake.

The speech I was planning to deliver is below. I hope the Los Angeles City Council will shelve this issue indefinitely.....

 

-----------

Councilmembers,

Your proposed resolution on Assemblyman Levine's elephant bill is in actuality nothing more than an attempt to eviscerate this humane legislation and needs to be identified as such in the clearest possible terms.

 

Your agenda erroneously states that the standards put forth by the American Zoo and Aquarium Association (the AZA) are based on scientific research. This is completely untrue. Ask any expert. The AZA is a rubber stamp organization, and they admit themselves that there is no husbandry science to back up their space requirements.

 

AZA standards only require 1800 square feet for one elephant. This is the size of a modest-sized home, except that humans get to go out of their own houses. The AZA's indoor requirement is only 20 x 20 or 400 square feet, the size of a two-car garage. Think about your own garage; is this large enough for an elephant? Many of you live in houses larger than what the AZA considers adequate space for an elephant.

 

Zoning laws in Los Angeles require more space than this to keep a horse. One must have a minimum of 17,500 square feet. Councilmembers, an elephant is nature's largest land animal; it needs far more space than a horse.

 

Councilmember Zine is the closest thing to an elephant expert on your council. So please listen to him. He spent time in Africa and understands that elephants travel great distances and need a large area in order to be psychologically and physically healthy. Keeping elephants in what amounts to close confinement is simply not acceptable in the 21st century.

 

This vote is no small matter; it is a vote that will be remembered for a long time. I urge you to fully embrace Levine’s bill in its present form or to refrain from a vote altogether.

 

Thank you.