Hands off the L.A. Zoo
Re “They’re not wild about L.A. Zoo plan,” Oct. 20
In an era where the remit of zoos is increasingly questioned and debated, the L.A. Zoo’s plan is tonedeaf and retrograde. A zoo’s sole purpose should be to help rehabilitate and preserve dwindling species and educate the public.
The proposal for the zoo to become more like an amusement park — destroying acres of vegetation and mature native trees that are home to many bobcats, mountain lions, hawks and owls in the process — is flat-out wrong.
It’s ironic that in its proposed expansion, the zoo will be causing irreparable harm to the animals that live on its perimeter.
Emily Loughran, Los Angeles
As a homeowner in the city of Los Angeles, I must abide by the laws protecting our native trees like the live oak, black walnut and toyon trees. I am not allowed to take them down unless they are determined dead by a certified arborist, and rightly so.
What good are environmental laws protecting these native species if the L.A. Zoo, a city-owned facility, is allowed to cast aside these important protections when it suits its “tourist expansion” plans?
Too often, government agencies grant to themselves exemptions to the laws they pass, while the rest of us are expected to obey.
Wendy Prober
Tarzana
I am incensed down to the hairs sticking straight out of the back of my neck as I read about this outrageous plan. Destroying 23 acres of native woodland and bulldozing trees, which will wipe out the homes to an entire community of hawks and owls, is not defensible and totally insensitive to the environment.
People go to the zoo to see the animals, not to climb a canyon wall or gaze at a vineyard. Why are we attempting to turn our zoo into a tourist attraction that mimics the real deal?
The surrounding environment should be kept as natural as possible to provide habitat for our native non-captive animals and birds, while efforts should be ongoing to provide the zoo’s current captive inhabitants with improved enclosures that most resemble their native habitats, especially the elephants.
This proposal reminds me of Joni Mitchell’s song lyrics, “They paved paradise, and put up a parking lot, with a pink hotel, a boutique, and a swinging hot spot.”
Susan Antonius
Redondo Beach
I have been a member of the L.A. Zoo for several decades and am very much in favor of its research and conservation work and educational programs.
I am absolutely apoplectic over the “Disneylandification” proposal, which seems to offer very little for the animals, or even the botanical aspects of the grounds, while at the same time destroying more of the natural surroundings. They may as well go all in and replace the animals with robots.
I have serious doubts that this would generate huge revenue from tourists, and many locals would probably encounter a prohibitive hiked admission fee. I will definitely not donate to such a project, and will vote “no” on any possible bond issue.
Barbara Assadi
Los Angeles