What’s best for kids, elephants

Re “Zoo, and L.A.’s kids, need Billy,” Column, Dec. 9

Hector Tobar intimates that those in favor of sending Billy the elephant to a sanctuary are somehow against the working families and children of Los Angeles. This is not about taking anything away from Los Angeles residents; it is about showing compassion to a living being that should never have become anybody’s property to begin with.

Tobar says that the experience of seeing Billy at the zoo -- even with his nervous tic as a result of his confinement -- is “a lesson in the complexity and beauty of nature.” But we have an opportunity here to teach our children one of the most important lessons of all: compassion and respect for nature and for all living things.

Tragically, and ironically, Billy has been stripped of all “the complexity and beauty” nature has to offer, so he is in no position to exemplify this for anyone who comes to see him. Which is why, if Billy stays at the zoo, we all lose.

Lara Chanley

Los Angeles

--

I was disappointed -- but not surprised -- by Tobar’s argument in favor of confining elephants in zoos, and his implicit suggestion that the children of Los Angeles should have an elephant in the zoo to satisfy their needs.

I recently did a presentation on wild Asian and African elephants to 7-year-old students who learned about these animals and their social, physical and emotional needs. The children overwhelmingly voted to send Billy to a sanctuary, even after a zoo supporter presented information about Billy and the new exhibit.

These children, unlike many adults, have not lost their innate sense of compassion for animals. They decided that their wants don’t supersede what is best for elephants.

They give me hope that one day we will live in a more compassionate society.

Valerie Belt

Pacific Palisades

--

It was a pleasure to read Tobar’s article and refreshing, for a change, to hear real people talk and not political nonsense.

Tobar’s description of the size of the current elephant exhibit (about half an acre), which he compared with the size of the zoo’s proposed Pachyderm Forest (which at 3.6 acres will be “significantly larger than the field at Dodger Stadium”), really puts the whole issue into perspective.

It is sad that some politicians have lost sight of who really benefits from the elephants in our zoo and who they were elected to represent -- including the children.

Especially troubling is the fact that council members of Latino descent (Cardenas, Alarcon and Reyes), whose primary constituent base makes up 40% of annual zoo visitors, are the leading proponents of the effort to eradicate our zoo of elephants.

At least someone is thinking about the children of

Los Angeles and our city

at large.

Nancy L. Dennis

Los Angeles