Elephants’ Elbow Room Is Big Issue

Elephants may be an unlikely star in a political drama, but the ones who inhabit the Los Angeles Zoo are taking center stage -- and that stage may get a lot bigger.

A long-awaited report by city officials on whether the elephants should stay at the zoo or be retired to a sanctuary declares the elephants to be well-tended but in need of more space.

The zoo, which is a city department, has been gearing up for several years for the elaborate “Elephants of Surin” exhibit. However, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, fulfilling a campaign promise to animal welfare activists, put the plans on hold while he instructed city staffers to research whether it should go ahead.

The proposed exhibit would have at least doubled the elephants’ space, from a little more than half an acre to 1.06 acres. Animal welfare activists criticized that plan as still being woefully too small for creatures who can roam tens of miles a day in the wild.

Some activists believe the elephants should retire to one of the sanctuaries in this country where they could wander on hundreds of acres.

Earlier this year, city officials decided they needed 1.84 acres, at a cost of $25.3 million. By then the mayor had gotten involved, and the City Council put off a decision, waiting for the report issued Tuesday.

Now, the report calls for even more space -- as much as three acres, which could boost the cost to nearly $50 million.

The report also concludes that there would be costs associated with moving the elephants to a sanctuary because the city would still be partly responsible for their care -- and the city might have to pay back money the county provided to expand the exhibit.

Before filing the report, the city brought in an independent veterinarian, who concluded that “it is unlikely that any staff or facility could offer a better level of care and management than the elephants receive at the Los Angeles Zoo.”

John Lewis, director of the L.A. Zoo, said he had just gotten the report and would have to go over it with staff before he could comment. But he noted that he had always emphasized that it’s not the size of the exhibit that was most crucial for elephants. “It’s what’s in the space, it’s how the animals are able to use the space, it’s how the staffs are able to encourage them to use the space,” he said.

The fate of the elephants will ultimately be up to the City Council and Villaraigosa. Tom LaBonge, whose district includes the zoo, has made it clear that he doesn’t want the elephants to go -- his reasoning is that the zoo is the only place most people will ever see a live elephant.

He jokingly said that he and the mayor would have to go “mano a mano” if Villaraigosa tried to get rid of the elephants.

“We need to do the right thing for the elephants and just as important for the children and millions of people who visit the zoo over time,” LaBonge said. “It’s worth every cent, and it’s going to be tough.”

Elephants -- Earth’s biggest land mammals -- have thrown their weight around in this city’s zoo and in others. The issue of whether these giant creatures can thrive in the confines of any zoo is something that zoo professionals as well as animal welfare activists have been wrestling with for years. On one hand, the L.A. Zoo provides state-of-the-art veterinary care and safety. On the other hand, argue activists, the confined spaces are frustrating and unhealthful for animals.

Two years ago, the L.A. Zoo’s decision to transfer its African elephant, Ruby, to another zoo so that she could be a maternal role model to other African elephants stirred up protest -- and even a lawsuit -- by animal welfare activists who contended the move would break Ruby’s 16-year bond with the L.A. Zoo’s female Asian elephant, Gita. (Female elephants are social in the wild.) Eventually the L.A. Zoo decided to bring Ruby back.

But that wasn’t the end of the tension between the zoo and the community of activists. Gita’s chronic serious foot problems have been a source of consternation for activists who say that she would be healthier in a sanctuary.

The mayor’s decision to put the proposed exhibit on hold raised the stakes in elephant care for all involved -- activists, zoo staff, city politicians and the elephants -- and gave a spotlight to all those with a passionate point of view. Since the mayor’s decision to review the exhibit, the zoo has been the site of protest, debate and rallies.

“Building a two-acre exhibit is not planning for the future. It’s merely a Band-Aid approach and a waste of taxpayers’ money, and it certainly does not provide a high quality of life for these elephants,” Les Schobert, a former curator at several zoos who has been critical of zoos’ management of animals, said at a highly charged Zoo Commission meeting in September. “You will hear some people say it’s not how much space you have to give elephants, its how that space is used. Balderdash. You can’t take a studio apartment and fit a family of six into it no matter how hard you try.”

The zoo has three elephants. Only one -- Billy -- is on exhibit. Gita and Ruby were moved off-exhibit to adjacent quarters while the area was cleared for construction. Gita is recuperating from foot surgery.

Activists argue that without sufficient space, elephants engage in repetitive behavior such as bobbing or swaying.

“How do you decide how much space is enough?” Zoo Commission President Kimberly Marteau asked at the September meeting. “You could give them the entire golf course out here.”

“OK,” Schobert responded.

It is unclear how the City Council would vote on the issue. Several members surveyed during their meeting Tuesday showed they were hardly speaking with one voice.

Councilman Bill Rosendahl said he wanted to see a large sanctuary created next to the zoo.

Jan Perry said the 40,000 people who were homeless in her district was a bigger issue for her. Ed Reyes said that perhaps he was being “soft-hearted” but that his sympathies tended to rest with the animals.

“If I was an elephant, I wouldn’t want to be caged up,” Reyes said. “I think as a society we could do better for the animals.”

Councilman Dennis Zine said he would balk at spending an additional $20 million or so, because the city has so many pressing needs for people. He also said the welfare of the animals is an issue.

“We want to show people nature, but we don’t want to harm nature showing it to them,” he said.

The zoo has had elephants since it opened in 1966. Twenty-five elephants have lived at the zoo over the years.