.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;} <$BlogRSDURL$>
the skunks of los feliz
7.06.2005
 

Who speaks for the elephants at the Los Angeles Zoo?

Richard Pryor, that's who....

Seems the world-famous funnyman (whose albums I spent many a pot-hazed summer day listening to in high school) is calling for the L.A. Zoo to send it's trio of pachyderms to an elephant sanctuary, rather than follow through on the Zoo's plans for remodeling and expanding the massive beast's current digs (which currently consist of a patch of dirt and a water hose).

Noted within the linked piece is the fact that Mayor Villaraigosa has also gone on record as being in favor of giving the long-suffering animals a one-way ticket to Retirementville, a preserve where they can rest their huge, and presumably, achy feet, whilst dining on the finest grasses the North American continent has to offer.

Which I'm all for.

However, if you follow the logic of this all the way to it's conclusion, you might begin to feel that perhaps all the animals in the Zoo should be sent to preserves rather than live out their lives in small, though humane, enclosures.

And if I actually endorsed such a leap of logic, I would risk a polite, well-reasoned, intellectually sound response from wildbell, whose views I do respect.

So, instead, let me close by saying: "Fuck'n is good for you, jack. Gettin some pussy beats having a war."
 
Comments:
Whoo.. ya had me going for a moment there. My favorite along those "free them all" lines is the email I got a couple years ago outlining how successful it would be to release the Zoo's entire animal population — just let them all walk out the front entrance — and turn Griffith Park into a sanctuary. Yeah, that would sooo work.

But seriously. Sanctuaries are always going to be deemed and seemed the eden because, for one, some really savvy person named such open-space zoos "sanctuaries" and people automatically get misty at the buzzword and think that everything from Quasimodo on up will be better off there. Not always the case. More space does not necessarily mean a better-adjusted, healthier animal.

I think that regardless of what the Zoo produces with its new exhibit, it will never satisfy the activists. I'm hoping it kicks ass, though just for the record I have to say that the present facility is a skosh more than "a dirt patch and a hose."

It also should be noted that our esteemed mayor, while he hasn't backpedaled from his statements as a candidate about wanting to send the Zoo's elephants to a sanctuary, has since done what he should've done in the first place before flapping his pre-election piehole: he consulted with the Zoo's administration and the city's chief financial officer and realized that the millions already invested in design and construction of the new elephant habitat would be lost, not to mention that millions more would be needed (and more time) to convert the work and planning done into a space for another animal species. Nothing quits a politician more than money down the drain.
 
Post a Comment


Links to this post:

Create a Link

DROP MAIL AT:

Le Pew Mail

PHOTOS:

BLOGS:

LINKS:

MUZAK & RADIO:

SUBSCRIBE:

BROWSER:

Get Firefox!


ARCHIVES: