Favorite

Mailbag 

Sending Elephants Away Is Unthinkable

I wish you had proposed another alternative ("Pachyderm Push," Feb. 16). What's best for the elephants when they live in an already compromised position? Sending them to a sanctuary at their age (where they could be split up), after having lived their lives together, is torture. How anyone--a UA law student or not--can propose that is unthinkable.

How about expanding the exhibit if need be, and letting them be with their keepers, in their place? Follow the Bronx Zoo's lead, and let them be!

Ellen Rauch


Give Elephants Quality of Life by Sending Them to a Sanctuary

Concerning the issue of whether or not the elephants should remain at the Reid Park Zoo: I think that their quality of life is far more relevant than their quantity of life. The insufficient size of the zoo's enclosure is causing foot problems for Connie, because she is compulsively swaying her head. Zoo Director Susan Basford contends that the elephant swings her head when she's happy. But if this is something that "elephants in the wild don't do," then I think we can surmise that this is a spurious interpretation, because wild and free animals must surely be happier than those in captivity.

Basford argues that "elephants can walk 30 to 50 miles a day; they don't choose to if they have what they need in front of them." Or if they are enclosed in a tiny habitat where they can't take that walk.

A shortened life span seems a mercy for animals living on an area "60,000 times smaller than the smallest known elephant range." I believe we ought to consider the quality of life for these elephants and send them to the sanctuary.

Zev Rubin


Keeping Elephants Makes No Sense for Tucson

I was amazed at how thoroughly all sides were presented in "Pachyderm Push," and I was undeniably impressed by Nikia Fico and what Save Tucson Elephants is obviously working very valiantly at.

I felt some points in this article were very important and should be recapped and focused on. Foremost: "In January, officials at the National Zoo in Washington, D.C., were forced to euthanize its 40-year-old elephant, Toni, just five days after they had said Toni had no significant health problems." Much like we have seen the Reid Park Zoo doing, the National Zoo was swearing up and down that Toni was fine. Before her premature and preventable death, it was reported that Toni was in so much pain regarding putting pressure on her legs that she was using her trunk for support. We know factually, from public records, that Connie has severe foot problems. Like Fico said in the article, her problem will never go away and will begin to get worse as she ages. I don't want to see our beloved Connie end up like Toni.

The need for walking, whether it is necessary to find food or not, is extremely crucial to an elephant's health. At least eight zoos have sent elephants to sanctuaries in the last decade. How can the Reid Park Zoo and some City Council members be ignoring this trend?

I am sick of hearing the praises of the American Aquarium and Zoo Association, which is a pro-zoo/circus group, obviously biased on the issue, as their survival depends on the revenue of zoos and aquariums. Zoos do not aid in developing a conversation ethic; millions more are spent on keeping elephants in miniscule habitats than the actual conservation effort. Conservation is carried out by habitat protection and anti-poaching measures. If these two things are not focused on and given the immense funding they lack, elephants will not survive, regardless of how many we put on display for the public's enjoyment.

I cannot believe that this is even being pondered when the zoo has only been able to raise $12,000 in roughly a year's time. Seriously, they plan on getting to $8.5 million? That is insane. This is not going to happen without it coming out of taxpayers' pockets and possibly hurting the other animals at the Reid Park Zoo that do much better in captivity and need their enclosures improved grossly.

Colleen Dugan


One More Statement From Save Tucson Elephants

I would like to thank the Tucson Weekly for the feature regarding the elephants at Reid Park Zoo.

More than 4,000 Tucson residents and Reid Park Zoo members have joined me in urging the City Council to put the proposal to send the elephants to the sanctuary on the agenda. When the Tucson community is given a choice and educated about the vast needs of elephants, the majority overwhelmingly support transferring Connie and Shaba to The Elephant Sanctuary. Council members are now aware of this support, and we all hope they act accordingly.

Last June, council members stated they received "strong public support" to keep the elephants in Tucson. I recently learned that "strong public support" consisted of roughly 100 form letters. They should now consider the will of 4,000-plus residents.

As reported in the article, Connie and Shaba currently suffer from captivity-induced problems such as foot disease and psychological disorders that will lead to their premature death. However, neither elephant is yet at the point where they cannot be rehabilitated. By going to the sanctuary, where they can have the freedom to roam over hundreds of acres and have access to care from world- renowned experts, Connie and Shaba will heal, giving them decades to live. If they remain in Tucson, even in the zoo's expanded enclosure, their diseases will continue to progress and will kill them at roughly half their natural 70-year lifespan.

If the zoo won't do what's best for Connie and Shaba by voluntarily sending them to The Elephant Sanctuary, then the City Council must step in and do what's right.

Nikia Fico, Save Tucson Elephants


We Leave Elephants Behind for a Helpful Bread Tip

I enjoyed your report ("Bread Hunt!" Yum! Feb. 9), and agree with your comment on pumpernickel from Beyond Bread. However, when you were in La Baguette, you should have tried their pumpernickel. It is only available on Wednesday and Sunday.

Robert Leff


In Defense of Jim Hightower

So William Hancock thinks Jim Hightower's column "offers no solution to the problem he has pointed out" ("Question: How Much Did This Letter Add to Our Publication?" Mailbag, Feb. 16). Apparently, Mr. Hancock doesn't read Hightower very often. If he had, he'd notice that Hightower often includes phone numbers, Web sites and other resources for people to take action and help stop the very real criminal activity in our government.

In fact, the Feb. 16 column ends with: "To join the effort, go to exxposeexxon.com." What exactly does Mr. Hancock want? Does he want Hightower to hold his hand? The solution is obvious: Get off your couch and take action. Participate in our democracy. Petition. Protest. And most importantly, inform those around you about what's happening to our country before it's too late. Unlike you and me, most people are unaware of the problems Hightower highlights. Do you need Jim Hightower to tell you that?

Al Rogers

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

Latest in Mailbag

  • Mail Bag

    • Dec 19, 2013
  • Mailbag

    Reactions to Tom Horne's suckiness and Tom Danehy'
    • Oct 31, 2013
  • More »

© 2016 Tucson Weekly | 7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 | (520) 797-4384 | Powered by Foundation