Los Angeles Zoo & Botanical Gardens Los Angeles Zoo elephant lawsuit moves forward

Z

zooman

Well-Known Member
15+ year member
Quote from Los Angeles Times

Los Angeles Zoo elephant lawsuit moves forward
September 24, 2009 | 6:00 am

"A lawsuit charging the Los Angeles Zoo with abusing elephants will be allowed to go to trial, a three-judge panel of California's 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled on Wednesday.

A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge had initially ruled that the issues raised in the suit were political and not for a court to decide.

The appeals court decided otherwise.

"The bottom line is we're entitled to our day in court and they sent it back to trial," said David Casselman who filed the suit on behalf of actor Robert Culp and real estate agent Aaron Leider.

Both men brought the suit as California taxpayers under the state's taxpayer waste statute. They allege that the zoo -- a city agency -- has violated the statute by managing elephants in a way that abuses and injures them.

The zoo, long a target for elephant welfare advocates, is in the process of building a large new exhibit to house the pachyderms. The zoo, which currently has only one elephant, Billy, has consistently maintained they vigilantly care for the animals."

Now this will be very interesting to follow and incredibly subjective.

Will this case be heard by a jury or only a judge? How do you US residents work this sort of case?:confused:

Will a court decision in California be a decision for the rest of the USA?
 
~sigh~ Here we go again...

This the 4th official time these maniacs have attemped to halt and disassemble Pachyderm Forest and LA Zoo (The second time in one year) and the fact that they'd accuse the extreme of animal abuse angers me

America has shown its support to LA all four times, so I highly doubt that this time will be different

But still, it is extremely frustrating that they have come this far and once again, Billy's new home is delayed
 
Nope, A reliable contact in LA told me the construction has not been halted. By the time this goes into play (for lack of better words) the exhibit will be finished, so it's not anticipated there will be another two month debate over elephants in zoos.
 
Sorry about not responding, but to be honest I don't really know much about what is going on and what will happen. And BlackRhino is correct, the construction has not been stopped, and hopefully it won't be stopped.
 
Blackduiker

I'm almost beginning to believe there's foulplay going on. Some type of conspiracy. We can't have Giant Pandas and Golden Monkeys from China, and now more celebrities pushing to halt the state-of-the-art Pachyderm Forest once again. Doesn't this sound a bit fishy, when our good neighbors to the south just opened their new Elephant habitat with very little protest?

Call it sour grapes but there is competition amongst zoos as with all industries. And with a large bulk of the over 3 million visitors attending the much more prominent zoo to the south coming from right here in the L.A. area, do you think someone may be pulling strings behind the scenes? Don't forget Sea World's ownership being responsible for the closing of Marineland of the Pacific. And the list of celebrities seem to be a bit suspect; Bob Barker, Robert Culp, Cher, Lily Tomlin. Ms. Tomlin sits on the Advisory Board of a well known preserve here in the area, Tippi Hedren's Shambala Preserve in Acton, California. Don't get me wrong, I believe Ms. Hedren is doing fabulous work there, but it would appear from all her loud protesting during the fight to end construction of the Pachyderm Forest, Ms. Lily Tomlin appeared to be anti-captive anything; whether it's at the L.A. Zoo or Shambala. And on that same board at Shambala; one of the Los Angeles Zoo's strongest advocates, Ms. Betty White.

So why the staunch protest against the L.A. Zoo by those like Ms. Tomlin? Protesting what would become one of the nations largest zoo Elephant habitats. L.A. has bent over backwards to expand this exhibit from its original plans. Plans that originally called for Black and Indian Rhinos, as well as a state-of-the-art Hippo enclosure. Those species were dropped from the plans in order to provide even more space for the Elephants. And that now only entails Asian Elephants, not African as were also in the original picture. Does it sound like I'm ranting, or could there be something to a conspiracy? No, Blackduiker hasn't lost his marbles, just frustrated after waiting too many years for things to come to fruition at the zoo I've attended and loved all my life. And don't get me wrong, I love the San Diego Zoo (that large neighbor to the south), and have even had membership there as well. But there still seems to be, for lack of a better quote, "something rotten in Denmark.":confused::(:mad:

Shambala's celebrity rich Advisory Board:
The Shambala Preserve presented by The Roar Foundation
 
Last edited:
There is no animal rights group behind this suit. This is Mr. Culp's suit. The only reason the council went forward with this project is money. They would have loved to dump this baby. There is not wide support for this project. On the contrary. People are resentful that so much money is being spent on an elephant. When the taxpayers voted on this the economy was not in the dumpster. I have lived here all my life and this zoo is a disgrace. Billy should have been sent to PAWS and money should have been spent to rehab this facility. I have sat on the fence where John Lewis is concerned, but now I truly believe this man needs to go. The City of Los Angeles deserves a director with vision and passion.
 
What I still don`t get is where the elephants for this multi-million-dollar exhibit will come from. They can`t seriously spent so much money just for Billy?? Are they plannung an import from Asia, or are they trying to buy elephants from Ringling?
 
Yassa said:
What I still don`t get is where the elephants for this multi-million-dollar exhibit will come from. They can`t seriously spent so much money just for Billy?? Are they plannung an import from Asia, or are they trying to buy elephants from Ringling?
Click to expand...

Possibly from private owners. Gypsy who lives in Dallas, and Gina who loves in Memphis, both came from private owners. It is starting to become more common. I'm sure they will figure something out.
 
Yes, but the private owned eles you mention are too old for breeding, and there are hardly any private owned asians females in breeding age in the US apart from those at Ringling and 2 at "Have Trunk Will Travel". Well, Charly Gray in Canada has a lot of breeding females and female calves, so they may get a small group from him. That or Ringling is the only source I can imagine for breeding-age females unless they are planning an import from Asia.
 
CritterBlog said:
There is no animal rights group behind this suit. This is Mr. Culp's suit. The only reason the council went forward with this project is money. They would have loved to dump this baby. There is not wide support for this project. On the contrary. People are resentful that so much money is being spent on an elephant. When the taxpayers voted on this the economy was not in the dumpster. I have lived here all my life and this zoo is a disgrace. Billy should have been sent to PAWS and money should have been spent to rehab this facility. I have sat on the fence where John Lewis is concerned, but now I truly believe this man needs to go. The City of Los Angeles deserves a director with vision and passion.
Click to expand...

Mr.Culp's lawsuit, but Bob Barker offering to fund the move of Billy. The city council have no right "to dump this baby." We, the people of Los Angeles, back in the 1990s voted overwhelmingly for several bond measures to improve our zoo. I was born in Los Angeles and have lived in this area my entire life as well. I only moved to the neighboring city of Santa Clarita 3 years ago, but voted yes in favor of every measure presented while still a resident of the city. We just went through this matter earlier this year, isn't it about time to lose the egos and let the matter go?

And just to refresh our recent memories, the majority of L.A. residents still want to proceed with this project. After all, aren't other cities continuing with major projects that were already in the works, even during these economic times? San Diego included? Then why not L.A.? We were underfunded back in 1966 when this institution first opened, it's about time our city made amends. And that's how the majority of L.A. residents really feel.

The majority have spoken once again. Let's move on!

Los Angeles Residents by 3-to-1 Majority Want LA Zoo`s New Elephant Habitat Completed | Reuters

http://anovelmenagerie.com/2009/01/...-bob-barker-betty-white-slash-have-in-common/
 
I am sure you are trying to make a point, but I can't figure out what it is. This is not just about Billy and Pachyderm Forest, it is about zoo management. There are other animals at the zoo, you know. This is Los Angeles and we have a sub-standard facility. Also, I was not aware San Diego was funded by the taxpayers. My point is there is only so much money to go around and I think the way it is being spent is shameful. The ****** who voted for this are the same ****** who bankrupt this state. When the other exhibits meet the necessary standards, I will support this. I have no problem with moving on, but I would like to do it without Mr. Lewis as Director.
 
The nature of this lawsuit, a "taxpayer waste" clause, just seems bizarre to me - even for wacky L.A. It shows the opponents of the elephant exhibit are desperate and willing to try anything.

While CritterBlog does have a point that L.A. Zoo is somewhat substandard for a zoo of that size and in a city of this class, they are going in the right direction I believe. They are in a series of improvements: gorilla habitat recently opened, reptile exhibit and elephant exhibit to open next year, etc. I don't understand the disrespect for John Lewis on this thread, I have never heard anything negative about his leadership.

The insinuation that San Diego Zoo is somehow behind the negative publicity is completely absurd! They work very well with L.A. as they do with other AZA institutions, having just sent them francois langurs and having just traded male hippos. I hope no one will entertain this notion, even for one second. As for why there were no similar large-scale protests for San Diego's Elephant Odyssey, I believe it is because the city of San Diego is so strongly supportive of their zoo that opponents realize they would not get anywhere and any opposition would be a waste of time. And as someone else pointed out, San Diego is completely privately funded while Los Angeles is a mix of public and private funding.

I grew up near L.A. Zoo and have a cousin who is a member, so I keep track of their progress and really do want to see them succeed. I hope this lawsuit gets thrown out.
 
Arizona Docent said:
The nature of this lawsuit, a "taxpayer waste" clause, just seems bizarre to me - even for wacky L.A. It shows the opponents of the elephant exhibit are desperate and willing to try anything.

While CritterBlog does have a point that L.A. Zoo is somewhat substandard for a zoo of that size and in a city of this class, they are going in the right direction I believe. They are in a series of improvements: gorilla habitat recently opened, reptile exhibit and elephant exhibit to open next year, etc. I don't understand the disrespect for John Lewis on this thread, I have never heard anything negative about his leadership.

The insinuation that San Diego Zoo is somehow behind the negative publicity is completely absurd! They work very well with L.A. as they do with other AZA institutions, having just sent them francois langurs and having just traded male hippos. I hope no one will entertain this notion, even for one second. As for why there were no similar large-scale protests for San Diego's Elephant Odyssey, I believe it is because the city of San Diego is so strongly supportive of their zoo that opponents realize they would not get anywhere and any opposition would be a waste of time. And as someone else pointed out, San Diego is completely privately funded while Los Angeles is a mix of public and private funding.

I grew up near L.A. Zoo and have a cousin who is a member, so I keep track of their progress and really do want to see them succeed. I hope this lawsuit gets thrown out.
Click to expand...

I agree, SD Zoo has always worked well with LA. There was once a "Zoo View", which is a monthly magazine given to LA Zoo members, dedicated to the great relationship between the two zoos. So I doubt that SD Zoo has anything to do with it. The two zoos do have a competition for visitors, but I'm sure it is a friendly competition.

I also agree that the zoo is going in the right direction. I've even been involved in improving some of the roundhouse exhibits myself, mainly by the way of enrichment. Yes, I know most of the roundhouses look bad, but that does not mean they are actually bad for the animals.

I also don't understand the negativeness towards John Lewis.
 
Blackduiker

CritterBlog said:
I am sure you are trying to make a point, but I can't figure out what it is. This is not just about Billy and Pachyderm Forest, it is about zoo management. There are other animals at the zoo, you know. This is Los Angeles and we have a sub-standard facility. Also, I was not aware San Diego was funded by the taxpayers. My point is there is only so much money to go around and I think the way it is being spent is shameful. The ****** who voted for this are the same ****** who bankrupt this state. When the other exhibits meet the necessary standards, I will support this. I have no problem with moving on, but I would like to do it without Mr. Lewis as Director.
Click to expand...

Let's not play dumb. In your previous post you're quoted as saying "there is not wide support for this project." Correct? What city do you really live in? "Los Angeles Residents by 3-to-1 Majority Want LA Zoo's New Elephant Habitat Completed." You can't figure out that one? I can't figure out your bold statement about there being no "wide support." At least I've offered documentation, where is yours? The point once again. We the residents of the city of Los Angeles, by overwhelming majority, voted on the bond measures to improve our zoo back in the 90s. That's the point. And as for "the ****** that voted for this," that's how we have to get things done in a city that must depend on large public support for zoo improvements. Unlike San Diego. Those local bond measures have nothing to do with "bankrupting this state." And yes, "there are other animals at the zoo" needs no reminder on my behalf. That's why I push for completion of the entire Los Angeles Zoo Master Plan presented over a decade ago. Pachyderm Forest being a huge part of that Master Plan. I've only been attending this institution since its 1966 underfunded beginnings!

And from my previous post I quote the opening sentence, "I'm almost beginning to believe there's foulplay going on." "Almost beginning to believe" are words written out of frustration. Frustration for the betterment of my zoo since before most of you were even born. I'm now 54 years old. My apologies to the San Diego Zoo and anyone else I may have offended.
 
That's been on my mind as well. But with Bob Barker still around and always trying to have the last say, don't be surprised if he tries to keep things going.
 
Here is an article with an update on the lawsuit against the LA Zoo...

Judge sets date for hearing on restraining order against zoo - LA Daily News

LOS ANGELES — A judge today scheduled an Oct. 25 hearing on whether a temporary restraining order should be issued preventing any new elephants from being brought to the Los Angeles Zoo.

Attorney David Casselman, who represents Aaron Leider, said the directive moves up a hearing that was originally set for Nov. 16. Leider is requesting that no additional elephants be brought to the zoo until a trial is completed.

The zoo has one Asian pachyderm, Billy, who is in his early 20s.

In a lawsuit filed in August 2007, Leider, a real estate agent, and actor Robert Culp — who died in March — alleged the zoo withheld medical care, confined pachyderms in too small an area and used bull hooks and electric shocks to control them.

They also argued that a larger exhibit would be a waste of taxpayer money.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge John Shepard Wiley dismissed the lawsuit in May 2008, saying the issues should be decided in a legislative rather than a judicial forum.

But last September, a three-justice panel of the 2nd District Court of Appeal overturned Wiley's dismissal, ordering the case sent back for trial on whether maintaining elephants at the zoo violates statutes protecting taxpayers, as well as any penal code sections concerning alleged abuse of animals.

The state Supreme Court declined to hear the city's appeal.

Casselman states in his court papers that he has heard that zoo officials plan to bring in up to four elephants just before the trial begins.

"Such moves and acclimation to a new facility are stressful and need not occur exactly at the start of trial," Casselman's court papers state.

Meanwhile, the City Attorney's Office is again asking Wiley to dismiss Leider's case, saying in court papers that he has failed to state a valid claim of a waste of taxpayer money by the city in building the exhibit. City attorneys say even the Court of Appeal ruled that the only issue to be tried is whether the city made an illegal expenditure.

City attorneys also want Wiley to limit or bar altogether observations of Billy and inspections of the elephant exhibit by experts hired by Leider. They say the inspections are not relevant to the lawsuit and would create a burden on the staff.

Zoo spokesman Jason Jacobs said the exhibit, called Elephants of Asia, is scheduled to open in December. He said there will be additional elephants at the zoo by then, but does not know how many or when they will arrive.

The City Council approved the exhibit in 2006 and reaffirmed its decision in January 2009 to continue construction and reject a proposal to move Billy to a sanctuary.

In addition, the Greater Los Angeles Zoo Association agreed to donate additional funds to lower the city's debt payments.

Animal rights advocates have been vocal opponents of the zoo exhibit, insisting that it would still be too small to allow elephants to roam freely.

They say the average male elephant weighs about 14,000 pounds, and standing still for extended periods of time could cause the animals to develop foot disease, arthritis and other ailments resulting in premature death.

One Los Angeles Zoo elephant, Tara, died in December 2004 of arthritis and another, Gita, died in June 2006 of systemic infections due to arthritis.

City attorneys state in court papers that the zoo has been exhibiting elephants since 1966. They also argue that Billy has nearly 9,000 square feet on which to wander, is watched over by four full-time keepers and five full- time veterinarians, is exercised daily and is never disciplined because zoo management prohibits abusive treatment.
Click to expand...
 
It is almost like these "animal welfarist" people can never accept a foregone conclusion ...! ;) It is a waste of public space and tax payers' monies to even start up another trial re. the LA Zoo elephant exhibit.

Elephants are to stay and prosper in LA Zoo.
Thank you very much!!! :D
 
Kifaru Bwana said:
It is almost like these "animal welfarist" people can never accept a foregone conclusion ...! ;) It is a waste of public space and tax payers' monies to even start up another trial re. the LA Zoo elephant exhibit.

Elephants are to stay and prosper in LA Zoo.
Thank you very much!!! :D
Click to expand...

Oh I think they are very strategic in what conclusions they accept and what they challenge. We all recognize that taxpayer funds are not the issue for either side.
Only once the new animals arrive and once the exhibit opens, then watch these people scurry back to the cracks until the next zoo has an animal death.

As long as there are politicians involved, theses egoists can try to influence the decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top