Inbox

[October 29th, 2008]

It’s Guantanamo For Animals
The word zoo is nothing but a euphemism for the word jail [“Our endorsements,” WW, Oct. 15, 2008]. The elephants have done nothing to us, why must we lock them up? Thank you for adult thinking on this measure.
“Paul”
via wweek.com

Vote For Zoo Bond, Or Tusko Gets It?
I agree with you 100%. We have a problem, though, if the measure [26-96] doesn’t pass and the zoo decides to keep the elephants. There’s no indication they’ll get rid of the elephant exhibit. So if we want to protect the elephants, having them stay in terrible conditions is not the answer, either.
If this measure read, “Give us this money or we get rid of the elephants,” I’d vote no in a heartbeat. But it’s harder for me to do so when I know they’re going to be stuck at the zoo.
“Matt”
via wweek.com

I volunteer at the Oregon zoo and we treat our animals just like we would if they were our own pets. We love them, feed them on a regular basis, etc. We would do anything for our animals.
“Juli”
via wweek.com

“I volunteer at the Oregon zoo and we treat our animals just like we would if they were our own pets”—They are not YOUR animals. It is time we treat them as living creatures equal to humans—not pets. Non-human animals have their own interests and lives. If the animals were treated with respect, they would not be incarcerated in concrete ‘habitats’ and exploited for profit—they would be left alone to live their lives according to their needs.
“Patrick”
via wweek.com

Après Ski With Babar
The elephants should be let loose in the forest surrounding Mt. Hood. Imagine the majesty of riding the ski lifts, and looking down on a herd of wild elephants grazing.
“Rich”
via wweek.com

CORRECTION: WW incorrectly reported last week that state Rep. John Lim (R-Gresham) lacks a website for his campaign. Lim’s campaign does have a website. WW regrets the error.