“These security fences send precisely the wrong message, that a visit to the Zoo is about danger, security, and exclusion.”

“Dear PoPville,

The National Capital Planning Commission is scheduled to vote on the first phase of the security check-point plan at the National Zoo (a perimeter security fence) next week.

Folks can submit comments on-line (click the “Submit Comments” button.)

Here’s the comment I just submitted:

I am writing as a member of the general public to oppose the National Zoological Park’s proposed Supplemental Perimeter Fencing,
NCPC File Number 7986.

This proposal is unnecessary and unwise.

As a resident of the surrounding neighborhood and extremely frequent visitor to the Zoo, I can provide direct assurance that security issues on Zoo property are extremely rare. Crimes are committed which notably higher frequency in the immediate vicinity *outside* the Zoo. A security fence, and the future planned check-points, will not have any appreciable benefit to visitors to the Zoo.

While the proposed fencing will not provide a worthwhile security benefit, it *will* have significant negative effects. First, the Zoo is under severe budgetary constraints, and cannot afford this unnecessary expense. Limited funds should be directed toward the vital programs that are unique to the Zoo.

More important, the proposed fencing will have an unintended but severe effect on the visitor experience. The Zoo grounds currently convey a sense of open parkland, in accordance with its original inspiration over a century ago. The property is seamlessly embedded within Rock Creek Park, with minimally intrusive fencing mostly in remote areas of the site. I invite the commissioners and staff to observe families strolling from adjacent parking lots to the nearest animal enclosures — the excitement, especially among children, builds palpably thanks to the open transition directly into the heart of the Zoo.

These security fences send precisely the wrong message, that a visit to the Zoo is about danger, security, and exclusion. Any further plan to implement security check points would exacerbate these issues.

With roughly two million annual visitors to the National Zoo, this decision requires substantially more public input and oversight. Please do not approve the fencing plan at the July meeting, and please provide an opportunity for the Zoo staff to re-consider this ill-advised proposal.”