First of all, nobody was ever planning to close Franklin Park Zoo or the Stone Zoo in Stoneham. Nor was anyone ever going to liquidate any animals. This was a mass panic - fueled by public manipulation by the outfit that runs the zoos - that never needed to happen, even given the governor's announced budget cuts. For now, House Speaker Robert DeLeo has blinked. He declared Monday that the entire $4 million cut from the zoo's budget would be restored in short order by overriding the governor's veto. DeLeo has not said what the House will cut to make this happen, though a possible target is medical aid to legal immigrants. Because really, why take care of noncitizens, at the expense of giraffes? Like any right-minded person, I am squarely on the side of taking care of the two zoos in our state, especially Franklin Park Zoo. But the notion that it was ever in danger of closing was, bluntly, a lie. The bogeyman in all this was Governor Deval Patrick. He has been portrayed in various unflattering ways during his time in office, but being painted as an animal-hater was unprecedented. 'I love the zoo,' Patrick said Monday in phone interview. 'I've visited often, especially when my kids were younger. To be clear about first principles, nobody's talking about euthanizing any animals, or closing the zoo.' Under the governor's veto, the appropriation for Zoo New England would have been cut from $6.5 million to $2.5 million. That is an enormous and damaging hit, to be sure. But to place it in perspective, the zoo's state funding was cut to $1.75 million as recently as 2004, during an economic downturn less dramatic than this one, and it still survived. 'This is about asking the zoo to do what we have asked every agency to do, and frankly, what we have asked every family in the state to do,' Patrick said. 'And that is to live within more limited means until things get better. I'm disappointed that Zoo New England would exaggerate the impact.' I'm sure the people who run Zoo New England - who have taken to avoiding questions from the media - had nothing but good intentions when they decided to announce they saw no alternative to shutting down. They might not have heard, though, that worthy programs left and right are getting their funding cut to shreds as state revenue continues its free fall. Agencies across Massachusetts are doing the hard work of figuring out how to reconcile their mission and their funding. 'There are no false choices in this budget,' Patrick said. 'We've had to make really hard choices that affect children's health and METCO and mental health, and most of those folks don't get to sensationalize their issues on the front page of the newspaper.' Clearly, Patrick's real issue, and rightly so, is that the zoo will go unscathed while so many equally worthy causes suffer reductions. 'I just think that's unreasonable in these times,' Patrick said. 'These are choices we're going to have to be wise and sober about.' There actually is an argument, raised during every downturn, that Massachusetts could get by with one less zoo. But that worthwhile debate will have to wait for another day. Many of the budget cuts are alarming, and every one of them is debatable. Every line in the budget reflects a decision about priorities, and perhaps the zoo is a higher priority than the governor thinks it is. A lot of people seem to think so. That doesn't make the controversy of the past few days any less surreal. With a sigh, Patrick acknowledged being taken by surprise by the zoo uprising. 'There are a handful of people who have the contacts and the money to ensure their interests on Beacon Hill,' Patrick said, paraphrasing President John F. Kennedy. 'Everyone else is the governor's responsibility.' 