Seems like a natural question. Instead of saying "Portland protestors set fire . . . " it should have read "white vandals say they set fire to a stone fountain where an elk statute was mounted because . . ." Otherwise, the act makes no sense and the reporting does little more than feed the predictable out-of-towners making generalized statements about Portland, BLM and AOC and whoever/whatever else they want to throw in the pot.

Okay, I'm from out of state, I've never been to Oregon as far as I can recall, but what is the deal with the elk?

In this case, its location location location. The fountains below the statue made great firepits to dispose of some plywood. No one was particularly interested in the elk itself. And I'd rank the fire itself as pretty irrelevant to the metal statue or the concrete base. But removing the statue and pretending it was necessary gives police and their supporters a talking point.