Gorilla shot to save young boy

[Peremensoe]

@drewder

Nobody’s saying it should be impossible for a determined adult, just a determined 4 year old.

You can try. I don’t believe it is practicable, with any design that won’t alienate far more visitors than it saves.

@Malthus

As you and drewder point out, the reasonable standard ought to be to prevent young children from falling in.

That’s exactly the standard adopted by the European zoo guidelines, which requires a
“barrier which would be capable of restraining children from falling” in such circumstances.

Not seeing anything unreasonable about that requirement - which, rather, just seems sensible.

In my experience of design terms, “restrain from falling” means preventing inadvertent falls. The existing Cincinnati design, like an OSHA fall-protection barrier, already does that. The point is to keep people from just walking off an edge.

An actual OSHA-compliant construction-site barrier won’t stop even a moderately-interested toddler, who can easily climb between the toe board and mid rail. Larger kids can use the mid rail as a step to climb over it. That standard beats the actual zoo of this case only in the height of its top edge.

[Malthus]

@Dinsdale

I’m curious - does anyone know where there is a picture of the fence? I’ve seen pics and vids own into the moat, but no shots of the fence the kid circumvented. Most zoos I’ve been to, have a relatively low railing - maybe 42" - which most determined children or adults (tho possibly not 3-4 yr olds) could easily climb. I’m not sure zoos should have to do more.

But if the bars were too far apart, or if it was easy to crawl under, that would IMO suggest a lack of sufficient care by the zoo.

I haven’t seen any pics - in the articles, they describe the barrier as a three foot steel fence (so, 36"), then some bushes, then a drop into the moat. Not sure if the kid went through the fence or over it.

[Malthus]

@levdrakon

Well, are zoos a “humans can’t jump in” areas or are they a “caged animals can’t jump out” areas? I don’t know. The Cincinnati zoo seems to have found something that worked for 38 years, but humans are fuckers about thwarting what did work, and sueing when they stupidly circumvent it.

But yeah, we really need to just make everything unthwartable by three-year-olds, 'cause that gets you sued. Let’s not be all sad and depressed and bitchy when zoos go away because they aren’t day care centers. Successful zoos will probably be more child friendly Disney Lands with lots of child-friendly rides and food stands. That’s probably a good thing. Captive animals under the pretense of “conservation” is stupid, so let’s let the free market work that out. Amusement parks fine, zoos are right out. They don’t seem to serve a useful purpose. It’s archaic and stupid and overly risky.

You make it sound like keeping out human toddlers and very young children is an impossibly expensive burden.

Given that zoos manage to keep in species of primates capable of much greater feats of climbing than human toddlers/young kids, permit me to doubt that.

[Hampshire]

@Dinsdale

I’m curious - does anyone know where there is a picture of the fence? I’ve seen pics and vids own into the moat, but no shots of the fence the kid circumvented. Most zoos I’ve been to, have a relatively low railing - maybe 42" - which most determined children or adults (tho possibly not 3-4 yr olds) could easily climb. I’m not sure zoos should have to do more.

But if the bars were too far apart, or if it was easy to crawl under, that would IMO suggest a lack of sufficient care by the zoo.

From what I’ve seen reported is that there was a 3 foot+ tall fence that the child climbed underneath. The fence did not go down to the ground. Beyond that there was ~6’ of ground foliage before the 15’ sheer drop into the moat.

[Pylesos]

@Soylent_Juicy

Just curious, has the mother apologized anywhere for her child’s actions?

:D:D what do you think??

[Malthus]

@Peremensoe

You can try. I don’t believe it is practicable, with any design that won’t alienate far more visitors than it saves.

In my experience of design terms, “restrain from falling” means preventing inadvertent falls. The existing Cincinnati design, like an OSHA fall-protection barrier, already does that. The point is to keep people from just walking off an edge.

An actual OSHA-compliant construction-site barrier won’t stop even a moderately-interested toddler, who can easily climb between the toe board and mid rail. Larger kids can use the mid rail as a step to climb over it. That standard beats the actual zoo of this case only in the height of its top edge.

Seems an absurd interpretation in this context. Why not go with what the words literally say, rather than adding language to it?

[Peremensoe]

@Malthus

You make it sound like keeping out human toddlers and very young children is an impossibly expensive burden.

Given that zoos manage to keep in species of primates capable of much greater feats of climbing than human toddlers/young kids, permit me to doubt that.

I’m sure the existing primate enclosure would keep human toddlers, and probably most adults, in as well.

[levdrakon]

@Malthus

Indeed.

As you and drewder point out, the reasonable standard ought to be to prevent young children from falling in.

That’s exactly the standard adopted by the European zoo guidelines, which requires a
“barrier which would be capable of restraining children from falling” in such circumstances.

Not seeing anything unreasonable about that requirement - which, rather, just seems sensible.

If the standard is “kids can’t fall in” then we wouldn’t have toilets.

[drewder]

@Peremensoe

You can try. I don’t believe it is practicable, with any design that won’t alienate far more visitors than it saves.

In my experience of design terms, “restrain from falling” means preventing inadvertent falls. The existing Cincinnati design, like an OSHA fall-protection barrier, already does that. The point is to keep people from just walking off an edge.

An actual OSHA-compliant construction-site barrier won’t stop even a moderately-interested toddler, who can easily climb between the toe board and mid rail. Larger kids can use the mid rail as a step to climb over it. That standard beats the actual zoo of this case only in the height of its top edge.

Most zoos I’ve seen have thick plexiglass around eight feet tall. It would keep out all but the most determined and have minimal effects on the users viewing pleasure. Hardly seems overly onerous. They put a lot of effort and money into creating the habitats. Shouldn’t be that hard to make sure they’re safe. You wouldn’t buy a candy bar if the wrapper had poison on it even if they warned you that it was just to keep the rats off.

[August_West]

@Magiver

I dunno, why don’t you call them and see if they have a gorilla exclusionary clause.

“Hello, I’m calling to ask about your Gorilla Clause?”

“Gorillas don’t have claws”

[Malthus]

@levdrakon

If the standard is “kids can’t fall in” then we wouldn’t have toilets.

When you start charging strangers admission to see the wild toilet exhibit protected by a 15’ moat, I’ll consider that.

[levdrakon]

@drewder

Most zoos I’ve seen have thick plexiglass around eight feet tall. It would keep out all but the most determined and have minimal effects on the users viewing pleasure. Hardly seems overly onerous. They put a lot of effort and money into creating the habitats. Shouldn’t be that hard to make sure they’re safe. You wouldn’t buy a candy bar if the wrapper had poison on it even if they warned you that it was just to keep the rats off.

No. Some zoos have some plexiglass around certain exhibits. I used to have a membership at the San Diego Zoo which is one of the world’s best zoos, and they had tons of barred cages. There’s no way a zoo has everything walled off in plexiglass. Too expensive, they don’t care and you ain’t paying for all plexiglass, all the time. Who’s going to clean that shit? Don’t tell me as a parent you don’t know what happens with kids and plexiglass.

[Malthus]

@Peremensoe

I’m sure the existing primate enclosure would keep human toddlers, and probably most adults, in as well.

Is the claim that keeping such beasts out is impossibly burdensome?

[Inigo_Montoya]

@panache45

No great ape, no matter how endangered, is worth more than a human child, no matter how stupid.

I don’t often disagree with you but I’m having a hard time with that statement. Objectively, it is false. By any reasonable standard humans present as a destructive and invasive species worthy of determined extermination efforts. Do humans have some great destiny which requires massive numbers that makes each and every one of us so valuable? In nature, a homo sapiens toddler that invades gorilla Gorilla’s space runs a very real risk of becoming putty and thus fails to reproduce similarly-minded offspring.

Really, with all respect, where are you coming from with that thought?

[Peremensoe]

@drewder

Most zoos I’ve seen have thick plexiglass around eight feet tall. It would keep out all but the most determined and have minimal effects on the users viewing pleasure.

Dirty, hazy, sound-muffling. No thanks.

Granted, people will have different tolerances. I can’t stand to watch baseball through netting, but some people pay good money for those seats. Difference is, at sports venues there are options. The nanny faction here is insisting that nobody should be allowed to see zoo animals without such visual barriers.

@Malthus

Is the claim that keeping such beasts out is impossibly burdensome?

My contention is that it is undesirable, counter to the values and interests of zoos and most zoo visitors. There is something special and inspiring, for (some) adults as well as kids, in being able to see and hear real live animals, with the least mediation possible.

[drewder]

@levdrakon

No. Some zoos have some plexiglass around certain exhibits. I used to have a membership at the San Diego Zoo which is one of the world’s best zoos, and they had tons of barred cages. There’s no way a zoo has everything walled off in plexiglass. Too expensive, they don’t care and you ain’t paying for all plexiglass, all the time. Who’s going to clean that shit? Don’t tell me as a parent you don’t know what happens with kids and plexiglass.

Let me ask you. If the head of the zoo could go back in time and modify the exhibit to prevent toddlers from playing with the gorillas don’t you think he would regardless of cost?

[drewder]

@The Great Sun Jester

I don’t often disagree with you but I’m having a hard time with that statement. Objectively, it is false. By any reasonable standard humans present as a destructive and invasive species worthy of determined extermination efforts. Do humans have some great destiny which requires massive numbers that makes each and every one of us so valuable? In nature, a homo sapiens toddler that invades gorilla Gorilla’s space runs a very real risk of becoming putty and thus fails to reproduce similarly-minded offspring.

Really, with all respect, where are you coming from with that thought?

This is why we’re doomed. The lack of sanctity for human life in our society is absolutely disgusting.

[Telemark]

@drewder

This is why we’re doomed. The lack of sanctity for human life in our society is absolutely disgusting.

The belief in the sanctity of life is sometimes in conflict with the belief in the sanctity of human life. There is no logical reason why either has to be absolute.

[levdrakon]

@Malthus

You make it sound like keeping out human toddlers and very young children is an impossibly expensive burden.

Given that zoos manage to keep in species of primates capable of much greater feats of climbing than human toddlers/young kids, permit me to doubt that.

If zoos have to put up 20’ tall plexiglass barriers everywhere, it’s easy to imagine that won’t work out. A large successful zoo has acres and acres of area they have to wall off in plexiglass. Ain’t gonna happen, for the ticket price you’re paying.

[levdrakon]

@drewder

Let me ask you. If the head of the zoo could go back in time and modify the exhibit to prevent toddlers from playing with the gorillas don’t you think he would regardless of cost?

If he were smart he’d kill the parents before the kid fucked up his profits, and every other worthwhile thing his zoo is doing. Assuming zoos ever do anything worthwhile, about which I am very undecided.