Oh, and dinosaurs. Do kids need to go to a real life Jurassic Park to be inspired to learn all about dinosaurs? I went through the dinosaur phase as a kid. Didn’t need to actually see one to be obsessed with them for awhile.
I bet it would have made a hell of an impression, if you had.
I’m not sure what infographic you refer to (and am not eager to scroll back thru the thread.) Happy to acknowledge that the set-up could have been safer.
As with so many such situations, the question becomes how much is enough? Do we put unclimbable 4’ fences along every street, just because some parents let their kids play on the sidewalks where they might run into traffic chasing after a ball? My dad used to work with printing presses, and I recall him commenting that he did not believe the lack of safety railings and other precautions in train stations, where a huge train would speed past a platform full of people not paying attention, wrestling with umbrellas, etc.
How much safer is 4’ than 3’? (I’m sure this has been studied.) I’ve been to enough zoos and museums, where a number of kids will be at the barrier whining “I can’t see!” would the viewing experience be lessened for how many folk with a higher/different barrier? How determined of an idiot do you have to deter? I recall decades ago when polar bears at Brookfield had to be put down because some morons decided to climb into their enclosure to go swimming! :rolleyes:
Yeah, I guess I can see animals being attractive to young kids - especially kids whose parents have not succeeded in teaching them about potential hazards and proper behavior in public. And zoos intentionally attract many such people. I don’t have any opposition to zoos putting in higher fences. But I am extremely reluctant to impose liability upon zoos for patrons who intentionally or negligently contravene precautions which have proven sufficient for countless prior patrons over decades.
The family has issued a statement and IMO they sound very reasonable (aside from the praise God stuff).
[quote=]
“We continue to praise God for His grace and mercy, and to be thankful to the Cincinnati Zoo for their actions taken to protect our child,” the family said.
The family also expressed gratitude for the support they’ve received since Saturday.
“Some have offered money to the family, which we do not want and will not accept,” the family said. “If anyone wishes to make a gift, we recommend a donation to the Cincinnati Zoo in Harambe’s name.”
[/quote]
Sure, but I wonder. If I’d had access to dinosaurs, would I have been even more fascinated, or would I have gotten bored because they are commonplace? Mountain gorillas: Rare and wonderful, or something I can see everyday at the local McDonald’s/zoo?
What’s going to give me a greater appreciation of the wonderfulness, rarity, uniqueness and preciousness of the mountain gorilla?
Part of the blame has to go on the crowd for yelling and being noisy and agitating Harambe. If they were smart the crowd would have sung lullabies to sooth Harambe and put him to sleep. Then the keepers could have snuck in and got the boy.
I read a book about this once; but it didn’t turn out so well. The gorilla pretended to be asleep, stole the zookeeper’s keys, and proceeded to release all of the animals from their cages. It was mayhem! But everything turned out okay… I hope but I fell asleep before the end of the book.
Meh, if you’re a believer then it seems reasonable enough to give a shout out to Whomever held some sway over the ape. I like that they did go on to tip their hat to the zoo as well, and to direct any money toward the zoo in recognition of its loss.
It wasn’t a book, it was a movie, and all these photographers were popping their flashbulbs and startling this big gorilla, then he broke free of his chains to try to protect a pretty blonde lady and some monkeyshines ensued. This ended poorly for the ape as well.
Are those anything like lightning bugs? 'Cause a monkey with a light up butt would be really cool. I’d go to a zoo to see that.
I’m thinking the zoo ought to sue the mom, because her negligent supervision caused them to lose a valuable animal. (Only PARTLY in jest!)
I can’t bring myself to watch the entire video, so can someone please help me out with this?
I read somewhere that one reason why they didn’t tranq the gorilla is because other than it going apeshit (heh) when the dart hit, it could also potentially fall on top of the boy and injure him that way. How did they manage to fatally shoot the gorilla and the body did not fall on top of him anyway?
Was it a clean headshot? Not trying to be morbid, just curious.
PS: As much as I’m angry and disgusted with the parent(s) for not teaching the boy how to behave in a zoo and about boundaries around animals, I read somewhere that people have been offering the family money (:dubious:) and they’re refusing to accept it and said to make donations to the Cincinnati Zoo instead. Makes me feel a tiny bit less anger towards them.
Yeah I’m sure the zoo is enjoying an uptick in donations so it may turn out better off financially.
I don’t think there are any videos of the actual shooting, are there?
Huh? If the barrier was 20 feet UP and down, it would be a 20 foot wall entirely blocking the visitors’ view of the gorillas. Sure the zoo could do that, but they’d get a lot of complaints from people who came wanting to be able to see them.
Unless you mean that the gorillas should have effectively been in a pit with vertical 20 foot walls to keep them in. Which – they were. And note that none of the gorillas got OUT, it was the boy who got IN.
So… I’m really missing what point you’re trying to make here.
I can’t speak to the fence because I’ve never been to the Cincinnati Zoo, but I imagine if the boy is capable of climbing over the railing, he’s probably capable of climbing over the fence too.
There were four barriers between the visitor path and the gorilla habitat. Sure, a determined idiot could circumvent all four, but 1. nothing is completely idiot-proof, and 2. I think it’s reasonable for the zoo to expect that if someone sees a physical barrier, they will understand that they are not supposed to cross it. As I said, even at four years old, that’s plenty old enough to understand that. It’s reasonable to expect visitors to take some responsibility for themselves.
To be clear, I don’t blame the zoo officials – they were put in an impossible situation by the bad decisions of other people – and I don’t blame the kid, because at four everything he is, is a reflection of the parenting he’s received. I DO think said parenting leaves much to be desired.
They do this by making the habitats effectively big pits with sheer walls. Animals can neither climb without handholds nor jump 20-30 feet straight up. This doesn’t mean that someone at ground level couldn’t jump or fall in, if they’ve gone to the effort of circumventing the fences. As I already noted, the gorilla didn’t get out, the kid got in.
I’m just imagining the public outcry if the inner fence that kid climbed over had also been electrified.
That fence WAS a steel wire fence, btw.
However, every zoo enclosure like this I’ve seen ALSO has viewing access from outside at ground level looking down into the pit. You can see in the picture that the gorillas are outside, no ceiling (and frankly denying wild animals access to sun and fresh air would be cruel). So, this doesn’t actually change anything.
There’s video of a gorilla somewhere who does crack such a window.
And anyway, if they’re raging and flinging themselves at the primates on the other side, I’m not sure such windows are desirable.
Not that I’ve been able to find. Even though an awful lot of people have cameras not everything gets recorded and not all angles where people might record from have good visibility. If the zoo took their own footage I’d think they’d hold onto it pretty tight.
FWIW, it turns out that the child is three years old. Initial reports were that he was four (maybe his birthday is coming up?), but his age was later verified as three.