Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: CindyDawg
Maybe there is a design flaw.

The national standards for a tiger enclosure are a 16'4" vertical barrier.

See post #43 as to who was responsible for the standards.

The SF Zoo originally claimed the barrier was 20' tall.

Now, as it turns out, the barrier was only 12'.

"Maybe" is an understatement.

85 posted on 12/27/2007 4:33:35 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: okie01

Maybe the wall still is 20 feet, but the ground just got higher. Erosion from the surrounding walls or wind carrying minute pieces of sand and dirt might have gradually built up over the years (the thing was built in the 40’s)until the distance from the bottom of the moat to the top of the wall was only 12.5 feet.


89 posted on 12/27/2007 4:41:21 PM PST by Krankor (kROGER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

To: okie01
I don't understand why you have been so adament even before this new measurement that the zoo is at fault. Do you have additional information? Can you share?

It is a maybe IMO, still because there are different reports. If it was too low then the zoo will and should have to accept responsibility. I'm sceptical though. It could happen but don't they have government inspections? How could this have been an oversite all these years? We may see a combination where regs weren't met and the young men were on the wrong side of the fence too. I don't know. Time will tell, I guess.

90 posted on 12/27/2007 4:41:27 PM PST by CindyDawg (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson