Posted on 01/03/2008 6:12:02 AM PST by Red in Blue PA
SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) -- Police are investigating whether several items found in the enclosure of a tiger who fatally mauled a 17-year-old man show that the animal was attacked or taunted, San Francisco Zoo spokesman Sam Singer said Wednesday.
Police are examining a large rock, a tree branch and other items, Singer said.
"They [police] are trying to make a determination that those items or any other things that happened on Christmas Day were part of some attack on the tiger or something that angered Tatiana, causing her to come out of her cage," the spokesman said.
San Francisco Police Chief Heather Fong has said that a shoe print found on the railing at the tiger enclosure is being examined to determine if one of the victims climbed over the rail or threw their leg over the side.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
This time, obviously!
Hmmm I have no idea if these guys taunted the tiger to provoke an attack however, if the tiger got over the enclosure at its present height then I surmise its far from OK.
If I am gonna to build an enclosure to keep something in then it is going to be to do so under any circumstances other than sabatage and/or acts of God.
It is irrelevant when it comes to building a fence. What IMO is important here is did the zoo believe this was an adequate enclosure though. Are there others like it? What happens if this year all are raised to 16 feet and another cat gets out.? Of course a zoo must be responsible but would it be negligence if they did the best they knew how? We the public have to acknowledge a little responsibility too here. We want big cats, in zoos, in natural environments for their “comfort” and our viewing. We would not be happy to see animals in cages. Do we scrap zoos (I hope not), put them in cages (probably the safest for the public but unacceptable)? No matter how well an outside enclosure is, a determined animal will eventually challenge it. Will people be complacent though that it’s 4 feet higher, so I’m safe” and can do what I want? My suggestion is yes raise the wall, but put up hot wires and an alarm system that will sound if a cat gets to close or a human tries to cross. Equipment can fail though so probably the safest is to have an armed, staff person stationed at the exhibit.
If that’s your point ... I;m not impressed. It changed nothing. If those kids hadn’t taunted this animal, nothing would have happened - regardless of the height of the enclosure. For that Hanna is an expert and you are NOT. I’ll believe a tiger expert over you any day. I know witnesses that saw the taunting don't matter to you. It doesn't matter that these jerks have criminal records ... or carry cling shots around ... very ABNORMAL.
Only she is interviewed, by either the Chronicle or the police. Neither you nor I know anything more of what happened later, so your ad hominem can be allowed to fly into the ether. The zoo's job is to keep the tiger in the zoo, and that's the basic fact here.
As for “recommended”r “suggested guidelines” they are just that - NOT REQUIREMENTS. With the CRIMINAL track record and their hostility towards those trying to help them in the ambulance and later not cooperating even after they knew one was dead .... tell me something. They’re no “victims”.
“Although authorities have said Sousa was accompanied only by San Jose brothers Paul Dhaliwal, 19, and Kulbir Dhaliwal, 23,”
The Religion of Pieces again?
About the moat. It’s more of an obstacle than a “moat.” I’m 6’3”, and can easily step over a 2 foot fence. But if there’s a 6 foot deep “moat” that I have to stand in, there’s no way I can get over the fence. For it’s no longer 2 feet high, but, from where I’m standing, 8 feet high! And, Tigers love to swim!
I think few do.
I asked for a specific time a tiger cleared a 12.5 ft wall.
I will be waiting.
___________
Um, late afternoon, 12/25/2007. But I suspect what you are really asking for is another time that it happened.
Since we already know that it can, and has, happened, how are we going to be any more enlightened with additional examples?
I am constantly amazed at how many here seem to be okay with animal abuse. Disgusting.
But not an ounce of sympathy for the so-called victims.
They had it coming, just as if they had played in traffic at rush-hour.
And this is as clear as can be to me. Why it isn’t just as clear to everyone is beyond me.
I can’t understand why there weren’t cameras in the zoo to observe the animals on both sides of the barriers. Are all zoos so inadequately equipped with modern technology? According to at least one story a zoo employee wanted to go into the area to check if the other tigers were still in their enclosures and was restrained by the police. Why on earth weren't their cameras that could allow him to verify this without putting himself in danger? It stinks of bureaucratic idiocy.
Oh please. Did we require interviews from every person at the WTC on 9/11 to prove it happened? This lady was there with her husband and two kids. She said her kids were disturbed by the thugs’ behavior. Sorry this doesn’t fit in with “the zoo is completely at fault” frame of mind. I do think the zoo could have protected both the humans and the animals better, but these thugs found out the hard way that actions have consequences. Too bad about the tiger, though, who was just being a tiger and didn’t ask to be taunted.
Hanna has recanted what he said the day after the attack; he was going by the zoo’s initial statement that their fence was 18 feet high, and it would indeed be a miracle if a tiger could jump that. But 12.5 feet? Well, no, a tiger could indeed jump that. It did.
That’s all that matters.
That was not an ad hominem.
If you beleiev it was, you need a better dictionary.
If it turns out they did provoke the tiger into attacking, does the deceased man automatically win the Darwin award for 2007?
Sorry, that was badly done of me. The deceased supposedly was trying to save his friend, so I guess we should just denigrate those who lived.
A Nail-on-the-head post.
That is the most damaging bit of information. If a water-filled moat wasn't necessary, why did they have the moat?
“According to the Association of Zoos & Aquariums, the walls around a tiger exhibit should be at least 16.4 feet high. But Mollinedo said the nearly 70-year-old wall at the zoo’s big-cat enclosure was 12 feet, 5 inches...At the Bronx Zoo, the tigers are surrounded by a 20-foot-high chain-link fence with a 5-foot overhang that curls inward at the top. An electrified wire runs along the inside of the fence.
The Philadelphia Zoo said it has 16-foot walls topped with a 3-foot overhang. At the Virginia Zoo in Norfolk, Va., the walls are 15 to 20 feet high with a 5-foot overhang and an electrified wire. At the Reid Park Zoo in Tucson, the wire fence is about 17 feet.
At the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium, Assistant Director Don Winstel said he checked the architectural drawings and plans for the enclosure on Wednesday, and found that the walls and fence around the tigers are no lower than 16 feet.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/27/national/main3649046.shtml
“So 100 foot walls for all zoos now, right?
Ludicrous.”
For those of you playing “Spot the Logical Fallacy” along with us at home, this would be: “The Straw Man”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.