How can a zoo enclosure for a leopard be easy enough for a 7 year old to get over?

[pnwmom]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/06/kansas.zoo.attack/?hpt=T2

(CNN) -- A child on a school outing was attacked by a leopard at a Wichita, Kansas, zoo, authorities said Friday.

The boy, a student from Linwood Elementary, was with classmates on a field trip at the Sedgwick County Zoo when, around 1:15 p.m., witnesses said, he "went over a railing" and approached the Amur leopard exhibit, said Lt. Jay McLaurian of the county sheriff's department.

The leopard was able to reach into the mesh covering of its enclosure and grab the boy by his head, McLaurian said.

The child was rescued by bystanders who rushed in and "beat the animal" away from the boy, officials said. According to McLaurian, the boy received injuries to his face and neck and was taken to a hospital for treatment.

SNIP

[rfranklin]

1. Usually you have to give the kid a boost over the fence...

that's been my experience.

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. 7 year olds are pretty agile

Doesn't surprise me at all.

[pnwmom]

3. Then you should have designed this zoo enclosure.

Your standards probably would have been much better.

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. Actually I would have watched him more closely

or not taken him to the zoo at all if I wasn't able to keep an eye on him.

[pnwmom]

7. You know what class trips are like. They had a whole class of 7 year olds

and probably a handful of harried parent-helpers.

That zoo enclosure wasn't properly designed.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. Yes I am very familiar with field trips

It's rare to get enough parents to go along as chaperones. Most work.

[pnwmom]

17. Well, I was one of those parents trying to watch 6 kids at once.

Trying to remember what all of "mine" even looked like in the middle of the kid swarm.

I don't blame the teacher or the parent-volunteers who I'm sure were trying to do their best. I think the zoo was at fault for having a leopard enclosure consisting of a mesh barrier with 4 x 8 inch gaps, separated from the humans only by 8 feet of walking distance and a 4-5 foot railing.

[gkhouston]

93. Worst field trip of my life was accompanying six 5-year-olds at the zoo.

I got a larger-than-normal group because I had the reputation of being the parent with eyes in the back of my head. None of the kids gave me the slip or got hurt, but that was the longest afternoon ever.

[Honeycombe8]

4. I smell a lawsuit. A pity. Kids do the darndest things. They can get in anywhere, climb over

anything, knock down anything, you name it. They have to be WATCHED CONSTANTLY when on a field trip outing. There should be two or more adults to corral them & keep them in line.

I wouldn't fault the zoo. That's just my opinion, though. Unless it were a four foot railing or something, which I'm sure it wasn't. He climbed over something into a protected area, then he had to walk through that area to get to the cage, it sounds like. I'm thinking...so where were the adults who were supposedly watching the kids?

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. There obviously weren't enough chaperones on this trip

I hate field trips for this very reason.

[pnwmom]

8. That zoo should have been child-proofed. There's no excuse for such poor design. A 4 ft. rail

wouldn't keep anyone out.

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. It helps to have all the facts

A four-year-old Amur leopard in the Asia section of the zoo attacked the boy after the child climbed over a four- to five-foot railing, crossed an eight-foot gap and stood next to the metal mesh fence of the animal's enclosure, Marlett said.

Read more: http://www.kansas.com/2011/05/06/1838692/child-mauled-by-leopard-at-zoo.html#ixzz1LcjZQCw7

[pnwmom]

14. That fact changes nothing. How hard is it to walk eight feet

after going over a 4-5 foot rail?

And how hard would it be for a leopard to stretch a powerful front leg through a gap in a metal fence that is more than eight inches across?

Read more: http://www.kansas.com/2011/05/06/1838692/child-mauled-by-leopard-at-zoo.html#ixzz1LcxtKcWt

The boy climbed over the railing and walked toward the leopard's cage, she said.

"He wanted to get a closer look," Robinson said.

The leopard came to the edge of the cage, reached a paw through the fencing and grabbed the boy by the side of the head. The fence has 4-inch by 8-inch gaps in the mesh.

It looked, Robinson said, like the leopard was trying to pull him into the enclosure.

[proud2BlibKansan]

24. It's been a few years since I have been to the Wichita Zoo, but IIRC,

it's not just an 8 foot strip of grass, but a trench. It takes quite a bit of effort to climb over a fence, go down into the trench and then climb out of it and then walk over to the cage where the leopard is.

The bottom line is that zoos are giving animals more space these days. At our zoo here, most of the animals aren't in cages. You can walk right up to the elephants and giraffes - there is no fencing.

I was surprised to hear this leopard was in a cage, which is very secure in today's zoos.

An adult who should have been watching this child made a rather large and nearly fatal mistake.

[pnwmom]

30. No, it's not a trench. You can see it here.

All the boy had to do was walk across the grass.

http://www.dailyamerican.com/kwch-news-ccd-child-injured-at-sedgwick-county-zoo-20110506,0,5146274.story

[proud2BlibKansan]

32. And climb that fence.

Where were the adults who should have been watching him?

[pnwmom]

39. I read somewhere that he had gotten away from his group.

And, as you know, that is all too easy to imagine happening.

[proud2BlibKansan]

44. If he was being watched, he wouldn't have gotten away

[pnwmom]

53. If the enclosure had been properly designed, he couldn't have near

the leopard.

Anyone designing a zoo with predatory animals has two main factors to keep in mind: the predators' natural tendencies and the humans' natural tendencies. And the point is to make sure they are kept safely apart.

[shanti]

60. exactly

the "mesh" of the inner cage should have been much more secure for a big cat. 8 inches?? isn't that about the size of its paw?

i definitely smell a lawsuit, but the zoo wouldn't be 100% to blame. the child's caretaker takes some of that too.

[pnwmom]

69. The problem is that the child

was on a class trip, and somehow got away from the group. The child's "caretaker" was probably an unpaid volunteer parent, trying to watch 6 kids who were running off in 6 different directions. Should that volunteer be held responsible?

I'm glad my kids are too old for field trips.

[-..__...]

13. "Child-proofed"?

That's an easy one... "NO CHILDREN ALLOWED"!

[pnwmom]

15. Most of the visitors to a zoo are children. That's a fast way to go

out of business.

[-..__...]

19. Sorry...

I forgot the sarcasm tag.

However... if it came down to the zoo being being held accountable, or kids banished from the place; sorry kiddies... stay at home with your Play Stations.

[pnwmom]

9. The "barrier" was only 4 feet tall. What were they thinking?

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/05/06/2854538/child-mauled-by-leopard-at-zoo.html

This Amur Leopard attacked at young child through the fence surrounding its enclosure at the Sedgwick County Zoo on Friday. The child climbed over a 4-foot barrier to get closer to the cage when the leopard attacked. The child is in fair condition at an area hospital. (May 6, 2011

[KittyWampus]

10. It's a barrier to the cage. The leopard did not leave the cage. Poor leopard in a cage.

[pnwmom]

20. No one's blaming the leopard, who reacted completely normally.

So did the child -- who acted out of normal childlike curiosity.

The zoo's designer should have carefully designed an enclosure that prevented contact between any human visitors and the leopard. Neither the 7 year old nor the leopard was at fault.

[-..__...]

16. A lawsuit?....

Really?

Of course there will be a lawsuit.

That's the American way go for the money... "I'm just doing this so no other child has to go through this kind of suffering emotional pain".

[pnwmom]

18. Perfectly justified, given the facts in the article.

There was nothing between the leopard's enclosure but a 4-5 foot railing and 8 feet of walking distance. And the enclosure itself was made of a "mesh" with 4 x 8 inch gaps. Children are always running around in zoos -- zoos have to be built to keep the people and the animals away from each other. It's amazing no one was attacked before now.

[-..__...]

21. Keep the little fucks tethered or on a leash...

if they're that out of control.

But, ohhhh no... that would harm the childs self esteem and confidence.

Gimme a break... the zoo didn't fuck-up, the school/supervisors/chaperons did.

But, like everyone else, they'll just pass the blame on to someone other than themselves.

[pnwmom]

23. No properly designed zoo enclosure would allow such easy contact

between a zoo visitor and a predatory animal. The enclosure was poorly designed, as you can see from this video.

http://www.dailyamerican.com/kwch-news-ccd-child-injured-at-sedgwick-county-zoo-20110506,0,5146274.story

[-..__...]

29. And?...

I see no problem with that enclosure.

Could have been a wide open alligator pit with twine strung around it, and yet it wouldn't matter.

Who the fuck was responsible for watching this kid is the only thing that's relevant.

[pnwmom]

33. No, an improperly designed enclosure is what is relevant.

There are design standards for accreditation of zoos and I'm sure this exhibit would fail. That zoo was either charging entry fees and/or taking public taxpayer money -- either way, it had an obligation to offer exhibits that kept visitors and predatory animals safely apart from each other.

The fact is, a normal leopard will attack. A normal young child is curious. Proper zoo design makes sure they're not able to get close to each other, even if an adult is looking the other way.

[proud2BlibKansan]

37. How many hundreds of thousands of kids visit this zoo every year?

ONE got over a fence. ONE. Every other kid who saw this exhibit walked away uninjured. I'd say they have a pretty good safety record.

[pnwmom]

40. They've been lucky up till now. But their luck ran out.

Too bad that's what they were apparently counting on, instead of good design.

You do realize that they probably had this sort of enclosure, instead of a safer one, because they were trying to save money?

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. This is how zoos are built now

If you can't watch the kids 24/7, don't take them to the zoo.

[pnwmom]

42. This enclosure wouldn't pass accreditation standards today.

I doubt it was built recently.

[proud2BlibKansan]

49. So now you're an expert on zoo accreditation standards?

:rofl:

[pnwmom]

51. Remember the case with the guy who got killed by an escaped tiger

last year? There was lots of articles then about standards for cages for predatory animals. This one doesn't even come close.

[blueamy66]

58. Wasn't that guy drunk and taunting the tiger?

nt

[pnwmom]

72. Right, that's the case. And that cage had a moat, but the tiger

was able to leap it.

The city never actually filed charges against either the minor or his older friends for taunting the zoo animals. You'd think they would have, if they'd had the evidence. It certainly would have helped them defend themselves against the civil cases.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Zoo_tiger_attacks#Subsequent_events

In January 2008, the lead investigator for the city said that the men may have harassed Tatiana, but no charges were filed against them for such behavior.<35> Taunting a zoo animal is a misdemeanor in San Francisco.<32>

SNIP

In November 2008, the Dhaliwal brothers followed up their initial filing with a new suit in federal court which accused city and zoo officials of defamation for suggesting the young men had provoked the tiger, in addition to a claim of negligence for the incident itself.<37>
In the last week of December 2008, the city filed a lien in the federal lawsuit brought by the Dhaliwals against the zoo. The lien is intended to recover over $75,000 for medical care spent on Kulbir Dhaliwal in city facilities. The city did not comment on why no similar lien was filed to recover the expenses of Amritpal Dhaliwal's care.<35>
On December 23, 2008, the parents of Carlos Eduardo Sousa filed suit against the city and the zoo. Marilza and Carlos Sousa Sr. claimed wrongful death of their son, a minor, and asserted in their filing that the zoo ignored industry standards and warnings from its own staff that the tiger enclosure was insufficient to contain Tatiana. Their attorney, Michael Cardoza said the suit sought unspecified damages for wrongful death, negligence, reckless conduct and maintaining a public nuisance.<37> The suit was settled in February 2009; terms of the settlement were not disclosed.<39>
The suit filed by the Dhaliwals was settled in May 2009 for terms including a payment of $900,000 to the brothers by the zoo.<39>

[LisaL]

92. It's because the wall was too short.

The leopard in this case, however, stayed in his cage.

[shanti]

61. the san francisco zoo learned that the hard way!

too bad this zoo didn't learn from the mistakes of others. :eyes:

[pnwmom]

73. The SF Zoo learned about proper enclosure design the hard way.

You would think that other zoos would have immediately checked to make sure their own enclosures were safer.

[blueamy66]

22. The parents of the kid that wandered away and put himself in harm's way

should sue the parents and or teachers that were there as chaperones. It's not the zoo's fault that someone shirked their responsibilty.

[proud2BlibKansan]

25. I agree with you

This is why I hate field trips and would never take a 1st grade class to the zoo without plenty of chaperones. And this child, who is likely used to walking away from the group, would either not have gone or would have had a hold of my hand the entire time we were in that zoo. There are always a few kids in every class you just can't ever take your eyes off of.

[pnwmom]

27. You think the TEACHER should be sued? Or the parents

who were asked to volunteer?

Oh, and you think no child has EVER done something unexpected -- that teachers always know which child will be the one to get in trouble?

:rofl:

The zoo administrators were the animal experts and it was THEIR job, not the teacher or the parents, to make sure the zoo was designed safely -- in a way that kept all visitors and dangerous animals apart. They failed miserably.

[proud2BlibKansan]

31. I don't think anyone should be sued

And yes, teachers know which kids to watch. We also know which kids to leave at school and not take on field trips. I've even refused to go on field trips when I have had classes that had too many children who don't follow directions well. I teach special ed. I take the responsibility I have to keep my students safe very seriously. And you bet I know which ones I can trust to stay out of trouble on a field trip and which ones would be likely to climb a fence and get too close to an animal.

[blueamy66]

36. Good answer.

from a teacher.....

[pnwmom]

38. You just said you agreed with the previous poster, who said

that the teacher or parents should be sued.

I agree with you that some kids ALWAYS need to be carefully watched, no matter what. But I also think that some kids , even the very "best behaved" can surprise even the best of teachers -- and unexpectedly get in trouble. This zoo should have been designed to prevent any contact between the leopard and people. Period.

[proud2BlibKansan]

47. I agree that the zoo isn't responsible

I should have stated that more clearly.

[blueamy66]

35. So, what part of a cage, a ditch and a fence don't you understand?

Does the zoo have to employ security guards to stand in front of every exhibit to stop dipshits from getting too close to the animals?

Jesus, use some common sense. The teachers and chaperones are there for a reason. If your school cannot "employ" enough parents/chaperones to watch the little darlings, shelve the trip.

Why the laughing avatar? Boring night for you?

[proud2BlibKansan]

41. One of the schools where I taught was actually banned from visiting an area attraction

because a group from our school showed up without the required number of adults. It was a children's art center at Hallmark Cards. Not even close to being unsafe, as a zoo. But a couple parents who had promised to come on the field trip didn't show up, the teacher took the kids and the parents she had and the school got a letter from the center telling us we were hereby banned from coming back.

[blueamy66]

48. Sounds good to me.

I have never been on a childrens' field trip before, but I have been with my great nieces/nephews at the zoo and they wear the animal backpacks with the "leash". I didn't like them at first, but heck, they are a godsend. And the kids don't mind at all!

Maybe the zoos should look into not allowing large groups of young children to tour the grounds altogether.

[proud2BlibKansan]

52. Our zoo has a kid/adult ratio recommendation

I don't know how strictly they enforce it but when you call to book the trip, they let you know how many adults they recommend for each group of kids.

[blueamy66]

55. Exactly.

That sounds perfect.

[pnwmom]

45. There was NO DITCH. NO TRENCH. NO MOAT. There was a low rail and a cage with openings

wide enough for the leopard to stick both front legs through.

You can see a better view of the cage in this video. (But there's a commercial to watch first.)

http://www.dailyamerican.com/kwch-news-ccd-child-injured-at-sedgwick-county-zoo-20110506,0,5146274.story

[blueamy66]

57. I never mentioned a moat or a trench.

What part of a fence doesn't a 7 year old understand? It's not just to climb on and swing from, ya know?

[pnwmom]

71. 7 year olds routinely make dumb mistakes. That's part of being 7.

Part of being a grown-up, responsible zoo administrator is making sure all your enclosures are designed to prevent close encounters between zoo patrons and predatory animals. This one wasn't.

[pnwmom]

26. The zoo charges for entry and/or takes taxpayer funds.

In return, it had an obligation to provide safe exhibits that were not easily overcome by a 7 year old. Visitors to any zoo have the right to expect that the enclosures of predatory animals have been built to keep children and animals safely apart.

This zoo's enclosure was very poorly designed, with only a 4-5 foot railing and 8 feet of walking distance between the child and a cage consisting of mesh with 4 x 8 inch gaps.

No parent would ever volunteer to go on another class trip if they could be sued in this kind of situation.

[proud2BlibKansan]

28. The parent chaperones won't be sued, the school will

[blueamy66]

43. So, if the family has medical insurance that paid for any injuries,

why should they sue?

I'm sure that the people that run the zoo will look into changing the stucture (which I don't think that they should have to do).

So, why sue?

[pnwmom]

54. Why shouldn't a zoo that charges for entry or takes taxpayer funds

have to provide for the safety of its visitors?

[blueamy66]

59. You didn't answer my question.

Why sue?

[pnwmom]

68. You don't think the 7 year old experienced trauma?

Or is it that you don't believe public institutions should be liable for negligence?

[blueamy66]

96. I believe that if the kid suffered trauma because he chose

to climb over a fence and get too close to a wild animal, then his parents' health insurance should pay for his medical and mental care.

[LisaL]

90. Well the difference is the kid shouldn't have been doing any of it.

[Maru Kitteh]

46. I could have scaled almost anything at that age. And I did.

I was light and strong, limber, and a very talented gymnast. I had NO FEAR of anything whatsoever.

Sure as hell couldn't do it now! But at 7? No problem.

[Codeine]

50. Kids do stupid shit and get hurt every day.

That's part of life.

[-..__...]

67. There was once a time...

that when I was growing up as a kid, and had I done something like that, I would have gotten smacked by my mother in addition to the leopard mauling

for doing something so stupid and no one would have blinked an eye.

[pnwmom]

79. Yes, which is what zoo designers are supposed to account for. n/t

[Codeine]

80. Meh. You can't plan for every imbecile on Earth.

If a child is that dimwitted he's best kept home in swaddling clothes.

[pnwmom]

82. You can plan for normal childish curiosity -- and most zoos have. This zoo was lucky till now.

But if they're sued, they'll lose -- unless they settle first.

[woo me with science]

56. The exhibit looks like many others I've seen.

Many zoos are designed with a short wall on the human side, but barriers on the animal side, like this one. There is some human responsibility not to climb the fence and to make sure that children don't climb the fence. This arrangement keeps the parks from looking like prisons and ensures that viewing is easy.

I hope to god some idiot doesn't file a lawsuit so that zoos start putting up big ugly fences and plexiglass barriers between us and the animals.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

64. I hope they put up better barriers - to protect the animals from being euthanized.

There was case here in Chicago... well Brookfield actually.... where some dip-shit stuck his hand in a wolf exhibit. IIRC, they killed the wolf.

A little chicken-wire wouldn't have ruined the view. Heck, it protected The Blues Brothers.

[pnwmom]

75. There are better alternatives than this leopard's cage

and "big ugly fences." A very tall moat around a more naturalistic setting would have been an improvement.

[woo me with science]

84. I don't see anything wrong with what was there already.

Although I am generally not fond of cages, the inner fence here was probably much cheaper for a smaller zoo like this than elaborate landscaping including moats or trenches...and may have been the difference between having this exhibit and not having it. Moats and trenches are not foolproof either, you know. There was someone killed by a lion not too many years ago at the National Zoo in DC after jumping a wall and crossing a trench.

There has not been a steady stream of children being hurt at this zoo. This was an exception. This child and those supervising him were reckless enough to allow him to go over the fence. Even given that, he is alive and will recover. I think that in itself says something about the measures in place, even once he got past the fence.

You choose to put blame on the zoo. I don't consider it realistic or reasonable to demand that the zoo be designed on the assumption that its visitors will be reckless and that children will be unsupervised.

The question is where you draw the line in terms of responsibility. I consider this a freak accident, and I would not demand anything additional of this zoo. I herewith agree to disagree.

[pnwmom]

85. Even an additional chicken wire fence between the cage and

the child would have added a significant amount of protection.

But they chose not to spend the money to have a safer structure. Now they'll be spending a lot more money, probably, settling a lawsuit. What a waste.

[woo me with science]

86. Meh.

There was a wall, and then there was a dividing space, and then there was a fence. Now the fence isn't good enough, and we will demand chicken wire. Ten years from now, some determined kid will put his fingers and his thumbs through the chicken wire and lose use of his opposable thumbs. Maybe even his nose. Then people will cry bloody murder and demand plexiglass.

Again, it depends on where you want to draw the line of responsibility. I prefer to assume that visitors will show some common sense and responsibility.

[pnwmom]

87. Not if the chicken wire was set back enough from the cage. All the fingers and noses

would have been safe. And there would have been more time -- time which could have allowed an adult to spot the child and get him back.

[woo me with science]

88. Yeah, I heard you the first time.

There will ALWAYS be one more thing we can do.

Happy bubbleproofing. :hi:

[pnwmom]

89. Better some bubbleproofing than losing lives

and negligence lawsuits.

As that zoo in California did.

[woo me with science]

94. Yeah, the TSA works kinda along those lines, too...

They started aggressively defending our underwear after one underwear bomber got through.

People should know not to cross the first fence. The second fence IS the safety measure. Now you want a third one.



And at some point, maybe 10 years from now, some determined soul will get through the chickenwire, too, and then we will need a fourth fence. They might even do it out of frustration at all the fences obscuring their view of the leopards.

You never addressed my comment about the National Zoo in Washington DC. The big cat exhibits there are beautiful and natural-looking, with big moats separating the animals from visitors. Yet someone still crossed over and got mauled.

My nephew could make it over there if he really wanted to. Do you think we should insist on a renovation of the National Zoo, installing chickenwire and fences in the beautiful exhibits, because someone managed to get in there years ago?

[boppers]

62. Darwin at work.

All these people blaming the zoo, the parents, the chaperons, the design of the enclosure.....

How about the rocket scientist who thought getting within reaching distance of a predator was a bright idea?

[proud2BlibKansan]

63. The rocket scientist is a 7 year old

[boppers]

65. I was running in the desert with snakes, coyotes, mountain lions, and javelinas (etc.) when I was 5

If the child was born without a set of natural instincts to stay away from dangerous animals, he may not be long for this world.

[pnwmom]

77. Which is why the ADULTS designing zoos need to take into consideration

the natural behaviors of both predatory animals and young zoo visitors.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

66. I blame a lack of Marlin Perkins' Wild Kingdom.

Kids these days only see predators as cute and cuddly.

A few episodes of Jim getting his ass chased up a tree let kids know what was what back in my day. Damn whipper-snappers.

[Codeine]

76. The Disneyfication of nature.

There's probably a good case to be made there. A bit more "nature red in tooth and claw" might prevent this sort of thing in the future.

[boppers]

81. Well, it's been going on for a long time....

[Codeine]

74. At seven I knew not to fuck with wild animals. nt

[pnwmom]

83. And you never ever made any other dumb mistakes, right?

:shrug:

Are you sure you were ever 7 years old?

[applegrove]

70. When I was 7 years old I was climbing everything. Remember you don't weigh so much

so you can stick your hands and feet into a wire mesh fence and get over it.

[pnwmom]

78. There was just a railing and 8 feet of grass between the little boy

and the leopard's mesh cage -- which had openings of 8 x 4 inches. According to the reports, when the boy approached, the animal grabbed the boy's head between his front paws and tried to pull him inside.

[LisaL]

91. The boy shouldn't have been approaching any cages.

It's like saying that if he jumped in front of the car it was the car's fault he got hit. There are many dangerous things one can do without having to go to the zoo to do them.

[athenasatanjesus]

95. When I was 7 I could climb almost any roof or tree in the neighborhood.

Combined with my small size I could sneak into lots of places.
Not to excuse the zoo completely,just I can see why this might happen.

[taterguy]

97. A 7 year old kid could easily get over the fence on the Golden Gate Bridge

Should that be redesigned too?

Please don't answer.

[orpupilofnature57]

98. The same way Hijackers set off alarms 1000 times, after learning

to takeoff but not land.We're consumed by Narcissistic Fibrosis.

[mainer]

99. 7 isn't a toddler. Is this boy of normal intelligence?

Just wondering.