HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Child mauled to death by ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:22 PM

 

Child mauled to death by African painted dogs at Pittsburgh Zoo Read more: http://www.post-gazette.

Source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Officials of the Pittsburgh Zoo & Aquarium confirmed this afternoon that a little boy was mauled to death today after falling into the African painted dog exhibit.
The incident occurred at 11:48 a.m. at the Highland Park complex, according to emergency dispatch supervisor. The zoo was shut down within a half-hour of the incident and will remain closed indefinitely.

...
Pittsburgh police officers and keepers attempted to lure the dogs away but one "aggressive" dog was shot and killed by an officer. Ms. Baker commended the officer, noting the dog would not move away from the child.
She said the zoo initially declared a "code blue," meaning an accident involving a human had occurred. That was followed with a "code red," meaning that there was a serious human emergency in play.




Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/neighborhoods-city/child-killed-in-pittsburgh-zoo-exhibit-660606/



Very sad and disturbing. There need to be more security measures in place when such dangerous animals are involved.

177 replies, 21265 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 177 replies Author Time Post
Reply Child mauled to death by African painted dogs at Pittsburgh Zoo Read more: http://www.post-gazette. (Original post)
rDigital Nov 2012 OP
slackmaster Nov 2012 #1
Daemonaquila Nov 2012 #11
wtmusic Nov 2012 #40
Chemisse Nov 2012 #63
LanternWaste Nov 2012 #127
slackmaster Nov 2012 #140
tammywammy Nov 2012 #38
magical thyme Nov 2012 #49
Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #50
Chemisse Nov 2012 #67
RebelOne Nov 2012 #136
slackmaster Nov 2012 #139
TorchTheWitch Nov 2012 #103
d_r Nov 2012 #123
TrogL Nov 2012 #152
progressivebydesign Nov 2012 #2
rDigital Nov 2012 #3
yardwork Nov 2012 #26
wordpix Nov 2012 #27
magical thyme Nov 2012 #56
tammywammy Nov 2012 #39
jenw2 Nov 2012 #4
RebelOne Nov 2012 #7
Rosa Luxemburg Nov 2012 #46
ronnie624 Nov 2012 #104
RebelOne Nov 2012 #135
magical thyme Nov 2012 #8
Daemonaquila Nov 2012 #10
Divine Discontent Nov 2012 #30
Daemonaquila Nov 2012 #86
roguevalley Nov 2012 #12
KoKo Nov 2012 #51
kurtzapril4 Nov 2012 #57
KoKo Nov 2012 #60
kurtzapril4 Nov 2012 #64
Katashi_itto Nov 2012 #99
naaman fletcher Nov 2012 #128
obamanut2012 Nov 2012 #142
lunasun Nov 2012 #79
roguevalley Nov 2012 #82
kestrel91316 Nov 2012 #14
RebelOne Nov 2012 #41
KoKo Nov 2012 #62
Daemonaquila Nov 2012 #87
james0tucson Nov 2012 #102
Paladin Nov 2012 #114
IDoMath Nov 2012 #134
XemaSab Nov 2012 #15
harmonicon Nov 2012 #17
AlecBGreen Nov 2012 #24
harmonicon Nov 2012 #25
kurtzapril4 Nov 2012 #36
LeftyMom Nov 2012 #33
harmonicon Nov 2012 #35
kurtzapril4 Nov 2012 #68
Posteritatis Nov 2012 #16
Lightbulb_on Nov 2012 #44
MuhkRahker Nov 2012 #95
a la izquierda Nov 2012 #126
ileus Nov 2012 #167
a la izquierda Nov 2012 #125
Nika Nov 2012 #5
magical thyme Nov 2012 #6
KoKo Nov 2012 #70
magical thyme Nov 2012 #74
Daemonaquila Nov 2012 #9
roguevalley Nov 2012 #13
Divine Discontent Nov 2012 #29
harmonicon Nov 2012 #18
magical thyme Nov 2012 #48
DollarBillHines Nov 2012 #19
Chemisse Nov 2012 #69
DollarBillHines Nov 2012 #80
Daemonaquila Nov 2012 #88
Chemisse Nov 2012 #160
Maine-ah Nov 2012 #115
Iggo Nov 2012 #21
rDigital Nov 2012 #37
Divine Discontent Nov 2012 #28
renate Nov 2012 #31
Divine Discontent Nov 2012 #32
magical thyme Nov 2012 #55
renate Nov 2012 #105
WilliamPitt Nov 2012 #111
Divine Discontent Nov 2012 #141
ronnie624 Nov 2012 #124
Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #52
WilliamPitt Nov 2012 #112
AngryAmish Nov 2012 #119
Quantess Nov 2012 #20
littlemissmartypants Nov 2012 #22
KoKo Nov 2012 #66
LineLineLineReply .
littlemissmartypants Nov 2012 #96
littlemissmartypants Nov 2012 #94
alphafemale Nov 2012 #23
JustABozoOnThisBus Nov 2012 #108
kurtzapril4 Nov 2012 #34
KoKo Nov 2012 #43
wtmusic Nov 2012 #47
kurtzapril4 Nov 2012 #61
Daemonaquila Nov 2012 #90
wtmusic Nov 2012 #100
Divine Discontent Nov 2012 #98
AtomicKitten Nov 2012 #42
KoKo Nov 2012 #45
Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #54
KoKo Nov 2012 #58
kurtzapril4 Nov 2012 #71
magical thyme Nov 2012 #72
AtomicKitten Nov 2012 #59
Helen Reddy Nov 2012 #53
KoKo Nov 2012 #65
magical thyme Nov 2012 #73
Helen Reddy Nov 2012 #78
junior college Nov 2012 #75
magical thyme Nov 2012 #76
junior college Nov 2012 #77
magical thyme Nov 2012 #81
junior college Nov 2012 #85
Daemonaquila Nov 2012 #91
junior college Nov 2012 #101
obamanut2012 Nov 2012 #147
hedgehog Nov 2012 #148
magical thyme Nov 2012 #156
obamanut2012 Nov 2012 #146
magical thyme Nov 2012 #155
happyslug Nov 2012 #84
Xithras Nov 2012 #131
obamanut2012 Nov 2012 #144
happyslug Nov 2012 #83
AngryOldDem Nov 2012 #107
Quantess Nov 2012 #109
IDoMath Nov 2012 #132
happyslug Nov 2012 #137
IDoMath Nov 2012 #138
-..__... Nov 2012 #89
rDigital Nov 2012 #92
babydollhead Nov 2012 #117
rDigital Nov 2012 #129
Blue_Tires Nov 2012 #157
TwilightGardener Nov 2012 #93
IDoMath Nov 2012 #97
queenjane Nov 2012 #120
AngryOldDem Nov 2012 #106
Blandocyte Nov 2012 #110
scheming daemons Nov 2012 #113
Nihil Nov 2012 #118
obamanut2012 Nov 2012 #145
OBAMAWILLWIN Nov 2012 #116
junior college Nov 2012 #121
IDoMath Nov 2012 #122
obamanut2012 Nov 2012 #149
marshall Nov 2012 #130
Carolina Nov 2012 #133
obamanut2012 Nov 2012 #143
Liberal_in_LA Nov 2012 #150
Liberal_in_LA Nov 2012 #153
tammywammy Nov 2012 #158
TrogL Nov 2012 #151
demhottie Nov 2012 #165
obamanut2012 Nov 2012 #154
CraftyGal Nov 2012 #159
magical thyme Nov 2012 #161
TwilightGardener Nov 2012 #162
shrike Nov 2012 #163
magical thyme Nov 2012 #164
yardwork Nov 2012 #169
TwilightGardener Nov 2012 #171
yardwork Nov 2012 #172
yardwork Nov 2012 #168
magical thyme Nov 2012 #170
yardwork Nov 2012 #173
bitchkitty Nov 2012 #166
Enrique Nov 2012 #174
magical thyme Nov 2012 #175
ebbie15644 Nov 2012 #176
Democratopia Nov 2012 #177

Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:26 PM

1. How horrible. I know from personal experience how hard it is to keep small kids from climbing...

 

...things that they should not climb. They want to get up to the big peoples' level so they can see what's going on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:58 PM

11. It's called parenting.

Even if you kid is a demon, strollers, kid leashes, etc. will fix that. If it's hard, the child has been terribly spoiled and not taught to respect basic boundaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:22 PM

40. You're funny

You respected "basic boundaries" at age 3, did you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:59 PM

63. Somehow I don't think you know much about parenting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #11)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 11:47 AM

127. I suppose pointing our fingers and blaming someone

I suppose pointing our fingers and blaming someone... anyone, is much more viscerally satisfying than looking for any possible solutions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #11)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:02 PM

140. People who verb nouns deserve to be violenced

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:14 PM

38. According to the article, the mother placed the child on the railing, he didn't climb up there

Pittsburgh police Major Crimes Lt. Kevin Kraus said the boy's 34-year-old mother placed the child in a standing position on a wooden railing overlooking the enclosure.

"Almost immediately after that he lost his balance, fell down off the railing into the actual pit and he was immediately attacked by 11 dogs," Lt. Kraus said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #38)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:06 PM

49. wow. that must be an update to the article because it wasn't there earlier

That's far worse than I imagined. I figured she was distracted on her cell or something. But she actually put her baby up there?!?!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #38)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:08 PM

50. If that's true, how stupid that was. Who would do such a thing? Geez. How sad. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #38)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:02 PM

67. That was amazingly careless of her.

I can't imagine letting my toddler stand on a railing in that way unless I was clutching him like his life depended on it. And even holding him in a vice grip would not have felt safe to me - I just wouldn't have done it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #38)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 01:35 PM

136. This reminds me of a 1977 tragedy in Miami where a father

put his child on a wall just above a 12-foot crocodile's pit. It is not mentioned in this article, but later articles told the full story. For some reason I cannot locate the info, but I remember it well because I lived in Miami at the time and the story was in all the newspapers. I had visited Miami Serpentarium many times and had seen the crocodile.

http://www.venomousreptiles.org/forums/experts/39421?page=2

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #38)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:01 PM

139. Wow, that was not in the article when it was first published

 

Thanks for the update.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:36 AM

103. the parent PUT the child on top of the railing where he/she then fell in

Read the article. Yes, this is absolutely horrible negligent parenting. The railing is there for a REASON. Only an absolute moron would purposely PUT a two year old kid on top of the railing where they can lose their balance and fall into a pit of wild animals. The purpose of the railing is so that people don't fall into the enclosure. But that is exactly what this parent did - they purposely PUT their two year old child on the top of the railing where the inevitable happened. I'm so sorry that this child was killed by an utterly stupid parent with absolutely no concern for their own child's safety.

As far as I'm concerned this is criminal negligence, and this parent needs to do some time for it. It's one thing to be forgetful or get busy and take your eye off what your kid is up to, but this goes far beyond that since it was the parent who purposely PUT the child into such danger. It's no different than if a parent plopped their kid down the the middle of traffic and told them to play.

That said, zoos need to build exhibits that are not only comfortable for the animals but immune from the colossal stupidity of zoo patrons. The fact that some extraordinary idiot was even able to place their child on the top of the railing where he/she could easily fall into the exhibit where the animals in it could harm them is a problem.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TorchTheWitch (Reply #103)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 10:54 AM

123. I can't imagine how she must feel

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 03:08 PM

152. I worked at Niagara Falls

Right at the brink of the falls, there was a small railing to keep reasonable people from going over. Every day I'd see people on top of the rail, behind the rail, holding kids over the rail, every possible bit of stupidity you could imagine.

They posted a full-time police officer there to try and get at the worst of it, but people still fell over.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:28 PM

2. Yes. Horrific. The added security is called "parenting"

Why the hell was a 3 year old up on the railing and able to fall into the exhibit???? Think about it. a 3 year old. a fence, railing, and mesh barrier. Sadly, this is on the parent, not the zoo (unless the 3 year old was 6 feet tall.)

I say this because I watched something yesterday that reminded me of how clueless some parents are. There were two dogs tied up outside a restaurant. One large dog, and one little dog. The people obviously left them while they went to eat (they were there an hour, which is a whole nother subject.) And while the dogs were tied up. I saw toddler after toddler run up to the strange dogs, and hug them, climb on them, chase them, while the parents stood there. The parent would pick up the kid and walk away, then suddenly the kids would appear again on top of the dogs. (and this was on a busy sidewalk, with a railing that dropped down 20 feet below.) It was a miracle that the children weren't bit by the dogs... even the most patient dogs can bite when chased and harassed.

I can't fathom why any parent would allow a toddler to stand or climb onto a fence at a zoo enclosure. Period. But every time I'm at the zoo, I see that same thing. Horribly tragic lesson to learn, but it's not on the zoo to fix that. If you can't seem to figure out that your child needs to stay on the ground behind the fence, or in a stroller, then the onus is on you. Just a heartbreaking way to learn that lesson.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressivebydesign (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:32 PM

3. I agree with you 100%.

 

Also, the painted dogs have gotten out of their cages more than once in the past.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressivebydesign (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 05:34 PM

26. I think that you must be right. An adult had to have lifted that child on top of the barrier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressivebydesign (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 05:35 PM

27. 2x I've seen 3 yr. olds running around alone near a busy DC street, looking for mommy

In both cases, I took the kid by the hand and said I would help find mommy. In each case, mommy was in the library bathroom nearby, leaving child 1) alone to "stay" and 2) with a sibling.

In case #2 (sibling was supposed to watch boy), the little boy was running up a busy driveway and parking lot just up from the sidewalk, where the driveway has a blind spot coming out to traffic -- very difficult place to see pedestrians coming. Child was totally oblivious to cars/danger, running, running to find mom.

I'm sure the parents will sue the zoo in this case but this one is on the parent who obviously wasn't watching child.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #27)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:22 PM

56. The parents will have a hard time with any lawsuit. The mother stood her 2 year old on the railing.

The article has been updated. Apparently the mother actually placed her 2 year old on the railing in a standing position. He almost immediately lost his balance and fell in. Unbelievable!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressivebydesign (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:15 PM

39. It's 100% on the mother, she placed him on the railing.

Pittsburgh police Major Crimes Lt. Kevin Kraus said the boy's 34-year-old mother placed the child in a standing position on a wooden railing overlooking the enclosure.
"Almost immediately after that he lost his balance, fell down off the railing into the actual pit and he was immediately attacked by 11 dogs," Lt. Kraus said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:38 PM

4. You should never have children around dogs

 

This happens way too often.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jenw2 (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:46 PM

7. But the child was never really around the dogs.

He just fell into their territory. The parents should be at fault for not keeping a closer eye on the child.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RebelOne (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:58 PM

46. Zoos should enclose their exhibits so that children cannot fall into them

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rosa Luxemburg (Reply #46)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:47 AM

104. It's so obvious.

There should be no possibility of visitors to a zoo, coming in contact with dangerous animals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rosa Luxemburg (Reply #46)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 01:32 PM

135. The child fell because the mother put it on the railing. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jenw2 (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:47 PM

8. these were wild dogs in a pack in a zoo exhibit

not domesticated family pets. But nice try

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jenw2 (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:54 PM

10. That attitude is what creates stupid, wimpy kids.

Dogs and kids go together beautifully. Scared city attitudes and excessive protectiveness damages kids. Teach kids to handle themselves responsibly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #10)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 05:52 PM

30. "Teach kids to handle themselves responsibly."

ugh... the kid was 2. the ridiculous, it burns!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divine Discontent (Reply #30)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:06 PM

86. The monomania burns.

Wow, lack of context central. Feeding your kids to wild animals = bad. Teaching your kid of ANY age to be responsible around domestic animals = good. Simple enough?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jenw2 (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 03:10 PM

12. these were wild dogs. the poor infant wasn't watched and he got inside.

dogs are good for kids. They even die to protect them. my nieces and nephews napped on our dogs and the dobermans. the dogs wouldn't move until they awakened. this is a failure of parental control. babies are fast and my heart goes out to them but any wild animal will hurt you if you trespass against them. People up here go up to wild animals all the time and are surprised they get hurt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roguevalley (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:09 PM

51. It's possible the exhibit didn't have high enough perimiters of glass walls to protect the viewers

due to the huge budge cutbacks on our public facilities and that the money to be made from the exhibit was to offset was to budget cut proper glass walls that would have prevented our curious, squirmy and spirit of our littlest kids who are "masters of investigation" who can get away from even the most careful, watchful parent in a blink of an eye.

The Zoo was at fault...but, with cutbacks and a huge exhibit that would bring in needed funds they cut corners and didn't properly have supervision at the site or proper barrade for curious toddlers who just "want to get in there" and don't know. Busy parents with other kids, crowds and a little kid can easily "escape."

The whole incident needs deeper scrutiny before we cast judgement on parents, child or the animals who are wild and now subject to stress in an environment that is not in sync with where they are supposed to be.

It's just tragic...but, the fault is everywhere in this, imho.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #51)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:41 PM

57. I'm sorry, but the zoo wasn't at fault.

It was the kid's parents fault. Period. They did not watch their child. How fucking high should the glass be? 18 feet? 30 feet? At some point it becomes impossible to protect people from their own stupidity.

If the "masters of investigation" can outsmart one...perhaps that person shouldn't be a parent. The parents are supposed to supervise at the site.

I'm pretty sure the fault lies with the parents of the toddler....the animals didn't break out of their enclosure and attack the kid, after all.

The animals were not at fault at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kurtzapril4 (Reply #57)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:46 PM

60. It's neither the animals or the parents fault...it's the Fault of a PUBLIC ZOO..(Taxpayer Dollars)

who cut costs on having watchful guards and adequate Glass Enclosure.

I've been going to Zoo's for decades. It's only recently we've had these deaths of little kids that are making the news.

It's cut backs in funding to the Public Facilities. You prefer to blame parents when you aren't looking at the whole picture.

PUBLIC FUNDING/PUBLIC EXPECTATIONS for SAFETY. It worked before...and it's not working now because of funding cuts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #60)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:59 PM

64. What planet are you from, seriously?

It was the parent's fault. Period. The parent/s put the kid up on the railing. If the kid hadn't been put up on the railing, the incident wouldn't have happened. But, I'm sure they'll sue the zoo anyway. I hope the zoo fights it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kurtzapril4 (Reply #64)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 12:22 AM

99. +1000 The parents served that kid up like an d'œuvre

Lets park junior on the rail above the pack of ferocious wild dogs. Cause their so cute!!!
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1196519.1352063202!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/article-zoo-1104.jpg

Yep it's brilliant!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #60)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 11:53 AM

128. Can you in any possible way back up your statements?

 

Are there more injuries in zoo's now then before?

Is cutbacks in funding at fault?

What makes you think that the plan was to have watchful guards and glass enclosures? You think there should be a guard at every exhibit? you think every exhbit should have a glass enclosure?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #60)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:23 PM

142. It is 100% the mother's fault

She placed her small toddler on the railing above a pit enclosing a pack of wild dogs. It is not the Zoo's fault, nor the dogs, nor the Zoo employees. Keepers and other employees did what they could, but it was too late.

I feel a lot of pity for the mother, and hope she can learn to live with her guilt.

FYI: the Painted Dogs are an endangered species.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kurtzapril4 (Reply #57)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 10:21 PM

79. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #51)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 10:37 PM

82. its tremendously sad isn't it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jenw2 (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 03:20 PM

14. What utter nonsense. Domestic dogs make wonderful family pets, and have for thousands of years.

These were a type of WILD DOG in a ZOO and the child entered their enclosure because the parents failed to exercise their parental responsibilities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #14)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:24 PM

41. That is why I put the blame on the parents. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RebelOne (Reply #41)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:53 PM

62. Are you a parent? Would you expect a little kid to be able to get into a Zoo Exhibit?

Would you be thinking that the Zoo's job is to protect the innocent animals from the innocent little kids who are fascinated with the animals ...as most little kids are...into everything that's new and exciting?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #62)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:11 PM

87. Bad parenting doesn't need an apologist.

The mom PUT THE KID ON THE RAILING. Irresponsible. Moron. Period. Zoo is 100% not at fault when a dumbass feeds her kid to the wild animals then goes wailing off to sue the zoo. I hope she's charged with murder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #87)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:24 AM

102. Put the kid on the railing and...

Put the kid on the railing and let go leaving the child in a situation where he could fall, be knocked off, or jump.
I hope she is charged with some form of negligent homicide, just so that she can go through the motions of having to plead guilty and maybe serve a few years in some kind of supervised environment for this. Some are willing to believe that losing the child is punishment enough. I'm not quite there, because it's not just about punishment, but also education and certainty that she actually understands what she did wrong, and how wrong it was.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #87)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 07:54 AM

114. And Personal Tragedy Doesn't Need Gloating. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #62)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 01:22 PM

134. Absolutely, yes, I would expect that.

 

Since I WAS that little kid once. My mother probably saved my life that day.

Since then Zoos are much more conscious of such safety issues but they can't eliminate them all nor should we expect them to.

Parents should not presume nor be allowed to presume that Zoos and other facilities are child-proof.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jenw2 (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 03:39 PM

15. They're not even in the genus "Canis," which includes pet dogs, wolves, dingoes, and coyotes

Comparing these animals with pet dogs is an invalid comparison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to XemaSab (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 04:39 PM

17. What gave you that idea?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycaon_pictus

They're definitely canids.

Of course they're not like domestic animals though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to harmonicon (Reply #17)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 05:28 PM

24. XemaSab is right

"They're not even in the genus "Canis," which includes pet dogs, wolves, dingoes, and coyotes"

He/she is correct. They are Lycaon (genus) pictus (species). They are not members of the same genus that includes dogs & wolves.

Canids includes true dogs, wolves, foxes, jackals and coyotes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlecBGreen (Reply #24)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 05:32 PM

25. I guess they're in a different genus, but they're still canids - in family canidae. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlecBGreen (Reply #24)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:10 PM

36. They ARE Canids.

but that doesn't mean shit. People think that wolves are house pets, too. They aren't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to harmonicon (Reply #17)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 06:26 PM

33. Where'd you get your degree in Biology? Xema's is from CSU Humboldt.

Just sayin'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #33)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:03 PM

35. Nowhere. I thought I was right, but I was wrong. I've admitted it.

I confused being a canid with being in the genus canis. That's all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to harmonicon (Reply #35)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:03 PM

68. They're in the family Canidae.

their genus and species are different. But they're definitely canids.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jenw2 (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 03:58 PM

16. Except for the fact that, it, you know, doesn't. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jenw2 (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:53 PM

44. Any dogs?

 

That's just crazy...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jenw2 (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:47 PM

95. Agreed, dogs are very dangerous and dirty. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MuhkRahker (Reply #95)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 11:33 AM

126. Yep, I'll be sure to inform my dogs that they're dangerous and dirty.

Oy vey.
And this is why animal lovers swear they love their dogs/cats more than people. My dogs sure as hell are smarter...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MuhkRahker (Reply #95)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 11:14 AM

167. Like most dogs mine smell bad, but they're not dangerous or dirty.

And I hate dogs....barking, smelly, pooping critters.


Some are dangerous, we did have to send one to "doggie jail" about 7 years ago. But hey....he was clean.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jenw2 (Reply #4)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 11:32 AM

125. Are you freakin' kidding me?

This is by far the stupidest thing I've read on DU in awhile.
Kids drown in pools quite a bit. I guess you'd ban pools in households with kids.
Kids eat medicine like candy (I know this because I once at an entire bottle of iron tablets). No meds in households with kids.

I have a Chihuahua and a Chihuahua mix. I guess I should revoke my right to ever have children.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:43 PM

5. This is heart breaking to hear

my deepest condolences to the family on their tragic loss.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:45 PM

6. I can't help but wonder....

"he fell over a railing and off of a mesh barrier"

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/neighborhoods-city/child-killed-in-pittsburgh-zoo-exhibit-660606/#ixzz2BHhMSOBt

I may well be wrong, but find it hard to believe that the railing was shorter than a 3 year old. I get the feeling he was someplace he didn't belong when he fell. That always seems to be the case in these situations...somebody ignoring rules and doing something phenomenally irresponsible and foolish.

And then the wild animal, who didn't ask to be there to begin with, does what its instinct calls for and tragedy follows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #6)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:05 PM

70. But, where could he have been to get into an exhibit like that? Why wasn't it fully contained?

"fell into a mesh barrier".....A 3 year old manages to skirt a public exhibit and why wasn't there glass instead of an open rail? Who didn't think that there would be kids there?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #70)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:37 PM

74. He was 2 years old and his own mother foolishly placed him in a standing position on the rail

The deck was enclosed in glass on 2 sides. The front instead had a wall or fence with a wooden rail at 4+ feet high. I'll bet dollars to donuts the zoo had signs saying not to climb on, sit on or stand on the railing...

According to recent news updates, the toddler's mother placed her son standing on the rail. He almost immediately lost balance and fell off, which implies that after she stood him there, she didn't even bother to hold onto him!

That is stupid beyond belief. Wtf kind of parent stands a 2 year old (or any age child, but a 2 year old?!?) on a rail that is 14' over a pit of wild animals?!?!

Sorry, but that is just plain stupid. I feel sorry for the toddler and the painted wolf/dog they had to shoot. I feel sorry for the poor witnesses to the horror. I feel sorry for the zoo staff who tried so hard to save the toddler.

I feel sorry for the mother, but the fact is she did something phenomenally stupid. Just unthinkably stupid. She will have to live with what she did, which has got to be horrible. Because it was absolutely, unbelievably poor, poor, piss poor judgement on her part.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:50 PM

9. BS. Security is FINE. Parents are at fault.

Nobody "falls" into a zoo exhibit. Little sh**s intentionally climb into them. I'm sorry an animal had to die because parents were not watching their kid. The dog's death is a tragedy, the kid's is evolution in action.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 03:12 PM

13. both are terrible because both were innocent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roguevalley (Reply #13)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 05:50 PM

29. I hope that poster doesn't truly think that little of human life, especially a 3 yr old n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 04:41 PM

18. I don't think you can blame a 3 year old for their own accidental death.

They're 3. Do you remember being 3? I do. I wasn't so clever. That's why I still had to live with my parents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to harmonicon (Reply #18)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:04 PM

48. I think that poster is blaming the mother, not the 3 year old

She is the one who failed to raise her child to carry on her genes...

Survival of the fittest can also apply to failure to successfully produce your next generation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 04:43 PM

19. Yep. Just because people have children...

does not qualify them as parents - merely keepers.

I am constantly amazed at how much the little shits get away with.

As an owner of some fine old cars and trucks, I have stopped parking in public lots - one too many times of walking to one of my vehicles to find one of the little fuckers having its picture taken while sitting on my hood or standing on a running board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DollarBillHines (Reply #19)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:05 PM

69. I sure hope you don't have any of your own.

You seem to really hate children.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #69)


Response to Chemisse (Reply #69)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:17 PM

88. Not THAT favorite complaint...

Expecting parents to teach kids manners and expecting kids to learn the rules = hating kids? Yeah, that's exactly why a lot of us want nothing to do with kids or their parents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #88)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 08:29 PM

160. There's a big difference between wanting kids to behave,

And calling them 'little shits' and 'little fuckers'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DollarBillHines (Reply #19)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 08:22 AM

115. I'd rather hang out with one of those "little fuckers"

than an "adult" like yourself.

I feel pretty bad for your kids if you ever had any. I wonder how many times they heard that phrase while growing up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 04:58 PM

21. Little shits?

Three.Years.Old.

Wow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggo (Reply #21)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:11 PM

37. For serious. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 05:50 PM

28. "The dog's death is a tragedy, the kid's is evolution in action."

shameful....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divine Discontent (Reply #28)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 06:03 PM

31. chilling

I'm embarrassed to read something like that here.

Poor little kid, poor mother. My kids were always complaining that I watched them too closely--it's a hard line to walk--but one little moment of distraction can sometimes have consequences like this. Kids move fast and if the zoo was crowded she might have lost track of him in just an instant. I can't imagine how horrifying this was.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renate (Reply #31)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 06:07 PM

32. agreed...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renate (Reply #31)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:17 PM

55. Article update: The mother actually placed her toddler on the railing!!!!!!

This wasn't a moment of distraction. This was a moment of enormous stupidity.

"Pittsburgh police Major Crimes Lt. Kevin Kraus said the boy's 34-year-old mother placed the child in a standing position on a wooden railing overlooking the enclosure.
"Almost immediately after that he lost his balance,
fell down off the railing into the actual pit and he was immediately attacked by 11 dogs," Lt. Kraus said.


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/neighborhoods-city/child-killed-in-pittsburgh-zoo-exhibit-660606/#ixzz2BJ3ZzwZr

At this point, I sadly have to agree with the poster about evolution. This mother stood her 2 year old on a railing overlooking a pen of wild dogs (that are no more dogs than hyenas are dogs). Her stupidity was going to kill her baby sooner or later.

Very, very sad for the child. Hopefully the fall knocked him unconscious for what followed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #55)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 03:07 AM

105. I wrote my response before I knew that--it's the mother's fault, 100%

I still feel tremendous compassion for her (not that you don't--but some people here don't, for sure). Half of the population are of below-average intelligence. She seems to be one of these people, by quite a bit, and she had to watch her child be killed by wild dogs. Most people don't have to pay a price like that for their mistakes. She didn't do this thinking that her child would die. She took her kid to the zoo, for Pete's sake. She wanted him to have fun. She never meant for this to happen.

And I'm still really upset by the people who are referring to children this age as little jerks and worse. Yes, some kids are ill-behaved and unpleasant to be around--boy oh boy, do I not deny that fact at all, I've known lots of kids I didn't want to be around--but when they're very young this is due to either developmental disabilities or uninformed or lazy parenting. The kids aren't to blame until they're old or developmentally capable enough to look around and see that not everybody is rude and selfish and to make deliberate decisions to keep misbehaving anyway. The poster who is complaining about little shits standing on his nice truck should totally blame the boorish parents who don't say No (and I HATE it when parents let their kids get away with that kind of crap, it's inexcusably rude and a terrible handicap to the kids as they grow up), not the kids who are interested in the beautiful truck. And I can't even stand to think of the "too bad so sad" attitude of people talking about evolution in action back before we knew that he was stood up on the barrier by his mother. It's horrifying and cruel.

I hope you're right about the fall knocking him unconscious. Poor little thing....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divine Discontent (Reply #28)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 07:36 AM

111. Might be the worst thing I've ever read on this board

11 years and counting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Reply #111)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:12 PM

141. yes, and we've seen plenty of nasty posts, you a few more than I even, and his post is something

we'd expect a cold-hearted right-winger to say to about a child being mauled by 11 animals.



Get it here -> http://www.zazzle.com/youre_not_in_the_1_why_vote_like_you_are_bumpe_bumper_sticker-128479630785214922?rf=238107662556833486

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divine Discontent (Reply #28)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 10:59 AM

124. Almost like a slap in the face.

Astonishing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:10 PM

52. Poster above posted article saying the mother PUT her child standing on top of the railing.

If true, what a stupid thing to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #9)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 07:37 AM

112. "The dog's death is a tragedy, the kid's is evolution in action."

You might just be the sickest piece of shit this forum has ever endured, and that is saying something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Reply #112)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 09:21 AM

119. Unfortunately, things like this are said around here constantly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 04:45 PM

20. Parents didn't watch their kid well enough.

Sad, but maybe other parents will try to be more careful next time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to littlemissmartypants (Reply #22)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:01 PM

66. So...It's Parent's Fault, then it's Animal's Fault...is anything else complicit that you can

see in this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to littlemissmartypants (Reply #22)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:46 PM

94. Lycaon pictus

http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/12436/0
http://www.awdconservancy.org/




Red List Category & Criteria: Endangered C2a(i) ver 3.1
Year Published: 2012
Assessor/s: Woodroffe, R. & Sillero-Zubiri, C.
Reviewer/s: Hoffmann, M. & Hilton-Taylor, C.
Contributor/s: Rasmussen, G.
Justification:
African Wild Dogs have disappeared from much of their former range. Their population is currently estimated at approximately 6,600 adults in 39 subpopulations, of which only 1,400 are mature individuals. Population size is continuing to decline as a result of ongoing habitat fragmentation, conflict with human activities, and infectious disease. Given uncertainty surrounding population estimates, and the species’ tendency to population fluctuations, the largest subpopulations might well number <250 mature individuals, thereby warranting listing as Endangered under criterion C2a(i).
History:
2004 – Endangered
1996 – Endangered
1994 – Endangered (Groombridge 1994)
1990 – Endangered (IUCN 1990)
1988 – Vulnerable (IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre 1988)
1986 – Vulnerable (IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre 1986)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 05:21 PM

23. Maybe someday they'll design an idiot proof zoo.

OK, I'm a dreamer. Seems like there's always a couple of these stories a year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alphafemale (Reply #23)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 05:53 AM

108. Then we'll evolve a higher order of idiot.

I'm not sure we can build a 100% safe zoo that's still enjoyable.

Sometimes parents do not-so-bright things.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 06:59 PM

34. There was an incident at Brookfield Zoo

wherein a little jerk was allowed to climb a barrier, and fell into the exhibit. It was a gorilla exhibit...and one of the gorillas, Binti Jua, came and took care of the kid, and delivered him to the zoo-keepers. The gorilla was a better parent than that kid's parents.

It's a shame the child was killed. It's a shame that the dog was killed. They were both doing what comes naturally. This whole thing is totally on the parents of that child. It's their fault, period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kurtzapril4 (Reply #34)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:46 PM

43. I don't think calling a little kid "little jerk" is helpful to your post....

It's possible you are very young and don't have children so that this "little jerk" could have fallen in puts it on the responsibility of the parent or you really think that an innocent young child should be called "little jerk."

Whatever...I assume you are as upset about this as the rest of us but, don't have the "life experience" to understand what this could have been about and how hard it is to control "little jerks" who are squirmy and excited and what it means to be a new or young parent dealing with a place you thought SAFE.

But...please rethink your post. If "little jerk" was your kid....how would you be feeling?

I put the fault on the ZOO for not having high enough glass walls or enclosing the structure to protect little kids who really have affinity with animals and might want to be in there with them.

I can think of how many reasons this whole thing is a tragedy on all sides with blame everywhere until it's sorted out...but calling the killed child "little jerk" seems OTT to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #43)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:59 PM

47. Exactly. There is no such thing as a 3-year-old "jerk". nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #43)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:51 PM

61. Umm....the mother of the child

put the kid up on the railing, all by herself.

If a person can't control their kids, and watch them every second, then they shouldn't have them. I don't care if they're squirmy and excited....it's YOUR JOB to control them. Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #43)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:31 PM

90. No, not feeling the political correctness...

3 year olds absolutely, positively can be little jerks, and worse. The parent helped mold the kid into a jerk, but that doesn't change the ultimate conclusion. Life experience shows that kids are quite capable of meanness, trickery, lying, selfishness, opportunism, greed, and calculation, among other un-charming traits.

Nothing can be completely safe, nor should it be. Zoos are generally paranoically secure. But nothing is idiot proof, and that's especially so when a moron parent feeds her offspring to the dogs by breaking the rules and standing him on a railing. The clueless idiot - oh, sorry, "grieving mother," since we're trying for political correctness - should be charged with murder. A pity no equivalent charge can be leveled against her for the dog's death.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #90)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 12:22 AM

100. On the subject of child development, you really have no idea what you're talking about.

The kid could have very likely been curious and completely unaware of the danger. He could have had familiarity with other dogs and wanted to pet them.

As far as "selfishness, opportunism, and greed' well yes - we're all born that way, aren't we? No child of three can be expected to be a model for public standards of behavior and is going through a huge learning curve at that age. That doesn't make them jerks, that makes them normal - and likely just like you were.

Kids are just starting to learn what deceit is at age three, and don't even fully understand the concept until around age 8. Some child psychologists believe that meanness, or deriving pleasure from the pain of others, is a completely learned emotion, although some kids pick it up faster than others. In any case meanness had nothing to do with what was going on here.

If you don't think every parent has situations where sheer luck avoided a potential tragedy, you're not a parent. This parent was negligent and unlucky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kurtzapril4 (Reply #34)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 12:09 AM

98. "little jerk" - that's shameful on your part... says a lot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:42 PM

42. In the SF zoo, a tigress killed 1 of 3 jackasses that were taunting her. It cost her her life.

Sometimes security isn't the issue or not the way you mean it.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/S-F-Zoo-visitor-saw-2-victims-of-tiger-attack-3233323.php

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #42)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 07:54 PM

45. Zoo's are hard places for wild creatures to adapt to. The best of the Zoos give some free reign,

habitat enhancement for exercise and high enough Glass Walls that keep the animals separate from the voyeurs of the rest of us who want to engage with them that often involves taunting, tapping on glass and leering and excitement.

Neither those of us who try to engage with the Zoo Animals are at fault nor the animals who feel anger in their Imprisonment.....but the fault of our ZOO policies who need to make sure that the "people viewing" are not "antagonizing the prisoners" and that adequate policies are in place that instruct "The Public" as to the proper way to engage with the whole situation.

It probably involves more "helpful paid personnel" at our Public Zoo's...and other Wildlife viewing sites to pay people who can educate and be mediators between Public and Animals who are caged.

With the huge budget cutbacks to our Public Places (Zoos/Nature Parks, etc.) it would seem that more of these horrific things will happen and more animals and children will die without more STAFF who can head off these incidents to intervene.

Just saying. Whole thing is so sad all around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #45)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:15 PM

54. We can't protect from stupid.

Everything in the country can't be battened down, meshed, covered, nailed down, encapsulated, cushioned, etc., to protect against people who do stupid things. Just like we can't protect against snipers who want to kill innocent people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #54)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:42 PM

58. This was a toddler with his parents going to a "safe" Public Zoo Exhibit. You have children?

Can you give any evidence as to why a Public Exhibit should not be safe?

I'm way older than you and we didn't lose little kids and people to exhibits we went to in the past. This is something new. And, I attribute it to cut back in funds with less protection to cut corners to get the crowds in for the MONEY...and to allow folks like you to blame the VICTIM...and not that this is a Public Facility paid for with Tax Dollars where Parents, Grandparents and the rest of the PUBLIC to feel they are protected....just as I would want the animals on "DISPLAY" protected from the rest of us who can do them harm or cause their "natural instincts" to take over if "prey falls into their limited prison domain."

It didn't used to be this way when we had proper funding and protections in our Zoos and Exhibits.

This is something new.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #58)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:11 PM

71. It was safe until

the mother decided to put her kid on top of the railing. What part of this do you not understand? It is IMPOSSIBLE to protect people from their own stupidity. The mother of this child put her child in danger. It wasn't the zoo personnel that hoisted the kid on top of the railing...it was his own mother. Sorry...can't blame the zoo for this one. this has nothing to do with budget cuts....it has everything to do with the stupidity of some parents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #58)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:17 PM

72. The mother placed her toddler on the railing in a standing position.

Sorry, but all the funding and protections in the world won't protect from just plain stupid.

I feel sorry for the toddler, I feel sorry for the wild doglike animal that was shot, I feel terribly sorry for the normal people who were visiting the zoo and had to witness that horror, I feel sorry for the zoo staff who tried desperately to save the little guy.

I feel sorry for the mother, who will have to live with what she did... but it is a pity mingled with disgust. I cannot imagine balancing on a railing at 15 or 20 feet over a mattress, never mind standing a 2 year old on a railing over a pit of wild animals. I cannot imagine what she was thinking doing something like that.

The railing was 4+' higher than the deck, putting it at least at chest height. Even if she was holding the boy, her arms would have been high up and not in a position to hang onto him with good strength if he lost balance.

Seriously, with judgement like that, the poor boy was doomed. Sooner or later he was likely to pay for one stupid decision or other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #45)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:44 PM

59. I guess not every zoo can be the SD Wild Animal Park.

Which is a damn shame, really. I lived in SD in the 80's and had a family membership that gave us access to the SDWAP and the SD Zoo. It was a wonderful way to raise funds and gave us "locals" admission anytime we wanted to go.

These stories are sad all the way around, but my natural affinity for the animals has me coming down on their side in situations like this more often than not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 08:13 PM

53. I'm saddened for the mother's loss.

 

I'm saddened for the Painted dog's loss of life as well. Sucks we even need zoos to keep so many endangered species contained in not their native habitat.

Plenty of blame all around.

Just extremely troubling all around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Reddy (Reply #53)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:00 PM

65. True...Saddness all around...but did deeper after sensationalism...to see what can or should

be done to make it all more safe for the imprisoned animals and those of us who come to see them and try to learn. Although...not all come to learn..but to voyeur.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #65)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:26 PM

73. There is nothing to indicate the zoo did not make it a very safe environment

It takes a "special" parent to stand a 2 year old toddler on a railing, 4 feet up from the deck they are standing on, so toddler's feet are at parent's chest height or higher, and 14+ feet higher than a pit of wild animals.

Even if this parent was still holding onto the 2 year old, she was doing so with her arms held high up, where she didn't have close to full strength.

This was worse than when Michael Jackson held his baby out over a deck railing. At least he had the baby fully in his hands at the time.

Instead, this was a 2 year old, with a 2 year old's balance, placed standing on a wooden railing by a very, very foolish parent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #65)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 10:15 PM

78. True this.

 

...In MY perfect world.. bla bla bla

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:46 PM

75. Perhaps the zoo will build the barrier higher

A safer barrier would be helpful whenever you put vicious dogs on display at a place where thousands of children come to play and crawl around

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #75)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 09:58 PM

76. The barrier is 4' high. If they make it higher, nobody will be able to see over it.

The toddler wasn't crawling around or playing, and didn't climb up the railing.

His stupid mother stupidly stood him on the railing and apparently wasn't even holding him, because he almost immediately lost balance and fell off.

It's sad all around, but really it is pretty clearly the mother's piss-poor judgement that killed this toddler.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #76)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 10:10 PM

77. We have Plexiglas and other materials

The barrier should have been higher. These dogs escaped a few months ago and were found roaming around the zoo. They throw them back in their cage and then a kid falls in and gets mauled to death. Please stop blaming the victims.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #77)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 10:28 PM

81. The toddler is the victim and I didn't blame the toddler.

The mother is at fault here. I don't often hold mothers at fault, but standing on a railing over a pit of wild animals is stupid. Standing a toddler on a railing set more than a few inches off the ground is really stupid, and standing them on a railing over a pit of wild animals is practically negligent homicide. Common sense tells you toddlers don't have great balance. That's why they're called toddlers.

The dogs weren't roaming around the zoo. They have a smaller enclosure within a larger enclosure. They dug under the fence of their smaller enclosure and were found within their larger enclosure in an area not accessible by the general public. They closed down the zoo for the day until they determined what had happened and rectified the situation.

The zoo had just been checked out and found to meet or exceed all requirements. It has never had a death in its many decades of operation.

2 sides of the viewing deck are already enclosed in glass. It seems likely that thanks to this woman's idiocy, the front will also be enclosed and everybody's view and ability to photograph will be permanently impaired. For the protection of the remaining African wild dogs from stupid people, that's probably a good thing.

In the meantime, some equally stupid parent will find some other way to cause their toddler's death because no matter how many protections and laws are put in place, you can't eradicate stupid or the consequences of stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #81)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:05 PM

85. You need to take stupid people into account

when you put vicious dogs (72 or 74 chromosomes) on display at a place where thousands of children go. The barrier needs to be higher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #85)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:39 PM

91. "Vicious." Dear gods.

Stop making excuses for morons. At a certain point, people have to take responsibility for basic common sense. Trying to protect idiots from their idiocy is tampering with evolution, which leads to teabaggers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #91)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 12:25 AM

101. If a child is able to fall in the enclosure

the exhibit is faulty, inadequate. The place is loaded with kids and public safety should be the biggest concern. You can go on about stupid parents but this is a zoo where children should be safe. The mom was not holding her child over the balcony of a high rise building to show her adoring fans. She was at the zoo trying to give her child a closer look at the exhibit, something that stupid parents do at zoos do all the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #101)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:59 PM

147. The child didn't fall into the exhibit

The mother basically tossed the child into the exhibit, although she did not think that would happen. For some reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #101)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 03:04 PM

148. Agreed - it sounds like the railing was poorly designed -

a better railing would have had a barrier that allowed small children to see the animals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #101)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 05:43 PM

156. It's now obvious that you haven't bothered to read the articles involved

Therefore this is the last I'll be writing to you.

1. You're right. "The mom was not holding her child over the balcony of a high rise building to show her adoring fans."

You have mom confused with Michael Jackson. The mom was not holding her child at all. She stood a toddler -- an age *known* to topple over frequently and easily due to still learning balance and walking -- on a railing. And expected that toddler to be able to balance on a railing on his own.

Had she been holding her child, when he lost balance she could have pulled him in toward her and averted this tragedy.

2. Laws and rules are designed for reasonable people. A reasonable person would not have done what that mother did. She very likely broke zoo rules by standing her toddler on the railing. Certainly she broke every rule of common sense. I can't think of a person I know, including developmentally disabled or brain damaged, who wouldn't have seen the inherent danger in her actions.

3. She had other options than standing her child on the railing. She could have taken him to another exhibit where he could see more easily. She could have held him with his back against her and both arms securely wrapped around him and let him look over the railing.

She chose instead to do something incredibly foolish. My neighbor had a wrap around deck overlooking the ravine that their house is built out of. If a visitor to their house stood their toddler on the 4' railing around that deck and the child fell off the railing, down the ravine and broke his neck, the neighbor would not be found at fault. This is no different. The zoo followed the rules. The mother did not follow rules or common sense. Sadly, with such incredibly poor judgement, that toddler was likely doomed even if he never was taken to a zoo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #85)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:57 PM

146. They aren't "vicious dogs," they are wild dogs

The barrier doesn't need to be any higher, it's high enough.

People need to quit endangering their children's lives.

Remember the three young adults who went over one of Yosemite's falls Summer 2011? One of the adults in the same group held his young child OVER THE BARRIER ABOVE THE DROP to take a photo. The child was screaming in terror, and hikers from other groups yelled at him. Minutes later, the three adults went over the falls. The barrier there is also sufficient. People are idiots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #85)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 05:30 PM

155. every day, thousands of children go out onto decks with 4' railings.

By your thinking, every time a parent stands a toddler on a railing and expect the toddler to balance, only to have them fall off, the parent is not at fault and the homeowner is at fault.

At least in every state that I've lived in, a 4' railing with some kind of fencing or wall that kids can't squeeze through underneath is the legal requirement. It is what barrier society has decided is reasonable.

Note the word reasonable. There is no such thing as perfect safety. When you get out of bed in the morning and head into life, there are risks involved. There is no perfect safety.

The zoo involved met and exceeded *every* rule that had been put in place for protection of children. Those rules are designed for reasonable safety.

A reasonable person does not expect a toddler to be able to balance on a railing. They are called toddlers for a reason...they toddle. They fall down...a lot. That is how they learn to walk and stand.

The mother could have held the toddler in her arms to allow him to look over the railing.

Had the mother been holding her child when she stupidly stood him on the railing, then when he lost his balance she could have pulled him in to safety.

She was not holding him. She deliberately chose to put her child at enormous risk. In my universe, she'd be looking at potential negligent manslaughter charges and losing custody of any other children she had for their own safety.

You can believe what you want. But society as a whole made the rules, and the rules agreed on are that a 4' railing with fence/wall underneath that children can't squeeze through is a safe barrier to contain children.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #77)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 10:55 PM

84. A few decades ago, a Leopard escaped, no body cared for months....

When it came to meal time, the Leopard was ALWAYS in his cage, so his escapes were dismissed for months. I beleive it was in the 1990s, but I can be wrong as to the date. After several months a high level zoo official saw it on the lose and ordered that the the cage be checked out. The leopard was NOT dumb, he ALWAYS returned to his cage for meal time and new NOT to go out when people were present. At night he did a patrol. It is beleived he did it for months. When the Cage was examined it was determined that the Leopard COULD jump over a net that the Zoo previously thought the Leopard could not.

The Pittsburgh Zoo has tried to make its "Cages" not only more animal friendly but still viewable by people. Thus the old fashion cages were junked and a natural environment but in a controlled limited area (where they are feed, so they stay viable). These are NOT as secure as the old Zoo boxes but as a whole better for the animals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #77)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 12:53 PM

131. Plexiglas often isn't an option.

The problem with glass exhibits is that the glass has to be cleaned or it will become difficult to see through. This usually isn't a problem for exhibits that are viewed from ground level, but some animals react VERY poorly to the sight of humans at their level. That's why many exhibits elevate their viewing areas above the animals living area...it's healthier and less stressful for the animals.

An 8 foot tall sheet of Plexiglass with a top nearly 25 feet off the floor of the enclosure would be very difficult to maintain. Doing so would also require that humans enter the enclosures far more often, which is more disruptive to the animals.

Just keep the kids off the rails. Parents just need to remember that these are wild animals that won't hesitate to kill you if given the chance. A zoo is not Disneyland, and the attractions aren't all friendly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #77)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:36 PM

144. They did not roam around the zoo

They were in their "backup yard." They were not out of the fenced in area. I literally just finished reading a big article about the dogs and their exhibit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 10:45 PM

83. I have questions on this, was the child killed by the Dogs or the Fall????

Wild Dogs are of the Canine family, they are NOT the same Species as Dogs and Wolves, but it is unclear as to how separate are Wolves (and Domestic Dogs) are from African Wild Dogs.

Now Wikipedia says Domestic Dogs and African Wild Dogs are NOT interbreed-able, but both have 74 chromosomes just like Golden Jackals, Wolfs and Coyotes (all of which can and do breed with Domestic Dogs).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canid_hybrid

The Pittsburgh Zoo in 2009 had a Domestic Dog nurse African Wild Dogs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycaon_pictus

I have read stories elsewhere that Domestic Dogs and African Wild Dogs have interbreed and produced fertile offspring, this would make them closer to each other then Horse and Donkeys (who can interbreed, but the offspring is NOT fertile for Donkeys and Horses have a different number of chromosomes).

The Wikipedia Article of Mules (A Cross between a male Donkey, and a female Horse) did NOT have any comments on the difference in chromosomes between Horses and Donkeys, but the Articles of Hinnys (A cross between a Male Horse and a female Donkey) did in the following sentence:

"A donkey has 62 chromosomes, whereas a horse has 64, being hybrids of those two species, have 63 chromosomes and are sterile."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mule
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinny

Side note: There have been cases of Female Hinnys and Mules giving birth, either to another Hinny or mule (None of which themselves were fertile) OR a Horse or Donkey with no Characteristics of the other (i.e breed out the non-confirming chromosomes). Offspring have been limited to Female Mules or Hinnys for the simple reason it is a simple operation to remove a male mule's testicles AND that was done even to male horses for thousands of years, for it tended to make them more docile. Thus we do NOT know how often a male Mule may have been fertile, but we do know some female donkeys have been fertile even when they are presumed to be not fertile.

I bring this up for Domestic Dogs and Wolves have 74 chromosomes, the same number as the African Wild Dogs (and Dingos and Golden Jackals). The Other Canine tended to have different numbers (For example all the Jackals EXCEPT the Golden Jackals have only 72 chromosomes).

Present theory have the African Wild Dogs separating from Wolves After the Black Back and Side Strip Jackals but before the Dhole the the Ethiopian Wolf and then the Golden Jackal separated from the Wolf-Dog family.


Notice, the Black Back and Side Strip Jackals have 72 chromosomes while the African Wild Dog, Dhole. Ethiopian Wolf, and the Golden Jackals have 74 chromosomes just like Wolves, Coyotes and Dogs. The issue is how far have the African Wild Dogs generically separated from Wolves and Dogs. I have read stories, which I can NOT find at present, saying they are interbreed-able, but the SOCIAL characteristics of all these breeds are close.
http://www.awdconservancy.org/genetic%20relationship.html

Wolves, are cold weather animals, they have a hard time in hot climates thus why the African Wild Dogs and Wolves separated so long ago, one went to live in the cold snow, the other into the hot desert and the two life styles are NOT compatible. Thus the two have been separating for at least 6-7 million years. On the other hand the two breeds did overlap in North Africa, especially during the last Ice Age so exchange of genes could occur to keep them interbreed-able.

I bring this up for these African Wild Dogs are NOT living in a "Wild" environment, but a Zoo, where the meals come on a regular basis. Thus for them to attack anything can NOT be for food, it has to be defense or some other instinct kicking in.

Wild dogs, like Domestic Dogs and Wolves can be Curious animals, they will check into anything new. African Wild Dogs being Canines will use their teeth in any investigation. Thus it is possible that the Child fell into the Wild Dogs area and the Wild Dogs then tried to figure out what it was. Walked up to it and smelled it and even gave the body a nip. That may be the full extent of the "Attack". At the same time, I can see people around the area yelling at the dogs to keep them away from the Child and the Dogs seeing this as an attack on them and then defending themselves from such attacks by biting the only thing they can, the dead child's body.

By the time rescue workers arrived, the dogs were in an agitated state, looking for ways to defend themselves from whatever was occurring. Knowing the Police as I have seen them in action, rather then go into the area and just use their billy clubs for the wild dogs to bite on (and then leaving them alone) they shot the dogs unless they ran away. Thus the "Attack" of the African Wild Dogs may have been in the minds of the speculators, Police and Zoo personnel rather then in the minds of the dogs.

Thus I will have to wait for the Autopsy report to see why this child died, I suspect it was the fall not the "Attack".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to happyslug (Reply #83)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 05:52 AM

107. As of Sunday night I don't think it was clear what killed him.

That's what I read in the Post-Gazette, anyway. Given the height of the fall and the age of the child, the fall could very well have killed him.

However the boy died, you can't blame the animals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to happyslug (Reply #83)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 05:55 AM

109. "Bush dog"? Poor things.

What an unfortunate name. I wonder if they claim to not be related to "Darwin's fox"?


Thanks for the interesting chart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to happyslug (Reply #83)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 01:13 PM

132. You are wrong about this part...

 

I bring this up for these African Wild Dogs are NOT living in a "Wild" environment, but a Zoo, where the meals come on a regular basis. Thus for them to attack anything can NOT be for food, it has to be defense or some other instinct kicking in.


Wild animals are still wild animals and some will 'attack' their food. This is especially true if the zookeepers throw the food in the pen. Predators react to movement. They either saw a big clump of meat sent their way or a wounded animal that was a prime target for food.

These animals are well cared for but that doesn't mean they weren't hungry just then and for them it may have been no more than a special meal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDoMath (Reply #132)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 01:44 PM

137. That is why I put the word "wild" in quotes

Yes African Wild Dogs are "Wild" in the sense there are NOT domesticated like dogs, but they are NOT "Wild" in the sense they do NOT have to hunt. The word "wild" has many meanings, but I was trying to reduce my use of it to show these African Wild Dogs were NOT in a hunting mold when this child died. They do NOT have to go into a hunting mold, for in that sense of the word "Wild" these are NOT "Wild" these African Wild Dogs do NOT have to go out and find their own food (which makes then "Domestic" in the sense people are feeding them).

I tried my best to make my use of the world "Wild" clear, these African Wild Dogs were NOT in a hunting mode, they do NOT need to hunt, thus they are NOT "wild" in the sense there are "Kept" animals.

At the same time I was making clear these ARE not DOMESTIC Animals, but they are also not "Wild" animals in the sense they have to hunt for their own food. Thus food seems NOT to have been a factor in the interaction between the African Wild Dogs and the Child. It was NOT feeding time, nor does it appear that the child fell into an area where food is normally thrown. Animals tend to be "Conservative" when it comes to food, they do NOT like change. Any change in food is best done over a long time period, not just overnight (I.e. in domestic dogs, it is better to mix old food with new food over a period of weeks to make a change between the two types of food, then just to put the new food for the domestic dog).

Sorry, something more then food aggression in hear, I suspect protection mode do to the yelling of the people after the child ended up in the "cage".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to happyslug (Reply #137)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 01:59 PM

138. quotes don't change nature and neither do walls

 

Wild animals remain wild animals. Do you work with wild animals? I do. While I will grant that there is a huge difference between working with birds of prey vs mammals, wild instincts do not go away. They have to be bred out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:26 PM

89. Lawsuit to follow...

 

because it's guaranteed, that some opportunistic, contingency, parasite is going to jump in on this,
and the parents involved will claim that they aren't "interested in the money... we just want to be certain that this never happens to someone else's child".

The maggot filing the claim will receive 75% of out of court settlement, and the parents will walk free
from child endangerment/negligent manslaughter charges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to -..__... (Reply #89)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:42 PM

92. Sadly so, but I can't get the visual out of my head of a 3 year old kid being eaten

 

alive by wild animals. It's been bothering me all night since I read this story. It's just totally and completely horrifying. I'm going to have my first child born here in the next week or two and this story just makes me sick/mad/terribly sad all at the same time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Reply #92)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 08:58 AM

117. I know its a big unknown bringing a baby in to this world

You will be a good parent. You already love your baby! Enjoy your time of waiting. If it is you with the baby growing inside of you, try to find a calm in your heart and have a little talk with your baby, you will do your best to keep them safe, and love them and nourish their bodies and their minds. You will keep them warm and healthy. Everything will still happen as their story goes from yours to their own. put your feet up. sing to your baby. don't read the bad news. we had a sign on our door(seen on the Simpson's Old Age Home) "Thank you for not discussing the outside world" Your job, have a lovely time until your baby comes out here. Then let the world fall away while you get to be in love with this new person. you are the mountain. be a loving calm and happy one. peace. and enjoy .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babydollhead (Reply #117)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 12:24 PM

129. : ). nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to -..__... (Reply #89)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 06:45 PM

157. Doubt she'll see the first nickel

and the Zoo's attorneys will tell her to piss off...

Very similar to that woman who let her toddler fall from the SkyBox of the Staples Center to the lower level...Tried to sue the Lakers (iirc), the arena ownership group and the architect who originally designed it and went 0-for-3

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:44 PM

93. Jesus, what a dimwit she was. Sorry the poor baby and the wild dog

had to pay the price for her stupidity. It sounds, though, like no one wanted to get in there with the dogs to rescue him. If that were my kid being eaten, I imagine adrenaline would send me over the railing to try to save him. Not out of bravery, but out of sheer maternal instinct. I'm surprised it took 5 minutes to get the last dog off of him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sun Nov 4, 2012, 11:57 PM

97. Once again an innocent animals dies for human stupidity

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDoMath (Reply #97)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 09:24 AM

120. My thought exactly! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 05:47 AM

106. Whenever I go to the zoo I always see at least one kid climbing on top of a barrier.

Parents should know better. Either you wait until you can get up to the fence/wall/whatever to see the animal, or you pass the exhibit and come back later, or explain to the kid that the animal just can't be seen right now.

Kids on zoo barriers just make my skin crawl.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 07:28 AM

110. And the mother's nightmares must be horrific

And her life from here on out will probably be a nightmare, too.

For a few moments of criminally bad judgment and carelessness. Tragic for everyone involved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 07:53 AM

113. let's be clear.. this kid is dead because his mother is a f***ing idiot

It isnt the zoo's fault.. or the dogs'.


This death is ALL on the idiot mother.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Reply #113)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 09:17 AM

118. 100% true.

I deliberately didn't respond to some of the idiots upthread that kept wanting to blame
anyone rather than the mother for this tragedy. The only conclusion I could come to
was that they (or someone close to them) were ambulance-chasers and I have no
interest "debating" anything with that sort of person.

My only hope is that the child died from the fall rather than from the inevitable follow-up
of putting a couple of kg of bloodied meat in front of a pack of carnivores.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Reply #113)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:53 PM

145. I agree

Very sad. I hope the child died from the fall, and if not, then was immediately killed by one of the dogs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 08:50 AM

116. What a horrible story

I feel so sick as this was definitely avoidable

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 10:09 AM

121. It's clear that the barrier was not high enough

The question is, should the dogs be put down?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #121)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 10:48 AM

122. Of course the dogs should not be put down.

 

The dogs were just following their nature. You can never make a barrier high enough to stop stupidity.

The mother was stupid for putting her kid up there. The kid was a victim. The dogs are victims.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to junior college (Reply #121)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 03:04 PM

149. The barrier was high enough, and why should the African Painted Dogs

Be killed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 12:29 PM

130. My supposition is the woman was taking a photo of her child

Why else would she place the child in a standing position on top of a fence/barrier and then let him go. She likely stepped away from him to get her Facebook pic, and the poor child tumbled into the pit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marshall (Reply #130)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 01:21 PM

133. Then that's even more incredibly stupid

So many other, safer places to snap a photo.

Sad all around, but the mother is clearly at fault here and admit it or not, she will face that blame and grief every time she looks in the mirror. All the more so because she did nothing afterwards to stop it. As a mother, I cannot imagine standing there watching without trying to intervene myself, even if it meant my life

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 02:26 PM

143. I hope the mother can learn to live with her guilt

With causing the death of her child. What a tragedy.

Props to the Zoo employees, who quickly responded, and tried their best, but the child was already dead.

African Painted Dogs are an endangered species by the way. Their markings are quite beautiful.

Peace to the family.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 03:04 PM

150. picture of an African painted dog

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_in_LA (Reply #150)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 03:10 PM

153. more info. Safety net existed, boy "bounced" into pit.

The boy's mother had picked him up and put him on top of a railing at the edge of a viewing deck late Sunday morning when he lost his balance and fell, said Barbara Baker, CEO and president of the Pittsburgh Zoo and PPG Aquarium. There was a safety net below the railing, but it failed to catch him and the boy dropped more than 10 feet into the enclosure, she said.

"The child was so small that he bounced. He bounced twice and then he bounced into the exhibit," said Baker, tearing up at a news conference Monday afternoon.

The animals attacked the child so violently and quickly that by the time a veterinarian and other zoo staffers arrived seconds later, they determined it would have been futile to try rescuing the boy, she said.

Baker said she had been informed by the Allegheny County medical examiner that an autopsy determined the boy survived the plunge. The medical examiner's office has not yet publicly confirmed its findings or released the boy's name.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-african-painted-dogs-at-pittsburgh-zoo-maul-toddler-20121105,0,2086553.story

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_in_LA (Reply #153)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 07:18 PM

158. I hope that while he survived the fall he was unconscious when they attacked.

That poor boy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 03:06 PM

151. I would have jumped in after him.

I'd take on a pack of wild dogs any day to protect my kid. At worst, I'd curl into fetal position around the kid to protect him and take the bites myself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Reply #151)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 11:55 PM

165. I have to agree with you

I would have jumped in- even if I died too, my baby would NOT have been alone.

The zoo was unsafe, but dangling the kid over the rail and NOT jumping in seem consistent with being a shitty mother.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 03:11 PM

154. Painted Dogs will NOT be killed -- good call

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 07:30 PM

159. Another update on the story

Fate of African Painted dogs who mauled child has been decided

The child's name is mention in the article.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 10:03 PM

161. Article with photos of the observation platform.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2227757/Pittsburgh-zoo-death-Maddox-Derkosh-mauled-death-African-wild-dogs-mother-dangles-railings.html

Things to note:

1. The platform is enclosed on all sides with what appears to be a 4' plexiglass wall topped by the rail. Therefore, there was no need hold the boy up, let alone set him on the railing, in order to see. He could have safely watched out all sides from the floor.

2. Above the 4' wall, the entire structure except the one front window, is enclosed in interwoven 2x4 non-climb wire fencing material (looks like the same grade I use for my horses, to keep them in *and* to keep people out of my pastures. Horses can run into it and will bounce off. People can't climb it or squeeze through it. In other words, it is very safe and strong).

3. According to this article, both parents were present, not just the mother.

3. The netting below the open window was designed to catch dropped cameras. It did catch the boy, but he bounced twice before bouncing out of the net and falling into the pit.

Really, short of completely enclosing everybody so that nobody could take photos, there is nothing more the Zoo could do.

The world is not perfectly safe and people must exercise good judgement, common sense and parents must do their jobs. Nobody is so special that their toddlers are immune from toppling over, no mother so special that she can't lose her grip.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #161)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 10:06 PM

162. I find it hard to believe a father and mother both stood and watched

while their kid got eaten.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #162)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 10:16 PM

163. I agree

How very very odd that neither of them tried to physically help the boy. No one knows what they will do in a given situation, but I like to think I would put myself in harm's way were it my child.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #162)

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 10:22 PM

164. It happened very, very quickly

There was staff just 12 feet away and they tried immediately to rescue him but the dogs were closer, so arrived ahead of the staff. They were able to call 7 dogs off immediately. Seconds later, 3 more responded to the tranquilizer darts. The last one was shot by police within a couple minutes.

But it is shocking that neither parent went after him, but then it's also shocking that the mother stood him on the railing and the father didn't stop it. The deck was 11 feet up, so a 15 foot drop from the windowed wall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #162)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 11:46 AM

169. Looking at the photos, it's not clear how they could have followed the child easily.

The only way into the enclosure is the way that the little boy fell. This would have required the parents somehow lifting themselves up onto a railing that looks like it was chest high, then launching themselves not only 15 feet down but at least 15 feet out to clear the safety net. There's no other way into the enclosure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #169)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 11:59 AM

171. It might have been a struggle, but as a parent, there is

no way I wouldn't have made the attempt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #171)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 12:09 PM

172. We don't know what happened. We weren't there.

There have been a lot of people jumping to conclusions in this thread before facts were known. Many responders to this thread immediately assumed that the child had wandered into the exhibit due to inattentive parents. Then we learned that the mother deliberately placed the child on top of a railing. Now we see photos. We still haven't heard a first-person account from anybody who was there at the time. We don't know what the parents may have tried to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #161)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 11:44 AM

168. The toddler is wearing glasses in the photo. He seems to have vision problems.

Maybe his mother lifted him on top of the railing so that he could see better. It was still a very foolish thing to do, but it helps me understand how this could have happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #168)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 11:57 AM

170. Yet also all the more reason not to stand him on the railing

which is what one of the officials said she did. Vision problems suggests more issues with balance.

If the father was there (and this is the only article I saw that said he was) then he should have held him head above, but body behind the railing.

Doubtless they will live with this for the rest of their lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #170)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 12:11 PM

173. Oh, no question that this was very poor judgment on the part of the parents.

I'm just thinking that we might have a clue as to why the mother would do such a seemingly reckless thing. I had been wondering if the parents deliberately tried to kill the child. Now that I see the photos I see a possible other explanation. It doesn't excuse their actions, just makes the situation a little more understandable.

The child paid for his parents' mistake with his life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 06:04 AM

166. Haven't been able to stop thinking about this.

My only consolation is that I read that these dogs are very, very fast predators, and that the boy's life was over in milliseconds once he hit the floor of the enclosure. He didn't suffer.

The suffering, unfortunately, is on his mother. I don't think I could live with the guilt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bitchkitty (Reply #166)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 12:19 PM

174. he might have died from the fall

it was a 14 foot fall, and authorities are saying it might have killed him. I'm going to assume that it did.

The only thing I feel for the mother is sympathy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #174)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 12:45 PM

175. the autopsy report showed that he did not die from the fall.

However, that does not mean he wasn't knocked unconscious from it. And bkitty is right; predators are very, very fast. The staff trying to rescue him knew within seconds there was no chance to save his life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 01:10 PM

176. This is extremely sad

the mother is at fault for placing the child on top of the fence and she will probably have nightmares for this the rest of her life. I know the zoo is heartbroken too. They will look at their security and see if it can be improved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Tue Nov 6, 2012, 01:28 PM

177. Very sad story, but we all should share responsibility if we see a child in danger.

 

The mother did a stupid thing, but others were there and said nothing. How often does this sort of thing happen where we see irresponsible parenting? But the onlookers say nothing for fear of offending the parent who is endangering a child.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread