In ambulance, survivors of S.F. tiger attack made pact of silence

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | January 5, 2008 | Jaxon Van Derbeken

[repinwi]

Soon after their 17-year-old friend was mauled to death by a tiger at the San Francisco Zoo, the two brothers who survived the attack made a quick pact not to cooperate with the police as they rode in an ambulance to the hospital, sources told The Chronicle.

"Don't tell them what we did," paramedics heard 23-year-old Kulbir Dhaliwal tell his brother, Paul, 19.

Sources also say that the younger brother was intoxicated at the time of the incident, having used marijuana and consumed enough liquor to have a blood-alcohol level above the .08 limit for adult drivers. The older brother also had been drinking and using marijuana around the time a 350-pound Siberian tiger escaped and killed Carlos Sousa Jr., the sources said.

[FredHead47]

The headline in the Asahi newspaper said “Tiger Teaches Sailor Reason for Fences”.

BRAVOOOOO!!!

[FredHead47]

There aren’t “standards” ...

There are “recommendations”.

[nicmarlo]

Erecting a fence/bar system that is safe to keep the animal enclosed is costly and that is more likely the driving reason why fences/bars are not higher and meshes between the bars are not in place at all places which cage dangerously wild animals.

The cheaper way, of course, is placing shackles around animals’ legs, but that is far from a humane way to treat a wild animal, either.

Absent the desire, means, and/or way of ensuring that humans, of all kinds, are protected from dangerous animals, of all kinds, it would be better to have less rather than more of them in captivity.

The risks should not be with the patron to protect themselves from a wild animal. The burden for adequately protecting patrons should be upon the holders of the animal. The don’t like for money, as the lavish salary afforded to the administrative higher up showed (~$500,000 between salary and benefits/bonuses what have you).

[Mr. Brightside]

Think how much money we could save if we waterboarded the brothers and the zoo officials. This investigation would be over in 24 hours.

Then we could do Geragos just for the fun of it.

[Balding_Eagle]

I’m OK with that, but after reading D&P I don’t think that is up to his standards. He’s calling for absolutes. We live in a world that has very few absolutes, other than death.

[repinwi]

There is a difference.

[nicmarlo]

Tell that to the director, then.

SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) — A wall that separated the public from the San Francisco Zoo’s tigers is nearly 6 feet lower than initially reported — and nearly 4 feet lower than industry standards — the zoo’s director said Thursday.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/27/tiger.attack/

[Mr. Brightside]

There aren’t “standards” ... There are “recommendations”.

"The Code is more what you'd call guidelines than actual rules."

[nicmarlo]

Yep, there’s such a difference that the director himself is reportedly using the word “standard.”

[nicmarlo]

foflol!!!

[Mr. Brightside]

The head of the “large animal division” for the AZA claimed that they have no enforcement mechanism to make the zoos comply.

(He also said he had no idea how they could have missed such an obvious hazzard.)

[repinwi]

”The director of the San Francisco Zoo is admitting the wall that surrounds the tiger enclosure is just 12 and a half feet tall. That's nearly four feet below the recommendation from a zoo accrediting agency.”

Zoo wall around tiger enclosure shorter than recommended

It’s just a matter of what the reporter feels like writing.

[nicmarlo]

And it’s just a matter that the fence was 4 FEET too short or 6 FEET too short, depending on what concerns you...or, as is the case here, doesn’t concern you.

[repinwi]

An AZA spokesman said a wall height of five metres was a recommendation, but a zoo could still be deemed safe if walls were lower.

They also said the zoo could still be safe if the walls were lower.

[Mr. Brightside]

a zoo could still be deemed safe if walls were lower.

The investigation will determine exactly who did the "deeming" and to what degree they "deemed."

But no doubt, the deemers will pay big.

[repinwi]

LOL That's good. (thanks for the laugh!) Another interesting thing I found was this:

"AZA spokesman Steven Feldman said yesterday that the agency does not set specific requirements for the size of tiger enclosure walls as part of its accrediting process."

[srmorton]

There you would be wrong. My husband is one who would gladly take every one of my cats (except maybe one) to the pound even though I am responsible for their care. He is not allergic or anything. He just grew up in the country where you always had a few stray cats and a dog or two hanging around that you fed, but did not allow to come in the house. You never took them to the vet or formed any kind of relationship with them. They would end up getting run over and others would come and talk their place. IMO, he is the almost the opposite extreme of an animal rights activist. I think I am the one that has the more typical view of animals that are also cherished pets.

Pray tell me what other logical explanation is there for the fact that the tiger, who had been there for years, had never tried to jump the wall before. Suddenly, it decides to do so when three young men who, as a matter of record, had been drinking prior to their visit to the zoo.

[Mr. Brightside]

Be back later to continue.

Gotta go ride a horse now.

[Sacajaweau]

STANDARDS is a “WHAT SHOULD BE” term. It’s not a wishy washy term.

[srmorton]

You have a point there! I have a Masters in Biology and have been teaching for over 25 years. I am ashamed to admit that I did not think of the possibility of the entire episode being due to evolution in action. (lol)