PDA

View Full Version : Tiger Kills One at San Francisco Zoo


fuzzis
12-25-2007, 09:38 PM
Tiger Kills San Francisco Zoo Patron, Injures Two Others (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/25/BA0LU4M2T.DTL&tsp=1)

One San Francisco Zoo visitor was killed and two others injured early this evening after a tiger escaped from its cage.

The tiger that got loose was fatally shot while it was attacking a patron, said San Francisco Fire Department spokesman Lt. Ken Smith.

The attack happened shortly after the zoo's 5 p.m. closing time at a cafe on the east end of the zoo, officials said. The tiger cages are located near the center of the zoo....

Holy cow! Merry Christmas, huh?

cubby 1
12-25-2007, 09:40 PM
What were they doing at the zoo on Christmas?.... Why was the zoo even open on Christmas?

Dixie Tree Slayer
12-25-2007, 10:06 PM
Cubby, we must remember not all of us are blessed with family and friends to share Christmas and also there are many who do not observe Christmas. What is sad is the fact there were deaths as well as injuries. The tiger is/was not to blame. He/she was only doing what tigers were born to do. Really sad...

cubby 1
12-25-2007, 10:08 PM
Cubby, we must remember not all of us are blessed with family and friends to share Christmas and also there are many who do not observe Christmas. What is sad is the fact there were deaths as well as injuries. The tiger is/was not to blame. He/she was only doing what tigers were born to do. Really sad...

I'm just surprised the zoo was even open... I can't find what I'm gonna eat for dinner here in Hattiesburg tonight.

fuzzis
12-25-2007, 10:12 PM
I'm just surprised the zoo was even open... I can't find what I'm gonna eat for dinner here in Hattiesburg tonight.

San Francisco is a bit bigger than Hattiesburg. :smt102

cubby 1
12-25-2007, 10:14 PM
San Francisco is a bit bigger than Hattiesburg. :smt102

Point taken. Still a little surprised at it, though.

Dixie Tree Slayer
12-25-2007, 10:20 PM
Many years ago I did some business with a company that was run by Jewish people.... It was weird because I was unfamiliar with their holidays and I would show up only to ind the doors locked on a day that was not a "recognized" holiday... Blew my very young mind at the time... Now nothing really blows my mind... At least not like the blow that will getcha when you get your picture on the cover of the Rolling Stones... Ooops... Slipped into song there... Dont groan me dang it... Too much wine to relax the mind!!!

IGID
12-26-2007, 12:04 PM
Here kitty kitty. How'd I miss this. It's all over the news today. How the hell does a 300lb tiger get out? Can you imagine the pandemonium at the snack bar when this tiger snatched one of them up?

ruckus
12-26-2007, 01:21 PM
Maybe one day they'll learn to leave these animals alone. Wild animals in cages. Hmm. What could possibly go wrong?

countrygirl
12-27-2007, 06:17 AM
Some idiot probably thought the thing was cute and felt sorry for the poor caged animal and helped him escape..

wilebill
12-27-2007, 10:06 AM
Now they're speculating that the victims may have partially gotten into the cage and taunted the tiger.

pinkytuscadero
12-27-2007, 10:42 AM
Now they're speculating that the victims may have partially gotten into the cage and taunted the tiger.


This makes me so sad. On CNN, it says that a shoe and bloody footprint have been found inside the fence, before the moat. It makes sense that the tiger used the kid as a ramp of sorts, to jump out.

We've said it here before, but kids have no fear or concept of consequences sometimes. :smt009

Pinky

LipsofanAngel
12-27-2007, 11:03 AM
This makes me so sad. On CNN, it says that a shoe and bloody footprint have been found inside the fence, before the moat. It makes sense that the tiger used the kid as a ramp of sorts, to jump out.

We've said it here before, but kids have no fear or concept of consequences sometimes. :smt009

Pinky

wow, I hadn't seen that yet. Course i'm now in Purvis and disconnected from the rest of the *real* world! lol

It's very sad that this happened, but I also don't blame the tiger. Why do they not have some serious tranquilizers on hand there? I think it's so unfortunate that an innocent animal had to be put down for doing what came natural to it.

ComputerDude
12-27-2007, 11:39 AM
wow, I hadn't seen that yet. Course i'm now in Purvis and disconnected from the rest of the *real* world! lol

It's very sad that this happened, but I also don't blame the tiger. Why do they not have some serious tranquilizers on hand there? I think it's so unfortunate that an innocent animal had to be put down for doing what came natural to it.
Animals are killed in this state for the hell of it almost every day, yet you think it's a shame that this animal was killed AFTER it killed one and mauled two others?
:confused::confused:

LipsofanAngel
12-27-2007, 11:54 AM
Animals are killed in this state for the hell of it almost every day, yet you think it's a shame that this animal was killed AFTER it killed one and mauled two others?
:confused::confused:
actually, yes.

ComputerDude
12-27-2007, 11:59 AM
actually, yes.Not to be insulting but that's kind of hypocritical. If a dog mauls a child playing in his or her yard, should the dog be kept alive just because it was doing what comes natural to it? Like I said, animals are hunted all the time just to be decoration on somebodies wall. If you don't have a problem with that, why do you have a problem with killing an animal that killed a human?

Dixie Tree Slayer
12-27-2007, 12:03 PM
wow, I hadn't seen that yet. Course i'm now in Purvis and disconnected from the rest of the *real* world! lol

It's very sad that this happened, but I also don't blame the tiger. Why do they not have some serious tranquilizers on hand there? I think it's so unfortunate that an innocent animal had to be put down for doing what came natural to it.
Ok my fat finger did not let me finish before it hit enter. Health care facilities, schools all have disaster plans. I am sure at one time the zoo had a disaster plan. But with turnover and no oversight organization the disaster plan became a piece o paper in someone's file cabinet... Just as the disaster plan for hurricanes or New Orleans was only there in paper. No one knew if there was one or where to find it. The zoo should have had every employee trained in the use of a tranquilizing gun. or them to have waited until the fire Department and police department to come and save them from themselves to me is criminal. At the healthcare facility I worked at once every employee was trained in the treatment of the boys there. Even those who rarely had contact with the boys. Someone at the Zoo should be held accountable. Not for the kids getting in and taunting them but for them not being prepared for an unforeseeable event. After all, the boys at the school I worked at were all taught there are consequences for every action they take. Both good and bad. It is sad these kids lost their life. But i a parent teaches them well they will be prepared for "temptations" they eventually come across. From what I have read the cage/pit was almost escape proof.... Sadly they did not take into account the idiot proof cage was good back in the day. But now they have new and improved idiots that walk through idiot proofing of yesteryear. So yes it is sad the animal had to be put down. Sad that the zoo was not prepared or an eventual escape by one o the dangerous animals. Sad it had to take the three or four minutes for the fire and police departments to arrive and even longer for them to formulate a plan and go in where others would not. Tell me that their respective academies trained and prepared them for such an emergency? NOT!!! Sad that an act of ignorance/idiocy/stupidity/malice caused the lives of others to be terminated prematurely...

LipsofanAngel
12-27-2007, 12:05 PM
Not to be insulting but that's kind of hypocritical. If a dog mauls a child playing in his or her yard, should the dog be kept alive just because it was doing what comes natural to it? Like I said, animals are hunted all the time just to be decoration on somebodies wall. If you don't have a problem with that, why do you have a problem with killing an animal that killed a human?
First off, I don't get how you come off calling me a hypocrite. If a dog hurts a child, then get rid of the dog. I don't necessarily see killing it either. But that's just me. And second, hunting to me is something different- if you kill, you should eat it. Killing for pleasure? No, I don't really agree. My problem with the tiger is that I think the Zoo or Animal Control or whoever should have been better prepared and used a tranquilizer, not a bullet. But then, hindsight is 20/20 and I guess they didn't expect this to ever occur. If the tiger was not fit to be in the zoo, then train it to be released back in the wild (yes, they have people that do that). Also, it's a sad thing that happened... BUT, if it comes about that the boys did indeed provoke the animal? The no, the tiger should not have been shot at ALL.

Dixie Tree Slayer
12-27-2007, 12:07 PM
So what she is saying is the zoo should have had a tranq gun handy since they house such dangerous animals. If there were and they had people trained in their use perhaps only one life would have been lost or only attacked. Instead of waiting on the police and fire department to come mop up the mess they should have been able to handle...

ComputerDude
12-27-2007, 12:11 PM
So what she is saying is the zoo should have had a tranq gun handy since they house such dangerous animals. If there were and they had people trained in their use perhaps only one life would have been lost or only attacked. Instead of waiting on the police and fire department to come mop up the mess they should have been able to handle...
No doubt. But there are surely details we don't know and may never know. Maybe the zoo was understaffed because of the holiday? Maybe those who were there weren't trained on trank guns? I would have thought that for the time it took to wait for SFPD to show up, somebody at the zoo could have done something.

Luvia
12-27-2007, 12:38 PM
I'm also really sad that they shot the tiger. I can't believe they didn't just tranquilize it. The tiger was the only thing doing what it was supposed to do. Of course, the price for being stupid (if those boys taunted the animal) shouldn't be death...but ya know....sometimes it is (racing cars, unsafe sex, playing with loaded guns, talking on cell phones as you drive, etc).

The tiger was innocent, caged, and helpless (til it got out, that is). How cruel is it to taunt something behind a cage...held in captivity?? That is pretty sick in my mind. Incomprehensible really.

The difference between that and a mean dog...is that dogs are DOMESTICATED animals! They aren't supposed to maul their prey. Tigers are WILD animals, who stalk and attack their kill. Pretty big difference. A zoo/wild animal vs a house pet....and these are ENDANGERED!


The difference between that and hunting...well...hunting is heavily regulated to keep the population balance in control. People have hunted since the dawn of time. Every hunter I know eats what they kill or gives it to someone less fortunate. The majority of hunters I know respect the outdoors and love the outdoors. They are usually very conscientious conservationists and advocates for wild life and forest preservation. Sure we have money now and meat at Walmart...but I know that growing up we *lived* (literally) on deer meat because we were so poor.

Ok...my rant is over. This is just a sad situation all around.

fuzzis
12-27-2007, 12:43 PM
Ummm...how long does a tranquilizer take to work? I mean, is it one of those things like in the movies where they shoot the animal and immediately it drops to the ground, passed out? Or is like it takes a couple of minutes to work it's way through the circulatory system of a 300+ lb animal, giving it more time to do more damage?

I really don't know.

fuzzis
12-27-2007, 12:50 PM
Nevermind...in doing some preliminary research, I found it can take up to TWELVE MINUTES for a tranquilizer to take effect.

countrygirl
12-27-2007, 01:42 PM
Sounds to me like the zoo needs to plan more on ways to keep stupid people out of the cages of dangerous animals....

amanda
12-27-2007, 01:49 PM
Will the entire story of what happened ever be fully known? Probably not. The young man who died can't say. But if the story bears out that these kids taunted this animal and may have aided in its escape, then what a horrible shame. A shame for the family of the young man who died for his grievous error, the Tiger that was killed doing what it does naturally, and a shame for the two who were injured.

wilebill
12-27-2007, 01:56 PM
Nevermind...in doing some preliminary research, I found it can take up to TWELVE MINUTES for a tranquilizer to take effect.I was going to say something about this earlier. No way in hell I'd go hunting a man-eating tiger with only a tranquilizer gun.

fuzzis
12-27-2007, 02:01 PM
I was going to say something about this earlier. No way in hell I'd go hunting a man-eating tiger with only a tranquilizer gun.

I know. With one person already dead and the tiger attacking two others, I'm pretty sure it would have been irresponsible for the zoo (and the police) to have not killed the tiger. Sorry. It's awful that the tiger died, but I've never been one to put animals above people. As much as I love mine.

58ford
12-27-2007, 02:11 PM
If those guys taunted & aided in the release of the Tiger, then this is just a case of natural selection throwing some dumbass genes out of the pool. Too bad the tiger had to suffer, but is traditional to put down any animal that kills a human.

LipsofanAngel
12-27-2007, 02:23 PM
I understand that considering the circumstances the police potentially did what they "had" to do... and trust me, if it were coming after me or my family, I woulda done the same. I guess I watch too much TV and assumed the tranquilizer would have stopped it immediately. And not to sound cold hearted, but IF the boy did put himself in the situation that caused this, then I don't feel sorry for him- only for his family that have to suffer the loss.

pinkytuscadero
12-27-2007, 07:13 PM
Now Foxnews is reporting that the zoo director claims the wall is NOT as tall as orginally stated. He is now saying the wall is 12 1/2 feet tall but since they were never told to raise it, they didn't. Holy crap.:smt103

Pinky

ruckus
12-27-2007, 07:22 PM
Now they're speculating that the victims may have partially gotten into the cage and taunted the tiger.

If this is the case, my only regret is that their deaths aren't available on YouTube.

Dixie Tree Slayer
12-27-2007, 07:49 PM
Sounds to me like the zoo needs to plan more on ways to keep stupid people out of the cages of dangerous animals....
The more idiot proof you make something the bigger the idiot is produced...
What will keep the idiots of today out will not stop them tomorrow...
As one of the blue collar comedy tour said you can't fix stupid

LipsofanAngel
12-27-2007, 07:52 PM
Now Foxnews is reporting that the zoo director claims the wall is NOT as tall as orginally stated. He is now saying the wall is 12 1/2 feet tall but since they were never told to raise it, they didn't. Holy crap.:smt103

Pinky
what a shame...

wilebill
12-27-2007, 07:57 PM
Now Foxnews is reporting that the zoo director claims the wall is NOT as tall as orginally stated. He is now saying the wall is 12 1/2 feet tall but since they were never told to raise it, they didn't. Holy crap.:smt103

PinkyWell, the tiger probably thought that they were feeding him from a different part of the enclosure. He saw some food being dangled in front of him, so he went for it.

Mike'sGirl
12-30-2007, 07:36 PM
I heard an update on this story today. It turns out that the enclosure the tiger was housed in was 2 feet below the recommended minimum for a tiger enclosure (16 feet is the minimum). Of course, this got me to thinking about our own Hattiesburg Zoo. That tiger exhibit they have there; does anyone know if it's 16 feet high?
I'd be really interested to know.

I'm pretty sure that all zoos everywhere have probably done a re-assessment of their facilities since this all took place.

daisy
12-31-2007, 01:23 PM
I will call ahead and find out before I visit a zoo or take my pistol (not really)

Still sad and frightening.

ComputerDude
12-31-2007, 02:02 PM
I heard an update on this story today. It turns out that the enclosure the tiger was housed in was 2 feet below the recommended minimum for a tiger enclosure (16 feet is the minimum). Of course, this got me to thinking about our own Hattiesburg Zoo. That tiger exhibit they have there; does anyone know if it's 16 feet high?
I'd be really interested to know.

I'm pretty sure that all zoos everywhere have probably done a re-assessment of their facilities since this all took place.
Is there even a tiger at the Hattiesburg Zoo? Every time I go it's never within view. :laugh:

LipsofanAngel
01-01-2008, 06:03 PM
Jack Hannah on Prime News is talking about the new news of the boys having slingshots, and an empty vodka bottle. He says the 2 survivors should be charged with involuntary manslaughter if they indeed were taunting the tiger. Also, the brothers are refusing to speak with police. Hannah is calling them criminals. An attorney now is blaming neglegance on the zoo...

I'm not pointing fingers, just posting what's on right now.

wilebill
01-01-2008, 06:27 PM
An attorney now is blaming neglegance on the zoo...
Hopefully a judge will rule that the only recourse the attorney has is to sue the tiger for depriving his clients of their civil rights, and to take this up with the tiger.

Luvia
01-01-2008, 07:48 PM
Jack Hannah on Prime News is talking about the new news of the boys having slingshots, and an empty vodka bottle. He says the 2 survivors should be charged with involuntary manslaughter if they indeed were taunting the tiger. Also, the brothers are refusing to speak with police. Hannah is calling them criminals. An attorney now is blaming neglegance on the zoo...

I'm not pointing fingers, just posting what's on right now.

Yeah, I heard this too. I am pointing fingers...at the 3 mauled boys. This is all about cruelty, stupidity, and consequences for your actions. I really don't have any sympathy for the boys...just the families and the poor innocent tiger who just did what it was born to do.

I'm so glad Jack Hannah is voicing his opinion. Good for him. I think he's right on the money.

Dixie Tree Slayer
01-01-2008, 10:02 PM
Getting down to the most basic concept of nature... This is going to improve the human species in that the stupid genes that ran rampant through young man/boy/idiot have been eliminated. Survival of the fittest... The zebra that outruns the lion is insured to pass the fast gene on to his/her offspring. The lion that is fast enough to catch the slower zebra insures his speedier genes are passed on and also insures the slower genes are not passed on by the slow zebra...
I am sure there were no signs up that stated "Do Not use slingshots on the tigers. Do not drink with slingshots at the tigers cage." Anyone who thinks it is ok to do so needs their genetics stopped to allow the human species to promote those genetics that posses a little intellect... Truthfully these young men would probably have done themselves in with a vehicle or a hunting rifle... Rest assured this level of stupidity could not be contained!!!!

ComputerDude
01-02-2008, 08:47 AM
No surprise the two survivors are claiming the zoo is to blame. Even going as far as to say they pleaded for help but didn't get any for forty five minutes.
And they hired a lawyer.
Story (http://www.mercurynews.com/healthandscience/ci_7861477?nclick_check=1)

Dixie Tree Slayer
01-02-2008, 10:59 AM
No surprise the two survivors are claiming the zoo is to blame. Even going as far as to say they pleaded for help but didn't get any for forty five minutes.
And they hired a lawyer.
Story (http://www.mercurynews.com/healthandscience/ci_7861477?nclick_check=1)This is where the Policies and Procedures will help or hurt the zoo. If there was in the P&P a section on dealing with dangerous animals that have escaped and if the procedure had been called into play it might have reduced the wait time and/or prevented additional injuries then the zoo is indeed liable... I call it the stupid clause in this case... A clause put in the P&P manual to address the stupid things the public is bound to do.... After several years of having no incidents along with the changing of the administration let the zoo and its personnel with no clue what to do...
I know if this were a childcare facility the governing government branch oversees and will come do an audit to see that all personnel are trained according to the standards of care that have been established... While it is a tragic event odds are the zoo did have a plan in place and it addressed the stupidity of the public... Including those who think there are no consequences fith tangling with one of these large killing machines...

Many years ago I was cutting trees at 7Js bird farm... They had three or four cougars they had raised as kittens... If they do not handle them everyday they quickly revert back to the wild animals they are... There was one they called Tiara. I got accusomed to playing with her on a leash. She was a small cougar based on the others sizes... While I was there (3 or 4 weeks) he had me take her out of the inner cage and bring her to the fence of the outer cage for the kids to pet and feel her fur. While doing this I would notice as the group approached she would stare at one in the group. Everytime she did this... I finally asked him why she did this. He told me "David if you notice she is always looking at an older person that moves a lot slower than the rest or is struggling to keep up. Or she is keying on the smallest one in the group... Or one of the group that is away from the others. It is natures way of keeping the species all in check and insuring the strongest of both species survives...
So everytime you got to the zoo take a look and see if the lions or tigers are looking at someone out in the public area? Or they may be looking at you... When these guys presented themselves at the edge dangling or whatever it was they were in effect letting nature take it's natural course.

Begs the questions... How old were these kids? Were they old enough to be by themselves or should they have had parental supervision? Sad yes... But put yourself in their shoes... Would you have dangled in the cage or pit? Would you have shot rocks or pellets with a slingshot at them??? Decisions and consequences.... Make any decision today and you reap or suffer the consequences... Supposed to go to work? Don't go... What will the consequences be? Do something extra special for your spouse today... What will the consequences be? Compliment them on the way he/she looks? Consequences? Might get along better today providing you have done everything else you were supposed to. Might get that smile that makes you feel a little better about living...

Luvia
01-02-2008, 03:36 PM
No surprise the two survivors are claiming the zoo is to blame. Even going as far as to say they pleaded for help but didn't get any for forty five minutes.
And they hired a lawyer.
Story (http://www.mercurynews.com/healthandscience/ci_7861477?nclick_check=1)


That makes me gag.

ComputerDude
01-18-2008, 07:41 AM
So. No real surprises here. They were taunting the animal.
And there was pot and vodka in their car.
So much for the "we were just normal kids at the zoo" defense.
Story (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/18/MNEIUH4B9.DTL&tsp=1)

dollfus46
01-18-2008, 08:20 AM
So. No real surprises here. They were taunting the animal.
And there was pot and vodka in their car.
So much for the "we were just normal kids at the zoo" defense.
Story (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/18/MNEIUH4B9.DTL&tsp=1)

Classy. I hope they have to pay a fine that will take them the rest of their lives to pay off. I figured something was up. Takes some odd kids to go to the zoo on Christmas. That's a clue right there.

ComputerDude
01-18-2008, 08:22 AM
Classy. I hope they have to pay a fine that will take them the rest of their lives to pay off. I figured something was up. Takes some odd kids to go to the zoo on Christmas. That's a clue right there.Send them the bill for the dead Tiger and the disposal of it's corpse.
Oh and make them pay for the funeral of their dead friend.

BayFly
01-18-2008, 08:31 AM
Wow, I have done some stupid things but my gosh who stupid enough to mess with a tiger is beyond reason to me even when I drank I was never that stupid.

ComputerDude
01-18-2008, 08:32 AM
Wow, I have done some stupid things but my gosh who stupid enough to mess with a tiger is beyond reason to me even when I drank I was never that stupid.Ya know, I'm pretty sure when I was seventeen and throwing a few back, taunting a tiger was NOT at the top of my to-do list.

amanda
01-18-2008, 10:56 AM
I knew at the time something smelled with their story. Now a person is dead for their "play" as well as a beautiful animal. Such a shame.

dyates
01-18-2008, 11:12 AM
http://www.myhattiesburg.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=691&stc=1&d=1200672688

Luvia
01-18-2008, 05:41 PM
Oh wonder what that jerk lawyer (Mark Geragos) had to say about that since he insisted there was no taunting.

I can't stand that guy.

ComputerDude
03-29-2008, 08:37 AM
One of the brothers was busted for shoplifting in the city I was born and raised.
Story (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2008/03/28/MNSSVSB9R.DTL&type=printable)

Bluesman
03-29-2008, 08:45 AM
I bet the attorney that is representing them for the tiger not eating them is not happy with him right now... This definitely shows a character pattern.

ComputerDude
03-29-2008, 08:48 AM
I bet the attorney that is representing them for the tiger not eating them is not happy with him right now... This definitely shows a character pattern.I agree. Even though the SFPD did an investigation and said the boys weren't antagonizing the tiger, I still think they were. They're not the type of teens to go enjoy a sunny day at the zoo.

dollfus46
03-29-2008, 09:07 AM
I agree. Even though the SFPD did an investigation and said the boys weren't antagonizing the tiger, I still think they were. They're not the type of teens to go enjoy a sunny day at the zoo.
Yep yep yep. On Christmas Day. Sheeeeesh.:(

dollfus46
03-29-2008, 09:10 AM
A jury will give them millions of dollars. Sad.

Bluesman
03-29-2008, 10:46 AM
I agree. Even though the SFPD did an investigation and said the boys weren't antagonizing the tiger, I still think they were. They're not the type of teens to go enjoy a sunny day at the zoo.
They were probably trying to piss it off as some gang intitiation or something.... They may not be gang members but I gotta tell you from the photos I've seen of them and the trouble they still be seeming to find it at least shows they have potential to be if they are not already gangbangers.

pinkytuscadero
03-30-2008, 12:02 AM
Shady:shade: