Was shooting a rare gorilla the only option for Cincinnati Zoo?

Bazza · May 30, 2016

Shortly after zookeepers shot and killed a rare gorilla to save a boy who had entered its enclosure, many are questioning whether death was the only option.In a statement released Sunday, Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Garden expressed remorse over the shooting of Harambe, a 17-year-old western lowlands gorilla who was killed Saturday after toying with a four-year-old child.
"We are heartbroken about losing Harambe, but a child's life was in danger and a quick decision had to be made," zoo director Thane Maynard said in a statement.
Western lowland gorillas are critically endangered in the wild, numbering fewer than 175,000, according to the zoo. An additional 765 gorillas dwell in zoos worldwide.
Neither the boy nor his family have been identified. The family had been visiting the zoo on Saturday when the boy slipped away from his parents and entered the enclosure.
In the storm of criticism in the aftermath of the shooting, some blamed the boy's mother for failing to look after her son. Others said the zoo was too quick to take the decision to shoot Harambe.
Ian Redmond, Chairman of The Gorilla Organization, said keepers had other options besides a fatal shot.
"When gorilla or other apes have things they shouldn't have, keepers will negotiate with them, bring food, their favorite treats, pineapple or some kind of fruit that they don't know and negotiate with them," he told CNN.
"I don't know if that was tried or people thought there was too much danger but it does seem very unfortunate that a lethal shot was required," he said.

LINK

JBama_in_PCOLA · May 30, 2016

Hard to say. Seems the gorilla was protecting him.

Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

Displaced Bama Fan · May 30, 2016

I wonder if the zoo will sue the parents?

Relayer · May 30, 2016

I would have to defer to the experts onsite observing the gorilla's behavior at the moment for that call. If there is any doubt about the child's safety they have to take the gorilla out. But, it's always easy to second guess after the fact, when the child's life is not in your (not you, OP) hands.

The fact that the gorilla is "rare" would not figure into it, in my opinion.

Bamaro · May 30, 2016

If anyone is interested:

We the undersigned believe that the child would not have been able to enter the enclosure under proper parental supervision. Witnesses claim that they heard the child state that he wished to go into the enclosure and was actively trying to breach the barriers. This should have prompted the parents to immediately remove the child from the vicinity. It is believed that the situation was caused by parental negligence and the zoo is not responsible for the child's injuries and possible trauma.We the undersigned want the parents to be held accountable for the lack of supervision and negligence that caused Harambe to lose his life. We the undersigned feel the child's safety is paramount in this situation. We believe that this negligence may be reflective of the child's home situation. We the undersigned actively encourage an investigation of the child's home environment in the interests of protecting the child and his siblings from further incidents of parental negligence that may result in serious bodily harm or even death

https://www.change.org/p/cincinnati-zoo-justice-for-harambe

bamanut_aj · May 30, 2016

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bamabuzzard · May 30, 2016

bamanut_aj said:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Behold!!! HONKY KONG!!!!

Bazza · May 30, 2016

If I had been there I would have pushed the mother into the enclosure so she could truly be there for her child.....

TrueCrimson7 · May 30, 2016

I've been to this area of the Cincinnati Zoo many times with my kids. Never once did they get out of arms reach of me. I do not blame the zoo. The emergency response team did the right thing under the circumstances. Those circumstances, however, are what infuriates me.

jthomas666 · May 30, 2016

There was a similar incident, oh, 7-8 years ago, maybe. A small child had fallen into a gorilla enclosure, breaking his arm in the fall. The female gorilla picked up the child, cradled it in her arms, and went to the enclosure door, where she gave the child to the zoo keepers. In the Cincinnati case, the gorilla looked to be dragging the child around like a favorite toy.

Regardless, you have to protect the child in such cases.

Displaced Bama Fan · May 30, 2016

#blackgorillalivesmattertoo

TideMom2Boys · May 30, 2016

JBama_in_PCOLA said:
Hard to say. Seems the gorilla was protecting him.

Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

You should watch the unedited video. He is seen dragging him through the water very fast. The boy's head is in the water as this is happening.

I think the zoo did what they had to do. I don't blame them, the parents should have watched their child. Honestly, if this happened to my child...I would have jumped in to get him. I wouldn't just stand by saying "I am here.."

JBama_in_PCOLA · May 30, 2016

TideMom2Boys said:
You should watch the unedited video. He is seen dragging him through the water very fast. The boys head is in the water as this is happening.

I think the zoo did what they had to do. I don't blame them, the parents should have watched their child. Honestly, if this happened to my child...I would have jumped in to get him. I wouldn't just stand by saying "I am here.."

Yeah I saw it. That's why is said it seems. It's an unfortunate situation.

Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

Bamabuzzard · May 30, 2016

This is a risk anyone owning and/or operating a zoo has to consider as something that could happen. I hate it for the Go-rilla but if I'm going to error it will be on the side of overreacting to save the life of a human rather than an animal.

JBama_in_PCOLA · May 30, 2016

Tranqillizers weren't an option?

Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

Tide1986 · May 30, 2016

JBama_in_PCOLA said:
Tranqillizers weren't an option?

Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

I assume it would have taken too long to take effect and no telling what shooting him with a dart would have immediately done to his level of agitation.

Bamabuzzard · May 30, 2016

JBama_in_PCOLA said:
Tranqillizers weren't an option?

Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

Great question. My only guess as to the reason they didn't use them was the zoo considered the child in immediate danger and didn't want to take the risk of shooting the animal with a tranquilizer and while waiting on it to kick in it killed the child. Who knows?

Bamabuzzard · May 30, 2016

Tide1986 said:
I assume it would have taken too long to take effect and no telling what shooting him with a dart would have immediately done to his level of agitation.

It aggravates me to no end when they do that to me. :wink:

Bamaro · May 30, 2016

JBama_in_PCOLA said:
Tranqillizers weren't an option?

Zoo officials were afraid they could take too long and possibly agitate the gorilla during that time although from what I heard it was already 10 or more minutes and the gorilla showed no sighs of aggression to the child.

Tide1986 · May 30, 2016

http://metro.co.uk/2016/05/29/why-h...ell-into-enclosure-at-cincinnati-zoo-5912479/

Tranquillising the gorilla with a dart just simply wouldn’t have worked in this situation.

‘It would have taken up to 10 minutes to take affect and the animal may have become violent which would have had catastrophic consequences.’

Was shooting a rare gorilla the only option for Cincinnati Zoo?

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

FB Moderator

TideFans Legend

All-American

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

FB Moderator

TideFans Legend

Suspended

FB Moderator

FB Moderator

TideFans Legend

Suspended

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!