It's looking like the well-publicized tiger escape and killing at the San Francisco Zoo might deal a death-blow to the zoo through lawsuits.
I'm not sure how I feel about thaton the one hand, I like going to the zoo, occasionally.
But the idea of a zoo seems like a creepy anachronism, nowadays. I never leave a zoo without thinkingwell, that whole thing must suck for the animals.
I've been to that tiger exhibit many times, and also to the enclosure where the tiger mauled a zoo employee a few years ago. When I read in the paper that the height of enclosure wall was 18ft, I remember thinking, "wowI guess it is much higher than I remember" (I've always had a good ability to judge distances in the 0 to 500 ft range. I summon images of basketball hoops, distances from the pitching mound to home plate, football fields, and other mental constructs, and interpolate. I'm never off by too much.)
I wasn't surprised to learn later that the wall was 4 ft shorter (12 1/2 ft) than previously described in news articles.
I've got a vivid picture in my mind of the tiger, jumping out of the enclosure, following a blood trail to the cafe where I've enjoyed poor hotdogs and fries with my children. The doors and walls of that cafe are mostly glass, and there's a miniaturized train that runs by there. So I'm thinking, when the tiger crossed the railway tracks, was she careful to not step on the rails?
Cole (or maybe Owen) wondered why the tiger, having escaped, didn't just stroll around at leisurewhy did it have to kill somebody? I remembered reading that escaped zoo animals are typically aggressivethey can't really fathom the FLIGHT option, so there's only FIGHT instead.
"A tigerwell, it's got a few million years of evolution behind it that says, 'I am the biggest and meanest thing in this particular jungle.' So, a tiger's natural instinct is to kill something that's causing it difficulty. You can hardly blame it," I said.
"Well, that's too bad."
Yes.