Re: OK...No water in the moat?
Posted by Canie on December 28, 2007 at 16:44:05:

Well.. they did get clearance on the cage specifications and pass inspections and had accreditation. The wall was 12 1/2 feet high.

One news report said: AZA spokesman Steven Feldman said the minimum recommended height of 16.4 feet is just a guideline and that a zoo could still be deemed safe even if its wall were lower. Accreditation standards require "that the barriers be adequate to keep the animals and people apart from each other," Feldman said. "Obviously something happened to cause that not to be the case in this incident."

The dry moat was 33 feet.. and never had water in it.

Personally, I think they deserve what they got for taunting a female tiger - I understand felines.. the females can be very protective, they have to be to raise a litter in the wild - who knows how hormonal she was as well? PMS in a cat is a whole lot worse than humans!

As for Benazir Bhutto, I firmly believe it was the current regime, not Al Queda, who arranged that tragedy. There is too much evil in this world.

Canie


Follow Ups:
     ● Re: OK...No water in the moat? - Mike Williams in Arroyo Grande  06:15:02 - 12/29/2007  (73078)  (1)
        ● Re: OK...No water in the moat? - Skywise  21:24:10 - 12/29/2007  (73087)  (1)
           ● Re: OK...No water in the moat? - Mike Williams in Arroyo Grande  21:37:26 - 12/29/2007  (73089)  (1)
              ● Re: OK...No water in the moat? - Skywise  21:41:06 - 12/30/2007  (73094)  (0)