Comments:Wall of Siberian tiger enclosure at San Francisco Zoo is too short

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

This image is totally NOT to scale... unless you expect me to believe that the human behind the fence are 2-3 feet tall.

No one said it was supposed to be to scale. But we made it with what we had and the skils we know. If anyone can make something better, please do :) DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 18:12, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Also, it is supposed to be an example/reference as to how the enclosure is laid out. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 18:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Notes on the diagram describe the moat as deepest at its corners, 13 feet, whereas the main article describes the moat as deepest at the centre and the corners being shallower at 12 feet. Also, the dashed arrow in the diagram is in the wrong place, it should be lower down to indicate the width of the moat, perhaps. It serves no function other than to confuse where it is at present. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes if it were to scale it would be that. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 03:21, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Tiger SF ZooEdit

The director of the zoo is an idiot. He keeps being reported making contradictory or meaningless statements and fails to take responsibility for the problem or provide adequate assurance of future safety.

He should be replaced immediately, even no one is better than an incompetent. He's a loose cannon. -Xrose vision 23:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Zoo is totally responsible for the Tiger Mauling. Kids hurt not to be blamed.Edit

Since the wall was too short and under the 18 feet specified, the Courts do not have any reason to now be searching for the status of the people who were hurt and 1 boy killed, nor what they were doing to the tiger, and even less, to look for contents of their cel phones and their car. Zoos must be 100% safe and all enclosures approved by tha AZA and OSH before they place the wild animals inside to operate safely.

Whatever the condition or the attitude of the people attending Zoos, and disregarding if they were disturbing or not tiget Tatiana, the wild animals must never be able to get out of their cages, and hurt people. The full responsibility falls in the Zoo designers, the one who approved the Construction of the Enclosure, those who approved putting the animals inside, and the Safety organization in Zoos who must always check that the minimum safety standards have been met, before placing wild animals inside.

Do not continue to search for any guilt whatsoever of the Zoo visitors, the 3 kids who were hurt. They have no blame whatsoever, and must be compensated for damages. The 2 injured boys, their families, and relatives of the deceased one, must be immediately and fully compensated psychologically and finantially by the Zoo, as they had no guilt whatsoever in this incident, no matter they might have been disturbing the animals. "Wild Animals must never ....ever get out of their enclosures".

Robert —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Sinerian Tiger AttackEdit

All three boys had drugs and alcohol in their systems. They are,/ or were, young mischievious boys. With all of the other evidence; there's no doubt in my mind that the old saying," Boys will be boys, applies here. There was early on, a report that sling shots were on the premises where the boys were. This makes perfect sense to me for a young drugged and partly drunk or drinking person, to have used on this tiger. They were too young to be helping or working at this facility with these dangerous animals.

Age appropriate men or women are definitely essential around the more dangerous animals. Obviously this has been proven now!

More caution to the ages and drinks of the people in or around the grounds needs to be given more attention in the future.

The tiger knew exactly who or whom was 'sling shoting him', and took action. I feel badly that the animal was killed. These gorgeous animals are extint or getting to where my grandchildren may not get to see them even in zoos many years on..... It's a shame.

People can be so insensitive toward other species and it is a terrible thing. For God's sake people can be very vicious to other humans even; so of course; animals are a boy's mischievous thing for them. Stupid!! Just a terrible shame all around! Ofcourse no matter What; some people will continue trying to blame the facility! But! It never happened prior. I really feel this animal was tormented!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


they had to put a perfectly healthy and normal behaving tiger down because of a PATHETIC mistake the Zoo made. the tiger should have been caught and tracquillised and then put back into her enclosure. these animals are already limited and to kill one dur to a mistake by us is discusting. the zoo should have been fined or even closed until the enclosure was put right!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:41, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments from feedback form - "i think your design is a bit u..."Edit

i think your design is a bit un realistic and could endanger loins with that huge drop and that drop is unessary — (talk) 02:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)