.
Critically endangered, Silverback Lowland Gorillas are now one step closer to extinction thanks to the irresponsible actions and denial of the Cincinnati Zoo, as well as failure of parents to properly monitor their three-year-old child.
.
.
Harambe, a 17-year-old Lowland gorilla was shot dead this past Memorial Day weekend when interacting with (and actually trying to protect) a small toddler who had managed to penetrate the so-called "security barrier" that is designed to prevent animals from escaping their enclosures.
.
But, it is obvious from this and other similar incidents, that such "barriers" are not sufficient in preventing humans from entering (or falling or jumping into) animal enclosures, whether they be children, drunks or the mentally ill. In other words, this and other zoos fail to properly protect the very animals they are entrusted to care for and safeguard.
.
Less than two weeks ago, a Chilean zoo had to shoot two lions dead after a suicidal man stripped naked and invaded their enclosure. http://www.examiner.com/article/two-lions-killed-at-chilean-zoo-after-man-strips-naked-and-jumps-into-their-cage
.
Little public outcry occurred after the lion incident because it was clear the lions attacked the man and would have killed him. (Protest should have occurred in that situation too, for the lack of adequate protection to the animals.)
.
But, there has been much public backlash on social media protesting the killing of Harambe. Not so much for the fact his species is critically endangered, but more so because videos show the gorilla gently trying to comfort and protect the confused boy as he might a juvenile gorilla. At no time did Harambe beat his chest or display other aggressive posture suggestive of threat and attack.
.
Unfortunately, due to the panic and screaming of onlookers, Harambe eventually did grab the boy by his ankles and dragged him away in the water in seeming attempt to escape the chaos and get the boy to a quieter place. Such appears "rough" to the naked eye, but the boy neither screamed nor cried and on the contrary, appeared to perceive the actions like a game.
.
Gorillas are of course very powerful animals who can "crack a coconut with their bare hands." But had Harambe wanted to crush the boy's head, he could have done so in mere seconds. The gorilla's actions over almost 15 minutes with the child showed absolutely no desire to kill or even harm.
.
That the boy was later taken to the hospital with only minor injuries due to falling into the 15 foot moat enclosure and returned home less than a day later, seems proof that the gorilla neither intended harm nor caused it.
.
Nevertheless, despite his concerned and protective actions toward the child, Harambe died via the bullet with no real attempt to exercise other options.
.
What were the other options?
.
Certainly, it seems the most humane and responsible action would have first been to clear out the hysterical onlookers who, in their screams only served to stress and agitate the gorilla. Then to bring in someone familiar with Harambe (trainer, behaviorist, or animal caregiver) to calm the animal and negotiate hand over of the boy.
.
Other option would have been to use a tranquilizer gun. Officials claim tranq would have taken "too much time," but the boy was with the gorilla 15 minutes anyway. This seems weak excuse.
.
Circumstances suggest that the zoo simply took the easiest and quickest way out by shooting to death the gorilla and then claiming "it was a matter of life and death" of the child.
.
But, that seems more to the zoo's defense in a likely law suit of the parents against the zoo for negligence. -- A lawsuit that is likely to win or be pleaded out.
.
Had the child died, there is little question the zoo could have been wiped out in paying legal damages for such and even worse "negligence." The decision to shoot and kill the gorilla was therefore, more for legal reasons than any actual death threat to the child from Harambe.
.
But, what is most distressing about this entire tragedy is both, the zoo's and parent's failure to admit and accept any responsibility for it happening.
.
Harambe did not die due to being struck by a lightening bolt.
.
He died directly through human negligence and irresponsibility of both, zoo and parents to admit any mistake and wrongdoing.
.
If a zoo creates a situation of having to kill the very animals it is deigned to keep and care for, there is an obvious failure in the system.
.
To quote famous TV psychologist, Dr. Phil McGraw, "You can't change what you don't acknowledge."
.
As long as zoos keep coming up with denials and rationalizations for their failures to properly protect the animals they are entrusted to care for and safeguard, then these ugly instances will continue to occur.
.
It is up to the public to let Cincinnati and other zoos know that we are no longer buying the excuses and denials. They need to step up to the plate, admit their mistakes and take immediate steps for remedy and policy changes regarding "emergency response" in situations like the Harambe tragedy.
.
It is never acceptable to push endangered animals one step close to extinction in effort to save ourselves from pricey lawsuits due to our own negligence and failures to properly protect animals and humans.
.
Rest in peace, Harambe. You and your magnificent species does not deserve what humans have wrought to you. -- PCA
.
.
.
**********
No comments:
Post a Comment