Heartbreaking news...a big reminder to be aware of wildlife on property

[ffugitive]

However, it is highly probable that Disney will be found to be negligent. Negligence occurs when a party does not prevent or properly warn of dangers that are "reasonably foreseeable." Given the well-known existence and prevalence of alligators to people native to Florida, Disney was certainly aware of the alligator threat. In fact, the have a special team of people dedicated to removing dangerous animals (per the press conference). In spite of that, Disney creates a zero entry beach, sets up lounge chairs, and hosts movie nights near the water's edge. All of these things signal to the average visitor that the beach is a safe place; it even makes the water inviting! Aside from a "No Swimming" sign, which has been shown in this thread can mean different things to different people, Disney has apparently not warned guests of the threat. On top of that, there have been numerous reports of people watching kids splashing or wading the in the water. It seems that Disney never asked the kids to stop splashing in the water; once again, it gives the impression that wading in the water is safe. My opinion only. However, according to the press conference, there is an active investigation.

There is NO question that Disney will be on the hook for negligence for the reasons you described. They know it (at least their lawyers do) and they do not want the publicity of litigating against this family. Therefore, not that it is ANY consolation, but Disney will be settling this with a relatively enormous sum of money.

 

[dnkmmw]

Fine. Would you really say that there is no difference in how most people would view these two signs?? That's what we're really talking about. One connotes RULE, the other connotes DANGER. Simple. And a distinction that I think it reasonable for Disney to make for its guests.

View attachment 175645 View attachment 175646

For me, no swimming means don't go into the water so either way, I not going into the water. I understand that no swimming to many people means go in, wade, splash, play, just don't "swim" in which case the wording of the OP would imply if one were to do any of those things they'd be safe from sharks, urchins, etc. The problem with the pictures shown in your post is that they are not encompassing all the dangers including drowning, amoeba, snakes, etc. Which is my point. I don't know how signs can possibly depict every possible scenario. Now, with Zika, there probably needs to signs for that too.

Dawn

 

[Gillyrose779]

You are being too literal. Do not swim clearly means "do not go in the water" and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous. Before my kids could swim, we would still refer to a day at the pool as "going swimming".

I'm not suggesting that the parents were negligent here, but I also do not believe Disney is negligent. This was a freak accident. A horribly tragic one. Can't we just leave it at that???

Where I am from do not swim means do not swim... but it's still okay to put your feet in and wade in the water. There are actual signs that read do no wade and do not go into the water for those areas. They are completely separate. I'm not sure why people would assume you can't take a sign literally- especially when I know there are signs to state the other.

I also want to add I have seen people wade in the water at WDW every time we go and I have yet to see 1 member of Disney staff say anything about it.

 

[mackay_j]

well then how safe are the disney water parks?? Can't alligators slip into the lazy river and the pools there???

We have been called out of the lazy river on 2 different occasions due to snakes getting in - never heard of an gator having a go

 

[yulilin3]

well then how safe are the disney water parks?? Can't alligators slip into the lazy river and the pools there???

they a checked every morning before park opening, once the park opens every day it is very unlikely an alligator will wander in. The same as they check all the pools in every resort every day.

 

[PantherPete]

"Negligent" in a legal sense? Perhaps not. I look at it as there being room for improvement in them notifying their guests of a potential danger. That seems a fair expectation, without going so far as to blame Disney. Disney -- like everyone and every company -- can learn and improve.

While I won't argue that there could be room for improvement, the fact that deaths by alligator attack are very rare indicate that it isn't a likely occurrence. You can't warn everyone about every possible danger in every situation. There has to be some understanding that freak situations occur. And this was a freak accident. I could see if this happened on a regular basis. But it hasn't.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

For me, no swimming means don't go into the water so either way, I not going into the water. I understand that no swimming to many people means go in, wade, splash, play, just don't "swim" in which case the wording of the OP would imply if one were to do any of those things they'd be safe from sharks, urchins, etc. The problem with the pictures shown in your post is that they are not encompassing all the dangers including drowning, amoeba, snakes, etc. Which is my point. I don't know how signs can possibly depict every possible scenario. Now, with Zika, there probably needs to signs for that too.

Dawn

With all due respect, I think you may be missing the point. I think the distinction that is relevant is between something looking/feeling like a RULE versus warning of a DANGER. It's not SWIM vs. WADE. Or ALLIGATOR vs. SNAKE. It's RULE vs. DANGER. It's PLEASE DON'T vs. BEWARE. Those are VERY different messages.

"No swimming please" hardly tells me that it is DANGEROUS. As I said SEVERAL times, I wouldn't go near the water regardless -- rule or danger. BUT: Is Disney doing all it can to protect it's guests if it doesn't make the DANGER clear? I say no. I say there is room for improvement. My opinion.

 

[muenginerd]

As others have said, around us "do not swim" is not necessarily the same as "do not enter the water". We have "do not swim areas" for things like rock shores, steep drop offs. It's still ok to walk along the shore line with your feet in the water. Then there's situations that say "Unsafe, do not enter water" for conditions like high levels of bacteria in the water.

 

[mindeola]

My heart is just broken for this family. How horrific. That poor baby.

No judgments for the family or Disney, but I just want to address some thoughts that have been shared in this thread. Like many other have said, it boggles my mind that people ( at least all US Citizens) would not think there are alligators in the water at Disney. I have never been to Alaska, but I know bears and moose are dangerous and can come right up onto your porch. Alligators are associated with Florida in popular culture. I have seen at least one on every trip to Disney.

We live on a military base outside of New Orleans and gators are often found in our large drainage ditches. Our signs only state DO NOT GO IN CANAL BY ORDER OF COMMANDING OFFICER. Just like the No Swimming sign, you do not go in. Period. At least you should not. We have plenty of kids that do even though there are gators.

This is beyond tragic, but it really is a freak accident. Look how many millions have been safe near Disney waters all these years. However, there can be no harm in Disney posting more obvious signs. Hopefully they will.

 

[WuvEeyore]

To Floridians maybe. Did you know that we get scorpions and bats in buildings and homes in Austin? Everyone here knows it.

I thought scorpions in Texas were common knowledge. Bats are everywhere. Spent a week in AZ once, checked my luggage for scorpions and spiders. Brought a snake bite kit with me while hiking in the Grand Canyon. But, I have to admit, not everyone thinks about things like that on vacation.

Just a tragic, heartbreaking thing to happen to anyone, whether they knew about the possibility of alligators or not, they lost an innocent child and no amount of blaming or finger pointing will bring that child back to them.

 

[dnkmmw]

You are being too literal. Do not swim clearly means "do not go in the water" and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous. Before my kids could swim, we would still refer to a day at the pool as "going swimming".

I'm not suggesting that the parents were negligent here, but I also do not believe Disney is negligent. This was a freak accident. A horribly tragic one. Can't we just leave it at that???

Actually, I totally agree with you. Many people on this thread have stated that the no swimming signs posted at GF mean just that, "No swimming" and it is perfectly acceptable to do anything else in the water so long as one was not in fact "swimming". There has been discussion about the changes WDW needs to make to signage and I disagree thinking it's simply not possible for a sign to convey every possible action to avoid and possible outcome that could arise.

Dawn

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

it's simply not possible for a sign to convey every possible action to avoid and possible outcome that could arise.

Dawn

It's possible for the sign to indicate a possible DANGER. That is possible. And practically costless for Disney to do.

 

[lynch34]

There is NO question that Disney will be on the hook for negligence for the reasons you described. They know it (at least their lawyers do) and they do not want the publicity of litigating against this family. Therefore, not that it is ANY consolation, but Disney will be settling this with a relatively enormous sum of money.

Exactly. Disney has no desire to fight this and they know their standing is shaky. This will never see a courtroom and Disney is going to give the family a boatload of money although it won't help that family bring their son back.

 

[ArwenMarie]

Here is a sign from the walking path along the water at the JW Marriott-Ritz complex at Grande Lakes. I remembered this from when we stayed there and had to google it to make sure I wasn't imagining it.

IMO, WDW was negligent not to have better signs and/or other warnings, especially when they create these fake tropical beaches and show movies on them.

 

[scousemouse09]

Disney does not go above and beyond what is needed or they would warn guests of the alligators who clearly live in their little fake beaches.

And how many guests would read it when they check in and receive a leaflet of "dangers around the Disney property"? What has happened is a tragedy, but such a rare occurrence that it does not warrant a massive overhaul of signage etc. I must admit that going to Kennedy Space Centre when I was a teen made a lasting impression on me when the tour guide said that gators roamed the property and were not fed, so if you got lost or tried to go to an area off the tourist route then you would be eaten, it would be your own fault because the free security guards had got you. But you have to ask yourself how many millions of people have sat in the same spot and nothing has happened? Also, when do you expect to hear of another report similar to this case?

As I said, it's a complete tragedy, but knee jerk reactions do not help anyone.

 

[mjkacmom]

Just because you wouldn't let your kids go into an area with a sign saying there is alligator and water moccasin danger, that doesn't mean that others will follow suit. There will always be those who don't see a danger and therefore see a rule as frivolous. Would an extensive list of dangers for those who decide to step in the water keep Disney out of court? Probably but it wouldn't prevent anything like this happening again. Same with a fence or wall or getting rid of the beach altogether.

If I saw a No Swimming sign on that beach, it wouldn't occur to me that wading wasn't allowed. However, if I saw a No Swimming/No Wading dangerous wildlife sign, you bet we are not going near the water. However WDW doesn't want to appear to be dangerous - gators are dangerous. This is WDW, an amusement park, not backpacking through the wilderness. I'm sure none of the guidebooks mention gators, snakes, or the dangers of the lakes. From many posts, it appears like kids wade in the water a lot - I've seen tons of pictures today. I'm betting there are new signs tomorrow.

 

[PantherPete]

Exactly. Disney has no desire to fight this and they know their standing is shaky. This will never see a courtroom and Disney is going to give the family a boatload of money although it won't help that family bring their son back.

It is more likely that Disney's insurance company will give the family a boatload of money. Then Disney will be forced to either close the beaches or put up signs with the verbiage that the insurance company wants.

 

[mking624]

So much talk about rule vs. danger...
In my opinion, it shouldn't matter and it doesn't. If they say don't, you don't. You don't weigh the consequences of rule vs. danger. You don't sit back and say "well it doesn't imply danger so I'll do it anyway." Signs shouldn't have to imply danger. If it's a rule, you should be following it regardless of any danger.

Personally I would think that saying "do not swim" is enough reason to not go in the water. There is obviously a reason they posted the sign, so caution/common sense/good judgment should be exercised.

That said, I don't want to place blame on the family. Especially during such a horrific time. It is easy for all of us, who are far removed from the situation, to pass judgment on the family and/or Disney with "if only the family did this" or "if Disney did that." Even if better judgment could have been exercised by either party, this was a freak accident and should be treated with compassion.

 

[mjkacmom]

And it's those who feel that they can disregard "frivolous" rules who unfortunately have to deal with the very real consequences of the actions they take when they turn their head and act contrary to the rules.

No Swimming does not mean No Wading. If they don't want you wading, the sign should say No Wading. Visitors are from all over, and according to these threads, many don't realize there are gators in the water! This isn't some local playground, where everyone is familiar with the dangers.

 

[daisy_77]

My heart just aches. The terror this little boy must have felt. And his parents having to live with this tragedy, knowing it was preventable. I am sure they are more heartbroken than I can even imagine.

I remember my first trip to WDW. I saw a small alligator walking near the water. I couldn't believe my eyes. I had my eyes peeled the entire trip just be sure I wasn't seeing things. We don't have creatures like that wandering around where I live. I've been many times since that first trip and I always look but never seem to find a single one. I wonder how hard it is for Disney to really control the situation.