Gator grabs 2 year old at Grand Floridian?

[MinnieSweetheart]

Exactly! Completely agree.
View attachment 175845

I don't see children in the water at night....

The beach areas in and of themselves are not the danger. It's going into the water and doing so at night only amplified the risk of something happening.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I feel the same way when I see people getting drunk at Typhoon Lagoon. I get serving alcohol around the resort pools, but the wave pool at TL is a different story and IMO an accident waiting to happen. If it happened, would it be an accident? Sure. Would it be the person's fault for swimming drunk? Sure. Could Disney have prevented the accident by not serving alcohol around an intense water attraction? Hmm ... see what I'm saying?

I didn't realize it was such a problem with the alcohol at TL. I haven't been there yet.

WDW as a whole, while truly unique, does share similarities to other places. At Oceans of Fun (KC area) there is a swim up adult bar..they def. serve tons of alcohol and I don't know what, if there, is a limit to how much you can purchase. Schlitterbahn KC you can purchase alcohol at the bars.

Sandals resorts plies you with alcohol (like they thought it was strange if you ordered something other than an alcoholic beverage) and while the alcohol may be slightly weaker you def. have the ability to drink a lot..in the swim up bars, in the hot tubs, on the beaches and further more you could drink a bunch then go do watersports (though they didn't have jet skiing in St. Lucia). You do have to rent the equipment (free of charge though) for the watersports so I suppose if they thought you were too drunk they could say no.

There are a multitude of water parks that have alcohol for purchase (Wet n' Wild locations, certain Six Flags water park locations, etc). The issue of the mixture between water and alcohol is in no way related to Disney at all.

I actually think we've overlooked another very important issue regarding Disney's liability, and that's the fact that so many people are now reporting that guests staying in the Poly bungalows have been feeding the alligators and despite complaints about it to management, nothing has been done to stop the practice, including something as simple as putting notices in the bungalows that feeding gators violated Florida law.

Feeding gators violates Florida law because it increases aggression/decreases fear of humans.
Guests are known to feed guests from the Poly bungalows.
Disney looks the other way, not reprimanding guests who are literally spending thousands of dollars a night to stay in the bungalows.
This attack happened just over a year after the Poly bungalows opened. After 40+ years of no incidents. Is it a coincidence? Maybe. But it's not going to be that hard to argue correlation, especially with CMs/former CMs coming forward saying that management did nothing despite complaints.

Umm wow I had no idea it was that common (going along with what rteez replied with). I will say me personally..I just don't feed any wildlife I see wherever I go. I've been to several places where they say "please don't feed wildlife" either verbally or with a sign and I guess I just apply that to all places to be on the safe side. I guess if a person had never been in a area where it said "please don't feed wildlife" they may not know any better (I could say common sense here..but really I'm not going to get into that can of worms).

 

[LSLS]

Exactly! Completely agree.
View attachment 175845

And how many of those pictures are at night when gators are most active and feeding?

All you have to do is go to google images, type in disneys grand floridian.

How many pictures depict the water and the beach as an inviting part of that resort?

Are people who frequent the water and the beach when they go idiots? Or are they marketed to that way?

To be fair, there are a number of beach pictures, but they are pictures of the beach at daytime. I see none for night, which is when gators are most active and feeding.

Honestly I find the whole blame the parents thing disgusting to a certain extent. Everyone in hindsight saying of course you need to realize there are gators, but I'm willing to bet most don't think about it as they walk around the property. I bet most people don't double check outside their rooms for a Brown Recluse (which is much more likely to kill you than the gator). Those things just don't cross most people's minds on vacation. Likewise, hindsight is pretty easy on Disney as well. How many people wander into the water of areas designated "No Swimming" at nighttime? This has not happened in 30 years, it's ludicrous to anticipate it happening. I just don't get this concept that blame ALWAYS needs to be assigned somewhere. It's a tragedy that would be very unlikely to be repeated even if no additional measures are taken (which you know there will be and should be).

 

[mab2012]

Now that the risk has increased, yes Disney should and most likely will add warnings.

Are you referring to the risk of alligator attack, or the risk to Disney if another incident were to occur?

The risk of alligator attack is no different than it was two days ago, unless you assume that an alligator that has attacked once is more likely to do so again (that's been suggested in this thread, but I have no idea if it's accurate, or how significant any increased likelihood of attack would be), AND that the alligator in question was not one of those trapped and killed as part of the search operation.

The legal and business risks to Disney if another incident occurred is another matter entirely.

 

[whiporee]

Wow, just wow. I truly have no clue what to say to this. There is so much wrong going on in this post that i'm just going to say wow instead of risking getting put in time out. WOW

I say this sincerely -- if you don't want to say it publicly, then please PM me. If I'm factually wrong I'd like to know it, and if I'm philosophically wrong I'd welcome that, too.

But if you just want to publicly call me an idiot, then I would ask you provide some substance, because just saying "WOW" is not helpful to any conversation.

 

[Yellowjj]

Oh no, me and everyone else coming to Florida are willing to comply. Since you want to MAKE everyone coming into the state read (and probably sign a waiver stating you fully understand and again, will COMPLY with reading the handbook upon entry). I am certain I need to defer to your credentials on the matter. You have clearly thought this through.

I need to defer to yours, since you felt the need to hit my quote with a snide remark. You seem like a Darwin board member.

Making everyone understand that there are dangers around them will go a long way for tourists who may not understand. After all, going to Everest, there is a written guide adherence that applies to all.

Like I said before, anyone going to some place they do not live in should have a understanding for possible danger in the place they visit. Research starts with yourself.

 

[DizneyPilot]

So you advocate the suppression of thought and wisdom?

Because that's what you're saying...

When something bad happens...it would be a nice change of pace if there was more "thought" and less "prayer"

This is a cautionary tale that shouldn't be forgotten...just like the developments in the nightclub story with the wife...

This has been largely respectful. But we shouldn't apologize for conversation. Especially if the alternative is tissues then back to status quo after dinner

Do I advocate the suppression of thought and wisdom? Whatever, I see a thread getting out of hand. I would think that with your 9000+ posts, you would be able to recognize that. Less prayer? Perhaps more prayer is needed. Largely respectful- Thats what I am talking about.

 

[poison ivy]

And how many of those pictures are at night when gators are most active and feeding?


To be fair, there are a number of beach pictures, but they are pictures of the beach at daytime. I see none for night, which is when gators are most active and feeding.

Honestly I find the whole blame the parents thing disgusting to a certain extent. Everyone in hindsight saying of course you need to realize there are gators, but I'm willing to bet most don't think about it as they walk around the property. I bet most people don't double check outside their rooms for a Brown Recluse (which is much more likely to kill you than the gator). Those things just don't cross most people's minds on vacation. Likewise, hindsight is pretty easy on Disney as well. How many people wander into the water of areas designated "No Swimming" at nighttime? This has not happened in 30 years, it's ludicrous to anticipate it happening. I just don't get this concept that blame ALWAYS needs to be assigned somewhere. It's a tragedy that would be very unlikely to be repeated even if no additional measures are taken (which you know there will be and should be).

Well I agree with you on the parents part but disagree on the company's part. Here's a video of a typical night at GF taken 8 mos ago. No average out of town guest would not have any idea of a dangerous predator lurking.

 

[mab2012]

The parents not letting their kid play on his own in a lake at 9:30 at night could have also saved the child's life. They took on the risk on their own to let their child "wade" in the water that said "no swimming" and wasn't even within arms reach of his child then I do not feel that Disney owed them an explanation of their no one in the water policy. They could have perhaps made it more clear that you shouldn't be in the water, but they don't owe an explanation as to why you are not allowed in the lake.

Further, considering the Dad serves on the chamber of commerce, which is very anti safety regulation, then I do feel like someone who lobbies on behalf of personal responsibility should have taken personal responsibility.

In fairness, we don't know that the family is not taking personal responsibility for the incident. I haven't heard any reports that the family is blaming Disney, just a lot of assumptions that a lawsuit and/or settlement is inevitable.

ETA: I would maintain that allowing the toddler to be at the edge of the water was not necessarily irresponsible. Inadvisable, yes, particularly in retrospect. But again, the risks were low. This family just got horribly unlucky.

 

[dlavender]

The signs on the old part of Eglin where they test lots of ammunition don't say "Stay out, there could be live amunition" it says "Stay out" and you stay out

Exactly, they stay stay out, because they mean, stay out.

They don't say, no playing in this area, hoping that you interpret stay out.......

Just like no swimming should say, stay out, not no swimming.

I think you agree.

 

[rileyz]

I just read that 2 of the trapped gators were 7 feet long. That's shocking to me as I was always told they remove them well before that. I've seen big ones in the golf course at Shades of Green so I have to wonder if they came from over there. I want to know the truth though in regards to if they are being as diligent as they have always been. I mean we all know there have been cutbacks and I pray this tragedy is not a result of something like that.

 

[Corsetopia]

But what if the child had died from quick sand? Then would we all demand a quick sand sign?/QUOTE]

Uh, yes.

 

[Happy Artist]

Be a Parent or Not One At All

I have had it folks! Lately people are saying not to shame or blame parents after "accidents" occur. Well guess what, some parents need some blame. Parents need to wake up! Child neglect IS a form of child abuse. As a parent you ARE responsible to keep your kid safe. There are accidents where children die but there are also incidents where children die that could be totally preventable.

This week a child died of an alligator attack because their parent decided to disobey the many "no swimming" signs located at a water edge. It's that simple. It is horrible, and I can't imagine how terrible it is to lose a child in any way. But let's hold the parent responsible. If the parent followed the signs right in front of him, and not decided to blatantly disregard them, his child would still be alive. We don't know why the parent didn't think the rules applied to him and his family. If the same parent decided not to use a car seat for the 2yr. old and the parent got in a car wreak, we would automatically say he was negligent because the parent knew he was suppose to have a car seat and disregarded the rules. Why is this any different? Because he was on vacation? Because it was unusual? Because the parent fought the alligator? What about the child who was totally unsupervised and fell into gorilla pit? He could have died too. When are we going to hold parents responsible for their neglect? These incidents didn't have to have happen if parents were doing their basic job of being a parent.

Being a parent IS very hard work. But you can't just take a vacation from it whenever a parent wants to. You have to work hard at it, at all times. Not following rules, especially safely ones and rules of supervising your kids, especially in public places IS neglect and it IS child abuse, and if something happens tragic to your child or they become hurt, it IS your fault as a parent. Wake up parents, and be a parent!

The Federal Child Abuse Prevention
and Treatment Act (CAPTA), (42 U.S.C.A.
§5106g), as amended and reauthorized by
the CAPTA Reauthorization Act of 2010,
defines child abuse and neglect as, at
minimum:
“Any recent act or failure to act on the part of
a parent or caretaker which results in death,
serious physical or emotional harm, sexual
abuse or exploitation; or an act or failure to
act which presents an imminent risk of serious
harm."

 

[dlavender]

If the parent followed the signs right in front of him, and not decided to blatantly disregard them, his child would still be alive.

As pointed out 33 times, which I'm sure you've read, no one knows if he was swimming. That is up for interpretation. If the sign said stay out of the water, you'd have a point.

Having a car seat is the law. So again, not seeing a point......

 

[kellyjeanie]

Be a Parent or Not One At All

I have had it folks! Lately people are saying not to shame or blame parents after "accidents" occur. Well guess what, some parents need some blame. Parents need to wake up! Child neglect IS a form of child abuse. As a parent you ARE responsible to keep your kid safe. There are accidents where children die but there are also incidents where children die that could be totally preventable.

This week a child died of an alligator attack because their parent decided to disobey the many "no swimming" signs located at a water edge. It's that simple. It is horrible, and I can't imagine how terrible it is to lose a child in any way. But let's hold the parent responsible. If the parent followed the signs right in front of him, and not decided to blatantly disregard them, his child would still be alive. We don't know why the parent didn't think the rules applied to him and his family. If the same parent decided not to use a car seat for the 2yr. old and the parent got in a car wreak, we would automatically say he was negligent because the parent knew he was suppose to have a car seat and disregarded the rules. Why is this any different? Because he was on vacation? Because it was unusual? Because the parent fought the alligator? What about the child who was totally unsupervised and fell into gorilla pit? He could have died too. When are we going to hold parents responsible for their neglect? These incidents didn't have to have happen if parents were doing their basic job of being a parent.

Being a parent IS very hard work. But you can't just take a vacation from it whenever a parent wants to. You have to work hard at it, at all times. Not following rules, especially safely ones and rules of supervising your kids, especially in public places IS neglect and it IS child abuse, and if something happens tragic to your child or they become hurt, it IS your fault as a parent. Wake up parents, and be a parent!

The Federal Child Abuse Prevention
and Treatment Act (CAPTA), (42 U.S.C.A.
§5106g), as amended and reauthorized by
the CAPTA Reauthorization Act of 2010,
defines child abuse and neglect as, at
minimum:
“Any recent act or failure to act on the part of
a parent or caretaker which results in death,
serious physical or emotional harm, sexual
abuse or exploitation; or an act or failure to
act which presents an imminent risk of serious
harm."

NEGLECT? Holy cow. This post is unreal. I hope it's satire.

 

[angelmav]

But what if the child had died from quick sand? Then would we all demand a quick sand sign? I know that some people have argued it and maybe it's because my husband is in the Army, but when I see "no swimming" or "do Not enter" I don't need to be told why.

The signs on the old part of Eglin where they test lots of ammunition don't say "Stay out, there could be live amunition" it says "Stay out" and you stay out.

I do think Disney has hopefully learned that they need to use more forceful and clear language in the signage, but ultimately the parents disregarded already posted signage.

I am stating that I agree they made a poor choice to allow their child in the water, because I have seen no swimming signs listed for a host of reasons as to why it was not safe to swim. Allowing him in the water was already a bad choice, because any number of things besides a dangerous predator could have happened. That is what this family has to live with.

But at the same I am simply stating that a sign that had the no swimming/alligator warning (like the one posted across the street at SOG) would likely be more of an alert to a parent not to allow their child anywhere near the water. I think that is a much clearer warning, when many people would otherwise think that getting your feet wet is not swimming. For the record, I would never enter water or allow my children to enter water where a no swimming sign is posted because I do not know what the particular danger is, but not everyone has my mindset. I do think that even a person from another part of the world though with a different mindset would take the no swimming/alligator sign much more seriously, especially when allowing small children anywhere near it.

 

[romitaz]

Are you referring to the risk of alligator attack, or the risk to Disney if another incident were to occur?

The risk of alligator attack is no different than it was two days ago, unless you assume that an alligator that has attacked once is more likely to do so again (that's been suggested in this thread, but I have no idea if it's accurate, or how significant any increased likelihood of attack would be), AND that the alligator in question was not one of those trapped and killed as part of the search operation.

The legal and business risks to Disney if another incident occurred is another matter entirely.

I'm saying the perceived risk by everyone just doubled when the second attack happened, so yes,now we may need a sign. I have a couple of sayings for you.
1) here is a Risk Doctor Proverb:
if a risk happens once, that's understandable
if a risk happens twice, unlucky
if a risk happens a third time, that's unacceptable
2) "Everything that happens once can never happen twice.But everything that happens twice will surely happen a third time."

 

[romitaz]

I say this sincerely -- if you don't want to say it publicly, then please PM me. If I'm factually wrong I'd like to know it, and if I'm philosophically wrong I'd welcome that, too.

But if you just want to publicly call me an idiot, then I would ask you provide some substance, because just saying "WOW" is not helpful to any conversation.

I most assuredly did NOT call you an idiot. Several premises that you are drawing upon are very wrong but I am in no way calling you an idiot. Correcting your assumptions would not help the conversation either so I will respectfully decline.

 

[LSLS]

I say this sincerely -- if you don't want to say it publicly, then please PM me. If I'm factually wrong I'd like to know it, and if I'm philosophically wrong I'd welcome that, too.

But if you just want to publicly call me an idiot, then I would ask you provide some substance, because just saying "WOW" is not helpful to any conversation.

Are you saying kill all gators in Florida? Because there is a ridiculous amount wrong with that. But away from that, the predators of young gators have not disappeared, they are still around. While numbers aren't completely know, it is speculated that in the 1880s around 2.5 million gators were killed in just Florida (which would mean a substantially larger number than the 1.3 million we currently have). Estimates from the early 1900s state that the number of alligators was less than 20% of what it was 20 years before the gator harvesting. The numbers of young surviving currently still outnumbers the number of parents (indicating a growing trend), but has slowed, indicating they are reaching their capacity.

 

[rteetz]

I thought things in this thread have been going relatively well. Now I'm seeing things about name calling and child neglect or abuse. I can garauntee the parents would do things different that night if they could go back. The family has to go home from their vacation with an empty car seat and prepare a funeral for a 2 year old. If we cannot remain civil with respect for the family this thread will be closed. I have no problem with discussions about disneys procedures and alligators in Florida but let's refrain from blaming the parents.