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

[thedonduck]

Really, I'd like to know why a barrier/fence/something cannot be erected to keep the gators from accessing the beach areas around GF and the Poly. I do understand this is the real outside but it is also a privately owned resort area and its owners have the right to do it.

Alligators can climb or push their way through unless you want cinder blocks walls.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

Ok, I guess I'm just naive (no snarkiness here). I get that the gators are in their natural habitat & we need to stay out of their way. But really there is NO barrier that has EVER proven effective in keeping alligators out? NEVER?

They crawl up on land and circumnavigate the barrier???

MG

 

[jknc]

I've suggested commenters read the piece on CNN:


"In Florida, the law does not require a landowner to anticipate the presence of or guard an invitee against harm from wild animals -- or "ferae naturae." This rule does have exceptions; for example, where the owner harbors such animals or has introduced onto his premises wild animals not indigenous to the locality. If wild animals are reduced to private control, confinement and possession, they become private property, which heightens a landowner's exposure to liability when tragedy strikes.
To illustrate this point with an pabsurd example, if a resort had an alligator on a leash tied to a pole in a petting zoo, that's going to impose liability in a way that an alligator born free in a swamp adjacent to a hotel would not."

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

I've suggested commenters read the piece on CNN:


"In Florida, the law does not require a landowner to anticipate the presence of or guard an invitee against harm from wild animals -- or "ferae naturae." This rule does have exceptions; for example, where the owner harbors such animals or has introduced onto his premises wild animals not indigenous to the locality. If wild animals are reduced to private control, confinement and possession, they become private property, which heightens a landowner's exposure to liability when tragedy strikes.
To illustrate this point with an pabsurd example, if a resort had an alligator on a leash tied to a pole in a petting zoo, that's going to impose liability in a way that an alligator born free in a swamp adjacent to a hotel would not."

This is about legal liability. I don't think this is where Disney should set their bar -- bare minimum not to be in violation of the law.

If Disney didn't know it before, they NOW know that many of their guests have NO IDEA that alligators are in those waters. SO WARN THEM going forward. Period. Simple, costless.

 

[Huff]

You're gong to teach a two year old how to escape an attack of an alligator two or three times his size?

Huh? My comments were with regards to a 2yr old around water.

 

[20yBWDW]

I've suggested commenters read the piece on CNN:


"In Florida, the law does not require a landowner to anticipate the presence of or guard an invitee against harm from wild animals -- or "ferae naturae." This rule does have exceptions; for example, where the owner harbors such animals or has introduced onto his premises wild animals not indigenous to the locality. If wild animals are reduced to private control, confinement and possession, they become private property, which heightens a landowner's exposure to liability when tragedy strikes.
To illustrate this point with an pabsurd example, if a resort had an alligator on a leash tied to a pole in a petting zoo, that's going to impose liability in a way that an alligator born free in a swamp adjacent to a hotel would not."

I read it. The part quoted only tells us that Florida law does not automatically hold a landowner liable for acts of wild animals behaving in a natural manner. The article does point out that a landowner has a duty to invitees to warn of known dangers, and can be found negligent of that duty. I think reasonable minds may view it as WDW having failed to properly warn guests of a known latent danger: alligators in the lagoon that guests cannot see for themselves but which the resort knew were there and dangerous.

 

[CAS239]

Really, I'd like to know why a barrier/fence/something cannot be erected to keep the gators from accessing the beach areas around GF and the Poly. I do understand this is the real outside but it is also a privately owned resort area and its owners have the right to do it.

Gators can climb over a fence. And stop and realize how big of a barrier you would have to build to keep all wildlife out from around Magic Kingdom and nearby resorts. That's stretching from past the golf course near grand Floridian all the way over to the Wilderness Lodge and from behind MK all the way to the Polynesian.

Must easier to have signs up to keep people out the water rather than have big walls encircling a huge property or barb wire fencing surrounding each hotel

 

[Huff]

You keep using this phrase "drown proof," and I have to ask...what the heck does that mean? Are you referring the method of survival sometimes used by our armed forces? Because I don't think it's appropriate, nor practical, nor possible to "drown proof" a 2 year old. Or a child of any age. Or most adults.

No. It applies to kids too young to actually swim. It is possible to teach them at a very young age, even infant in some cases to float on back when in water and stay calm. That is whats known as drown proofing. We teach it here for families with kids under age 3 including some infants. If they fall in the pool for instance they can be taught to stay up breathing for quite awhile despite being too young to learn to swim.

 

[KatieCharlotte]

Do you let your kids swim or wade in the ocean? There are sharks in there. If something happened, would it be your fault? Or the fault of the city/county/state/property owner? I've been to MANY beaches without shark warning signs. This is absolutely tragic, and I agree that a "keep out of water" sign would be much stronger, but I don't blame anyone. Terrible accidents happen sometimes.

I had a conversation today with my daughter about her fear of swimming in the ocean. She is terrified of sharks but was perfectly happy snorkeling in the ocean on our cruise. She explained that she did not feel any danger when she was swimming between the man-made beach crowded with loungers and the cruise ship. The cruise line (Carnival) had created a fantasy world, but it wasn't impossible for sharks or barracudas to be in the water. That doesn't mean the cruise line would be at fault if someone was hurt, but it's something to keep in mind. Disney works much harder at creating a fantasy world for guests. Because the odds of a deadly alligator attack were so low, I'm not going to blame Disney for not anticipating it. But I do think the fantasy "bubble" that Disney intentionally creates contributed to the danger. Our guard is down.

 

[jknc]

I read it. The part quoted only tells us that Florida law does not automatically hold a landowner liable for acts of wild animals behaving in a natural manner. The article does point out that a landowner has a duty to invitees to warn of known dangers, and can be found negligent of that duty. I think reasonable minds may view it as WDW having failed to properly warn guests of a known latent danger: alligators in the lagoon that guests cannot see for themselves but which the resort knew were there and dangerous.

And you are kidding yourself if a company as massive as Disney who is known for attention to detail hasn't had their legal teams clear the warnings they have on open waters.

 

[A Mickeyfan]

Disney knew there were gators in the lakes. Many guests including ME did not know there were gators at the lake. Disney is to blame for not informing guests about gators on the lake. There is nothing dangerous about a toddler in ankle deep water with a parent right next to him in most lakes. Disney failed to protect guests plain and simple.

See, in FL if it's fresh water, it's very dangerous, no matter who is standing next to you. If you visit a State, you should be aware of their wildlife

 

[Njr526]

So can you get in a pool after it is closed despite signage against it if you make the case that you aren't swimming in the pool but merely wading in it?

False equivalency. If you're in a pool after hours you're breaking an expressly posted hours of operation, so it doesn't matter if you're swimming, wading or sitting in a lounge chair. The pool is closed. Wading when a sign says No Swimming is in my opinion open to interpretation, whereas Stay out of the Water or No Swimming or Wading is not.

 

[jknc]

This is about legal liability. I don't think this is where Disney should set their bar -- bare minimum not to be in violation of the law.

If Disney didn't know it before, they NOW know that many of their guests have NO IDEA that alligators are in those waters. SO WARN THEM going forward. Period. Simple, costless.

Many guests may also not know eating too many Mickey Ice Cream bars will make you fat, I look forward to the clear warnings on those as well.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

Heard today that the actual water is likely federally owned. Even though it's a man made lake on Disney property, if ANY of it is or has ever been fed by any stream or other lake, the Federal government actually owns the "water". That said, it was also said the Feds are immune from law suits in such situations.

MG

 

[A Mickeyfan]

And that is fine. Paddling is a British term to walk through water. I am just saying it is the plausible that he was further out than people are thinking.
View attachment 175714

I didn't know it was British for Wading. .thank you. Yes, I knew swim or use an orr

 

[20yBWDW]

And you are kidding yourself if a company as massive as Disney who is known for attention to detail hasn't had their legal teams clear the warnings they have on open waters.

Oh, I'm sure it was up for discussion, but lawyers don't have a crystal ball, nor do they overrule the decision makers. It's entirely possible that the legal team sent a memo outlining the risks of going with "No Swimming" instead of warnings of actual alligators, and that memo told them that if there was ever a fatality caused by an alligator, they would lose in court, but that someone said we'll take those chances. Because warning of actual alligators would take away from the ambiance that allows them to charge a small fortune, but they never thought there would be an actual alligator attack.

That kind of stuff happens all the time in corporations. It's why firms will go through tens of thousands of emails and documents at the expense of hiring hundreds of document review attorneys, all to find that one little gem where the company president was informed of the risk and said they'd accept it.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

Many guests may also not know eating too many Mickey Ice Cream bars will make you fat, I look forward to the clear warnings on those as well.

Give me a break. Ludicrous.

 

[bilnsheldodisney]

Give me a break. Ludicrous.

this is not even in the same ballpark!

 

[A Mickeyfan]

True. And this is why I think the most reasonable response is improved signage warning of potential danger from wildlife. Walls would be breached somehow by either wildlife OR people climbing them anyway. Just give people a real warning rather than a little "no swimming please" sign: View attachment 175711

Will the warnings deter someone from walking at waters edge? It is completely possible for this to happen again. A gator can lunge out to the edge and snatch a small child. Chances are slim, but it can happen

 

[TARAMEOW]

I really think this was a tragic Accident. Could the signs of been more clear? Possibly and I hope they make them more clear for the future. Should the parents have let the child into the water? perhaps not, but they did. Nobody I know is a perfect parent and I am certainly not either, We all do our best. There is an element of risk in everything we do, and all we can do is learn to be more vigilant from now on. Blaming somebody is not going to bring the child back.

Also putting up barriers may sound like a good idea but I don't think it would be very affective. There are greater risks to your child at the parks, injuries from ride malfunction, car/transportation accident, even more likely for them to choke on popcorn then be attacked by an alligator, but they will still ride the rides, eat the treats, and go to and from the parks. Chances are they will be fine because this really was a freak accident