From the OS: Gator drags child into Seven Seas Lagoon

[FrankLapidus]

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/20...rez-jimenez-alligator-attacks-fatal-alligator

Here's the incident I was talking about yesterday. I remember being so creeped out when it happened, it didn't mean everyone stopped going to parks though, or that the parks added any additional barriers. Attacks are so rare, but they can happen anywhere.

No but it's not really relevant; the discussion isn't how do you prevent all alligator attacks in the state of Florida, the discussion pertains to Walt Disney World.

I think that's part of the problem with the discussion, you seem to have taken concerns about the threat posed by alligators on Disney property and, as a local, have projected those concerns right across the whole state.

Disney aren't going to add additional barriers because of a random alligator attack elsewhere in the state in the same way that someone with a holiday planned at WDW isn't going to cancel because such an attack has taken place miles from the resort. Rightly or wrongly it was always going to take the problem arriving on Disney's doorstep for them to take those extra precautions that people have called for and debated since this happened.

A random alligator attack in Florida isn't an international news story, it doesn't have the traction of a fatal attack in Walt Disney World, the most popular tourist destination on Earth. And the ramifications of such an attack aren't the same, the circumstances are different when someone is killed by an alligator in a, or next to, a Florida lake or canal as opposed to someone being attacked and killed by one on a beach at Walt Disney World.

An element of common sense on the part of the public (not the family involved here but those who might be feeding the alligators) is required along with greater efforts by Disney to publicise the potential threats posed by natural bodies of water on their property.

Saying "It's Florida, this is rare but can happen" doesn't and isn't going to cut it. While I personally haven't and don't blame Disney for this tragedy, it's clear that they need to do something to ensure that an incident like this doesn't happen on their property again.

 

[flynnibus]

Did something new come out? I haven't read/watched anything about this incident today or last night, is the media pointing in this direction now?

No, just a bunch of anecdotal stories being told from one side.. and the media taking that to mean DISNEY DID NOTHING.

I have no doubt about stories of the rank and file CMs not making much of a fuss... they are instructed to NOT take action in conflicts and instead just pass the word onto someone else.. who is 'trained' for such things. Disney doesn't trust their front-line people period... they are to call others.

The story gets harder to interpret as you mix in what was actual management and policy response - but you don't have real facts in that matter, just the anecdotal observations from guests and low level CMs.

But none of that rational thinking stops media from running with stories and headlines about how Disney ignored the problem and taking quotes as if they were vetted gospel.

Certainly there is merit to the discussion of 'is the problem getting worse' due to factors like land management, potential changes in policy/operations, etc... but again this is just discussion and not 'findings'.

As to guests feeding gators... what do we see at every gator show and on TV??? making these seemingly dead still animals leap and surge by throwing food at them. And we wonder why people may try that themselves without thought of consequences???

 

[flynnibus]

Yep, when you put out a promotional image like this it's clear the hotel was built on the beach so that the beach could be enjoyed, not as an off limits wildlife preserve.

Sure, but promoting this...

Does not mean swimming in this...

This isn't just about a body of water... its also includes context of when, what, and how.

 

[s8film40]

I've stayed at these resorts several times. The lake water is not in anyway "inviting". The beach itself is, and should continue to be. I personally think the water is gross, even though you can see the bottom a few feet out. I let my child sit at the water's edge (where an alligator could also strike if they wanted to), I don't let him go in the water, especially the grassy areas- the latter due more to my fear of snakes. But I love sitting on those beaches. I love the peacefulness and look of the luau beach and the grassy water there. But not once during any of my trips in the past several years have I felt (or even seen advertised) that Disney "encouraged" or "invited" guests to go in the water.

I also want to mention that there are gorgeous fresh water springs and parks in Florida. These are all far away from where I lived, but we did go up to one near Ocala like 10 years ago. These parks are popular, probably more popular with central and north Floridians, and people still go- knowing that there could be an alligator. I think there has been an attack at one of them in the past, but the point that I keep repeating is- you can't live life thinking you will be attacked.

Not by a terrorist or crazy person. Not by a wild animal. Not by an alligator or crocodile. Not by a shark. Not thinking you will fall into a gorilla pit if there isn't plexiglass walls... We just can't live that way. We'd all be hyped up or zoned out on heavy prescription drugs holed up in our house.

We're not really talking about being in the water we're talking about being at the waters edge. That's where this incident happened and that's where alligators look for their prey.

 

[Nemo14]

Might be time to just close this thread out of respect for the family.

 

[s8film40]

Does not mean swimming in this...

I don't think anyone was swimming. Seeing a hotel advertised as a beach hotel I don't think I would look over all the promotional images see that they're during the daytime and come to the conclusion that an evening stroll along the beach must not be allowed since it's not in the photos. How do you draw such strange conclusions?

 

[21stamps]

We're not really talking about being in the water we're talking about being at the waters edge. That's where this incident happened and that's where alligators look for their prey.

Who's "we"? Half of this thread has been about the interpretation of a "no swimming" sign.


But regarding another alligator attack in Florida as not being relative.. When you realize that Florida is a series of bodies of water..with a small amount of land between them, as well as interconnecting water ways.. Then you will understand why it is relevant, and why Disney can not fully prevent alligators from coming onto their property. No one can.

 

[asianway]

People keep saying that Disney's Insurance Co. won't settle. Isn't Disney self insured? @ParentsOf4 can you help us on this?

They would be "self insured" but no company using that model is going to accept unlimited risk, they are going to want to transfer it at some point with a Stop-Loss policy. Think ultra-high deductible.

 

[asianway]

It will all depend on what comes out. If it turns out that Disney turned a blind eye when guests were doing this it could really hurt their case. Trespassing DVC members from their hotel is a very complicated matter and Disney management doesn't usually push things as far with DVC members for this reason. If a property owner is aware of crimes being committed on their property and consistently ignores them and the result is the death of a child, it could seriously diminish their case.

Im pretty sure the condominium rules allow for eviction when conducting illegal activities within the unit.

 

[s8film40]

Who's "we"? Half of this thread has been about the interpretation of a "no swimming" sign.

If someone wants to interpret walking along a beach as swimming thats fine, but we just need to understand the circumstances of this event occurred when someone was doing the type of swimming where they walk along the bach. The way we interpret the definition of the word doesn't change the circumstances.

 

[donsullivan]

I can't tell if it's embedded somewhere else in this thread but CNN released an interesting piece this morning that might be a good watch/read. it gives a perspective from someone who actually knows what he's talking about when it comes to gators; not all the armchair wildlife experts and lawyers. Definitely worth watching the video and reading it:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/16/us/airboat-captain-disney-gators/index.html

CNN is now playing the Click-Bait game. The version of this that shows up on their home page now says "Airboat Captain: Don't blame gators"

 

[s8film40]

Im pretty sure the condominium rules allow for eviction when conducting illegal activities within the unit.

Yes they do. I won't go into the details but I dealt with a situation with Disney security where someone was doing something illegal at their home hotel. They didn't want to go through all the hassle of evicting and trespassing them, so they essentially just waited to see if it was going to continually happen with the hope that they could just let it go and take the non confrontational route.

 

[asianway]

Yes they do. I won't go into the details but I dealt with a situation with Disney security where someone was doing something illegal at their home hotel. They didn't want to go through all the hassle of evicting and trespassing them, so they essentially just waited to see if it was going to continually happen with the hope that they could just let it go and take the non confrontational route.

Great...hope they poly owners are ready for the dues increase when they are named as a defendant in the lawsuit.

 

[21stamps]

If someone wants to interpret walking along a beach as swimming thats fine, but we just need to understand the circumstances of this event occurred when someone was doing the type of swimming where they walk along the bach. The way we interpret the definition of the word doesn't change the circumstances.

I know there are a ton of pages. But you may want to go back and read a few of them. Not being snarky.. But this convo has been heavily about the signage, if the parents broke rules by allowing their child in the water, etc. The boy was not swimming, but he was in the water. Regardless it could have happened even if he was at the edge playing in the sand.

Tragic blameless incident. That's all it is.

 

[flynnibus]

I don't think anyone was swimming. Seeing a hotel advertised as a beach hotel I don't think I would look over all the promotional images see that they're during the daytime and come to the conclusion that an evening stroll along the beach must not be allowed since it's not in the photos. How do you draw such strange conclusions?

Stroll along the beach during the day (like your photo) is not the same thing as strollling along the water or using a sail boat AT NIGHT. That's my point, don't gloss over the important distinctions.

The photo also doesn't show life preservers... are we to assume from those promotional images that they aren't needed when playing on the sailboat? Or how about sailing at night... that cool too from what you see in your photo?

Or maybe we should infer we can bring our own sail boat and park it on the beach!

Nothing about this incident really plays to what that image shows or conveys what measures someone takes in an activity. But instead you then want to take leaps from that to expand upon those to mean 'well its fine for night time too' -- this is your leap that my analogy was exposing. The daytime photo does not infer or project that there are no different dangers involved when you do something like.. make it nighttime.

It's ridiculous to point at these (dated) images and try to infer what is allowed or not from them. Besides, we all know Disney's quagmire about the beachfront and its identity has been a problem for AGES. They are part of the design, yet Disney has tried to relegate them down to be visual features only for a long time now. Disney's bipolar approach to resort recreation and resorts vs simple hotels has created this 'hung in the middle state' of the resorts for almost two decades.

I would expect a slow migration away from the beach concepts as the properties evolve... Disney has been half-pregnant on this topic for a long time... certainly this kind of incident will be impetuous to get over the hump. Much like the fencing topic around the existing pools was a similar topic that languished, yet found new life after incidents.

No body walks the grounds of the Poly or GF, sees wildlife, and says 'OMG, I can't believe that bird is actually here.. this is all an artificial environment Disney fully controls!'.. because we all have the common sense to recognize the managed and manicured grounds are all wide open and surrounded by open spaces. Disney manages pests, they don't create a Biosphere.

 

[21stamps]

Stroll along the beach during the day (like your photo) is not the same thing as strollling along the water or using a sail boat AT NIGHT. That's my point, don't gloss over the important distinctions.

The photo also doesn't show life preservers... are we to assume from those promotional images that they aren't needed when playing on the sailboat? Or how about sailing at night... that cool too from what you see in your photo?

Or maybe we should infer we can bring our own sail boat and park it on the beach!

Nothing about this incident really plays to what that image shows or conveys what measures someone takes in an activity. But instead you then want to take leaps from that to expand upon those to mean 'well its fine for night time too' -- this is your leap that my analogy was exposing. The daytime photo does not infer or project that there are no different dangers involved when you do something like.. make it nighttime.

It's ridiculous to point at these (dated) images and try to infer what is allowed or not from them. Besides, we all know Disney's quagmire about the beachfront and its identity has been a problem for AGES. They are part of the design, yet Disney has tried to relegate them down to be visual features only for a long time now. Disney's bipolar approach to resort recreation and resorts vs simple hotels has created this 'hung in the middle state' of the resorts for almost two decades.

I would expect a slow migration away from the beach concepts as the properties evolve... Disney has been half-pregnant on this topic for a long time... certainly this kind of incident will be impetuous to get over the hump. Much like the fencing topic around the existing pools was a similar topic that languished, yet found new life after incidents.

No body walks the grounds of the Poly or GF, sees wildlife, and says 'OMG, I can't believe that bird is actually here.. this is all an artificial environment Disney fully controls!'.. because we all have the common sense to recognize the managed and manicured grounds are all wide open and surrounded by open spaces. Disney manages pests, they don't create a Biosphere.

After 102 pages.. This is the BEST post I have read.

 

[FrankLapidus]

But regarding another alligator attack in Florida as not being relative.. When you realize that Florida is a series of bodies of water..with a small amount of land between them, as well as interconnecting water ways.. Then you will understand why it is relevant, and why Disney can not fully prevent alligators from coming onto their property. No one can.

No one with any degree of common sense here has said that they should be able to prevent that.

What they can do, and what they've already begun doing with the signs they've begun to put up on their beaches, is take steps to ensure that guests on their property have no reason or excuse not to be aware of the risks posed by natural bodies of water and consequently minimise the risk of this ever happening again.

If guests choose to ignore those steps and take those risks regardless then responsibility for any harm that might befall them lies with themselves.

 

[PhotoDave219]

No, just a bunch of anecdotal stories being told from one side.. and the media taking that to mean DISNEY DID NOTHING.

I have no doubt about stories of the rank and file CMs not making much of a fuss... they are instructed to NOT take action in conflicts and instead just pass the word onto someone else.. who is 'trained' for such things. Disney doesn't trust their front-line people period... they are to call others.

The story gets harder to interpret as you mix in what was actual management and policy response - but you don't have real facts in that matter, just the anecdotal observations from guests and low level CMs.

But none of that rational thinking stops media from running with stories and headlines about how Disney ignored the problem and taking quotes as if they were vetted gospel.

Certainly there is merit to the discussion of 'is the problem getting worse' due to factors like land management, potential changes in policy/operations, etc... but again this is just discussion and not 'findings'.

As to guests feeding gators... what do we see at every gator show and on TV??? making these seemingly dead still animals leap and surge by throwing food at them. And we wonder why people may try that themselves without thought of consequences???

I think there's some managers that really poo-pooed the problem or drastically underestimated the problem they pose and the problem feeding them poses.

I can see people getting fired over this.

 

[s8film40]

I know there are a ton of pages. But you may want to go back and read a few of them. Not being snarky.. But this convo has been heavily about the signage, if the parents broke rules by allowing their child in the water, etc. The boy was not swimming, but he was in the water. Regardless it could have happened even if he was at the edge playing in the sand.

Tragic blameless incident. That's all it is.

Well I think if this thread proves anything it's that not everyone associates swimming with walking along the beach. The argument would then be did they break the rules and/or were these rules explained adequately. Looking at the opinions on this thread it's safe to say that that is at the very least in question.

 

[Incomudro]

Stroll along the beach during the day (like your photo) is not the same thing as strollling along the water or using a sail boat AT NIGHT. That's my point, don't gloss over the important distinctions.

The photo also doesn't show life preservers... are we to assume from those promotional images that they aren't needed when playing on the sailboat? Or how about sailing at night... that cool too from what you see in your photo?

Or maybe we should infer we can bring our own sail boat and park it on the beach!

Nothing about this incident really plays to what that image shows or conveys what measures someone takes in an activity. But instead you then want to take leaps from that to expand upon those to mean 'well its fine for night time too' -- this is your leap that my analogy was exposing. The daytime photo does not infer or project that there are no different dangers involved when you do something like.. make it nighttime.

It's ridiculous to point at these (dated) images and try to infer what is allowed or not from them. Besides, we all know Disney's quagmire about the beachfront and its identity has been a problem for AGES. They are part of the design, yet Disney has tried to relegate them down to be visual features only for a long time now. Disney's bipolar approach to resort recreation and resorts vs simple hotels has created this 'hung in the middle state' of the resorts for almost two decades.

I would expect a slow migration away from the beach concepts as the properties evolve... Disney has been half-pregnant on this topic for a long time... certainly this kind of incident will be impetuous to get over the hump. Much like the fencing topic around the existing pools was a similar topic that languished, yet found new life after incidents.

No body walks the grounds of the Poly or GF, sees wildlife, and says 'OMG, I can't believe that bird is actually here.. this is all an artificial environment Disney fully controls!'.. because we all have the common sense to recognize the managed and manicured grounds are all wide open and surrounded by open spaces. Disney manages pests, they don't create a Biosphere.

Then, how about an image of movie might? Full of little kids.
Would that work for you?
Do you really mean to tell me that guests are supposed to know better than to go down to the waters edge?
You continually state what you know, with little consideration about what the average guest knows. Some of the guests come from the other side of the Atlantic.
They are not doing wildlife prep homework when booking their Disney hotel as though they are booking an airboat ride through the everglades.