From the OS: Gator drags child into Seven Seas Lagoon

[matt9112]

I think that's a major assumption. So the bungalows are at fault because people staying in the bungalows feed them?

no disneys at fault for building lodging on top of gator habitat and not warning and or enforcing no feed rules....hard to toss somebody out that just paid 3 grand eh? feeding certain animals is an annoyance feeding an aligator is deadly. more importantly disney cast members told higher ups a problem with guests feeding alligators was occuring and nothing changed.

 

[Incomudro]

Here's the thing though...
The beaches of say the Grand Floridian are not just any area where land meets freshwater in Florida.
They are a groomed area designed to attract guests to the waters edge.
Beach chairs, movies, fireworks etc. just a few steps away from ones hotel room.
Many guests have small children with them, something an alligator is more likely to attempt to take.
Decades ago, the alligator situation in WDW was obviously different. Heck, at 52 years old, I'm old enough to remember when alligators were an endangered species.
If Disney was aware that there is a sizable alligator population in its waters off of its hotel beaches, it is not unreasonable that they should have had signage to alert people of an alligator presence.

 

[s8film40]

I think that's a major assumption. So the bungalows are at fault because people staying in the bungalows feed them?

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.

 

[21stamps]

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.

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?

 

[thomas998]

It's quite foreseeable that a little kid would want to pet a cute armadillo at night. And just by petting or having the armadillos sneeze on the kid the kid could contract leporosy and die.

While the chances of that are very small tell that to the parents.

a kid petting an armadillo is about as likely as a kid petting a wild rabbit... The kid might want to pet it but unless it was road kill the kid wont be able to catch it, they are afraid of people and would run away.

 

[s8film40]

Here's the thing though...
The beaches of say the Grand Floridian are not just any area where land meets freshwater in Florida.
They are a groomed area designed to attract guests to the waters edge.
Beach chairs, movies, fireworks etc. just a few steps away from ones hotel room.

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.

 

[Hakunamatata]

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?

And herein lies the problem. The media should not be pointing in any direction. The media should be reporting factual information and let the individuals involved either come to an agreement about who is at fault, if any, or proceed to a legal remedy.

 

[s8film40]

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?

There's an article stating CM's are coming forward saying that they had warned of this problem because they had seen a large rise in guests feeding the alligators.

 

[thomas998]

Tell that to the parents who let their kid pet an armadillo filled with leporosy.

The chances of that happening are very small but the chances of being killed by an alligator are also incredibly small. 100 times less likely than being struck by lightning and killed.

How did armadillos with leprosy suddenly become such a big deal? I mean leprosy isn't something someone would want to contract but its completely treatable so it isn't fatal....

 

[peter11435]

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.

Except that image was released 30 years ago when it was called Disney's Grand Floridian Beach Resort. They have since changed the name of the resort to remove the word beach, removed most of the beach itself, and installed no swimming signs.

 

[ParentsOf4]

Wouldn't a lawyer have to prove that guests feeding gators and Disney letting them continue doing that was the direct cause of this attack though? I don't think that can really be proven.

As I understand it, it has to be a "knowable" danger and Disney must have failed to take sufficient action to address that knowable danger in order for Disney to be found negligent.

Disney employs wildlife experts. These experts know (or should be expected to know) that alligators are more active at night. They know the risk of humans feeding animals. They also know alligators tend to congregate at water's edge.

Disney held a "movie nights" event on the beach next to a location where alligators are likely to be found.

Disney did little-to-nothing to warn Guests about alligators. Disney failed to warn or prevent Guests from feeding them. Disney facilitated an activity that brought these Guests in close proximity to alligators when they are most active without providing additional protection.

For these reasons and others, it appears that Disney was negligent.

 

[thomas998]

And herein lies the problem. The media should not be pointing in any direction. The media should be reporting factual information and let the individuals involved either come to an agreement about who is at fault, if any, or proceed to a legal remedy.

You have a lot high expectation of what the media will do... They haven't had an interest in simply reporting fact for a very long time. They are a business that wants to make money and facts don't sell nearly as well as a good story.

 

[Tiggerish]

There will always be the "thrill-seeker" guests who will insist on feeding them because it's exciting to do something that's forbidden.

Those guests should then experience the thrill of being ejected from a theme park or resort.

 

[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

 

[s8film40]

Except that image was released 30 years ago when it was called Disney's Grand Floridian Beach Resort. They have since changed the name of the resort to remove the word beach, removed most of the beach itself, and installed no swimming signs.

Yeah I agree with that to a point, but the hotel was obviously built as a beachfront hotel. The beach is still utilized for recreational activities. This is all a reason Disney wouldn't want to push the perception that there are alligators in the lake.

 

[Incomudro]

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.

My point exactly.
I keep hearing people allude to things like; "It's Florida, what were they doing by the water?" "Don't they know?" "Or, that water's gross, I wouldn't put a toe in."
The average guest who books the Grand Floridian cannot be blamed for believing that they along with their family can stroll along that beach.
I love Disney as much as anybody, and I'm a quick parent blamer and Disney supporter.
But if Disney was aware of an active gator population, possibly being fed - they owed it to guests to have some gator warning signs, not just "no swimming."

 

[ratherbeinwdw]

Disney had even been warned about this problem, by a lawyer, last year when another child was threatened by a gator at Coronado Springs. Several cm's have come forward to say they asked for a fence around the resort part of the lagoon. Gators have gone from an endangered species to now being more than one and a half million in Florida alone. They live for up to 50 years and lay 20 or more eggs at a time.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Signs won't fix this problem. Stopping guests from feeding the gators is.

 

[21stamps]

Yeah I agree with that to a point, but the hotel was obviously built as a beachfront hotel. The beach is still utilized for recreational activities. This is all a reason Disney wouldn't want to push the perception that there are alligators in the lake.

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.

 

[Ariel1986]

Whether or not anyone's liable, apart from perhaps initial anger and need for closure- why on earth would the parents care for money? They've lost their son. No amount can "compensate" that. I understand security and peace of mind for costs that will come about from the tragedy, of course would be of help. The trauma could prevent either of the parents from working, so I understand where money could help there also. They don't need any further stress. But when people throw about arguments over the difference in millions they could/should get or fight for, like it's an achievement, what's up with that? I would think it's the last thing on their minds- and even years down the line, how could you ever spend these millions knowing how they came about? I can't see them fighting for anything other than the need for awareness and remembrance of their son. This also isn't meant to be judgemental- I wouldn't judge them whether they did sue or not. It's more people talking about the amounts and what they deserve. I just don't see how money could ever help. There are no winners here. The poor family.