"Akit is the man. He knows Clipper." (spenta)
"It’s a fantastic blog for any San Franciscan."
"Your blog is always on point, and well researched!" (Nina Decker)
"Everyone's favorite volunteer public policy consultant..." (Eve Batey, SF Appeal)
"You are doing a great job keeping on top of Translink stuff. Keep up the good work!"
(Greg Dewar, N Judah Chronicles)
"...I don't even bother subscribing anywhere else for my local public transportation info. You have it all..."
(Empowered Follower)
"If anyone at City Hall wants to make public transit better for all San Franciscans, it would be wise to follow Akit religiously...
or, better yet, give him a job."
(Brock Keeling, SFist)

Thursday, January 3, 2008

My Opinion on the San Francisco Zoo Tragedy

The San Francisco Zoo has had some bad incidents in the past years, from an elephant dying, to a lady being mauled by a tiger. Even more tragic is that one man was killed, and two were mauled (and survived) by the same tiger that attacked a keeper. AND THIS WAS ON CHRISTMAS DAY!

Now, this story has hit the national headlines big time, and this story is not going away that easy... OK, maybe in a month, just like the Cosco Busan oil spill incident. Our local news outlets don't even talk about the oil spill anymore.

There's this huge blame game going around, and it always seems that when things get really f-ed up, you always call the best "spin" public speakers and lawyers in the nation to screw around with the story. Lets see what they have to say:

The Zoo: They claim that the tiger was taunted by the three (now possibly four) people that were allegedly involved. They also claim that they had a quick enough response.

The lawyer for the mauled men: They did not taunt the tiger and zoo employees at the nearby cafe refused to let the men hide in the facility.

My analysis: The zoo is responsible for this incident. Regardless if an animal is taunted or not, it is the responsibility of the San Francisco Zoo to build safe exhibits that prevent animal escapes in the first place. For the tiger grotto, the wall was NOT HIGH ENOUGH to repel the animal.

Also, there's word that the tiger had some cement in her claws, which is a sign that somehow the animal was able to climb the wall. I wonder what the condition of the wall is? Was it in good condition, where it is smooth and not possible to break apart so that the animal could not climb the wall? Or was the wall in poor condition, where the wall was not smooth (rocky) or in bad condition, that even a human could do some rock climbing on that thing?

So what's going to happen now?
-- I think that the zoo better be ready to take on a million dollar settlement. The zoo is held responsible for holding a DANGEROUS animal that is their responsibility. They built a grotto that is not high enough, and did not provide quick enough response to evacuate the area and respond to the incident. And now... they are to install a PA system... yeah, could have been installed decades ago; idiots.

I'd fire the entire zoo management for this fuck-up. Especially the guy who's getting paid over $100,000+ a year to "manage" this bullshit facility. Even better, close down the damn place if they cannot pay to maintain the facility. Why waste my tax dollars on a place that is inadequate in the name of safety?

What's wrong with this city?
  1. Muni sucks.
  2. The cops can't control the lower east side of town.
  3. A zoo that is basically unsafe.
  4. A Mayor who went to rehab.
  5. A Mayor involved in a sex scandal.
  6. Overpaid city "managers."
  7. The 311 operators are operated by a bunch of retards.
  8. Things change only when someone gets killed, such as the zoo incident.

No comments: