Alligator Drags Toddler Into Lagoon at Disney Resort

[kenny]

Wow.
I thought gators were only in FL.
I had no idea their range was so large.

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/uw230

 

[Calliecake]

Honest question here for those who live in FL. (They know best.)
Is is reasonable to expect a large body of water in Florida would be, could be, gator free?

I can imagine this only where there is a solid tall fence of a material like brick and where the body of water is a swimming pool with a cement bottom and sides, with clear enough water and light enough bottom to SEE such a creature.

That Disney is all-powerful family-friendly Disney, and that this is a tourist resort does not change nature.
It's not a Magic Kingdom. (Sorry, but the pun was just sitting there.)

Kenny, I was speaking about this with my father this morning who has lived in Florida for the past 35 years. Apparently alligators are extremely fast. Even if the child was a few feel away from the water the alligator could have grabbed the child and been back in the water in no time. He said this probably happened so quickly that nothing could have been done to save the child. The reports I have read stated that the father tried to fight the alligator. I can't imagine what these poor parents are going thru.

 

[kenny]

A No Swimming sign is inadequate to protect against gators.

Sure, the kid wasn't 'swimming'.
Reportedly he was wading in 1-ft deep water when the gator snatched him.
But I've seen nature docs of gators waiting motionless and still, underwater, at the water's edge with only their nostrils and eyes above water, hardly noticeable when the bottom is dark and muddy ... especially at night.

They wait for the prey to stand close enough to the water and not even in the water.
Then the gator quickly runs up and grabs the victim and drags it into the water to drown it.
Its so fast it's over in the blink of an eye.

That's why a No Swimming sign is inadequate to protect against gators.

I agree, Kenny.

People are always so quick to blame parents for these types of tragic accidents, and it makes me so sad. It really could have happened to anyone in this instance. Nobody at any of these resorts should assume their family is safe.

Hold on; I do blame the parents.
I don't care if the ARE from Nebraska, they should have known what I just posted.
I sure as hell would research local dangers (like higher UV index closer to the equator so get a high-SPF sunscreen) before bringing my kids somewhere.
I know about the surprising dangers of gators and I'm not even a parent.

This whole Happiest-Place-on-Earth so NOTHING bad could ever happen in Disney's protective bubble is a big crock.
Parents are responsible to protect their kids from harm.
They should get educated!

Yeah yeah yeah, this was a great tragedy and I do feel enormous sympathy for the family but ten times more for that poor boy.
I cannot imagine a worse fate.

Sorry but this is a classic example of Darwinism.
Both sentiments (sympathy while assigning parental responsibility) are fully appropriate at this time and to not cancel each other out.

 

[Calliecake]

People are really hypocrites. If a young woman gets black-out wasted from binge drinking in public, it's okay and she is not going to be held accountable if something bad happens to her. She has no responsibility to educate herself and keep herself safe. But now these poor parents are at fault that their kid got killed by an alligator? Because they were not being responsible somehow (when it still isn't even clear if this is the case)? Come on. You can't have it both ways. They were at a resort with tons of other vacationers. Nowhere has any article stated that the parents were in a restricted area or doing something wrong.

All I can say is WOW. I sincerely hope you don't have a college age daughter.

 

[momhappy]

Listen, this is a terrible tragedy. But this is Florida. Alligators live here. There are something like 30,000 lakes in this state. Plus alligators are SMART and they give no shits about your fences and deterrents. This family was not swimming in a "Disney beach" - they were swimming in a restricted area behind the resort with clearly marked signs that say "DO NOT SWIM." I can't be pissed if I go visit Colorado and go hiking, walk off trail to an area that says "Do Not Hike" and get mauled by a cougar.

Not one for empathy, eh?

BTW, how did you learn this was a restricted area?

I agree. The lack of empathy in some of the posts (not singling out any one particular post) is a little disheartening. Thousands of people visit Florida each year and I don't think it's fair to say that everyone should be 100% aware of the fact that there are alligators everywhere. I can see how a family from Nebraska might not understand that alligators are a serious threat - especially while on a family vacation at a high-end Disney resort.... Also, yes, there was "no swimming" signs posted, but from my understanding, they weren't swimming. The boy was only ankle-deep and while I understand that they were in a restricted area, I think the situation deserves a little more empathy. People loooovvveee to place blame..... and no matter where you point fingers, it still doesn't change the end result, which is a tragic loss of life.

 

[CJ2008]

A No Swimming sign is inadequate to protect against gators.

Sure, the kid wasn't 'swimming'.
Reportedly he was wading in 1-ft deep water when the gator snatched him.
But I've seen nature docs of gators waiting motionless and still, underwater, at the water's edge with only their nostrils and eyes above water, hardly noticeable when the bottom is dark and muddy ... especially at night.

They wait for the prey to stand close enough to the water and not even in the water.
Then the gator quickly runs up and grabs the victim and drags it into the water to drown it.
Its so fast it's over in the blink of an eye.

That's why a No Swimming sign is inadequate to protect against gators.

Right.

Whether you live in Florida or not, or whether you should have known about it as common sense.

 

[Bonfire]

This is what nightmares are made of!!! Prayers all around.

 

[kenny]

CNN has a banner, no story yet, that the boy's body has been found.
News conference soon.

 

[CJ2008]

I feel like you can have empathy and STILL be able to look at the facts as to why something happened and / or how it could have been prevented.

Just because someone is at fault or not about why something happened doesn't negate being able to FEEL for them.

Of course it's much easier to feel for someone when something totally couldn't have been helped or prevented - but even if it is the parents' "fault" you can still feel the part that is their loss / pain at losing a child. Especially when it's not black / white but more of a gray area when so many variables / factors are present.

Now...if say there were huge signs all over the place warning of alligators, and the parents at the bar drinking and not watching the child ...in other words when it is so OBVIOUS the parents were negligent then it would be much much more difficult to feel empathy. And in that case I probably would feel none. Or very very little.

But in this case where it's gray I think most people are able to feel empathy and still see both sides of the issue - and what the parents could have done better without negating being able to feel for the horror they went through and their loss.

 

[Laila619]

People are really hypocrites. If a young woman gets black-out wasted from binge drinking in public, it's okay and she is not going to be held accountable if something bad happens to her. She has no responsibility to educate herself and keep herself safe. But now these poor parents are at fault that their kid got killed by an alligator? Because they were not being responsible somehow (when it still isn't even clear if this is the case)? Come on. You can't have it both ways. They were at a resort with tons of other vacationers. Nowhere has any article stated that the parents were in a restricted area or doing something wrong.

All I can say is WOW. I sincerely hope you don't have a college age daughter.

I have two sweet baby girls. Not college age though.

 

[Laila619]

I think placing blame makes people feel better; this sort of thing will not happen to them because they have more common sense, they are better prepared, etc.

So sad, every parent's worst nightmare. I hope the poor dad isn't blaming himself for not being able to "fight" off the gator. Alligator attacks are very rare, why should they expect it would happen to them? There probably has never been a gator attack resulting in someone's death in the history of the resort.

 

[kenny]

I just watched the police news conference, live.
Divers found the body intact 10-15 feet from shore in 6 ft deep murky water.
It is presumed, pre autopsy, the cause of death was drowning.

I'm glad he was found intact.
Hopefully the family can find a bit of solace in that and closure compare to the alternative of being ingested by the gator.

They are not sure they have found the 'guilty' gator and will continue the search till they are sure they have.
I presume this means once a gator attacks a human it may be more likely to do so again than a gator that has no 'record'.

 

[CJ2008]

OMG that poor little boy



Seriously I have no words.

I keep visualizing his small body. I don't know why this is hitting me so real and hard.

ETA and I'm also glad now they can stop gutting the poor alligators.

 

[telephone89]

I just watched the police news conference, live.
The boy's body was found intact 10-15 feet from shore in 6 ft deep murky water.
It is presumed, pre autopsy, cause of death was drowning.

I'm glad he was found intact.
Hopefully the family can find a bit of solace in that and closure compare to the alternative of being ingested by the gator.

That actually makes me a bit more sad for the family. It makes it seem so unnecessary. The animal wasn't hungry enough to eat him. It just killed him and left him =\ Poor kid.
I do think finding the body will bring closure for the family, and enable them to have a nice service.

 

[purplesparklies]

Comments on a parenting forum mention that this area, while posted as a No Swimming area, is a sandy beach that is a common place for guests to gather and watch the nightly fireworks. Also, there are water sports that occur in this lake. Jet skiing and waterskiing were mentioned. Apparently, waterskiing lessons are available here. This would certainly lead people to believe that the environment is safe. It is just such an awful situation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[kenny]

ETA and I'm also glad now they can stop gutting the poor alligators.

Maybe not.
They are not sure that they've found the guilty gator.
They will do forensic analysis (bite mark comparisons) on the five gators they have already euthanized and if there is no match they will continue the hunt.
I presume this is not about punishment at much as it is about destroying an animal that has killed one human, and they reason may kill again.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

People are really hypocrites. If a young woman gets black-out wasted from binge drinking in public, it's okay and she is not going to be held accountable if something bad happens to her. She has no responsibility to educate herself and keep herself safe. But now these poor parents are at fault that their kid got killed by an alligator? Because they were not being responsible somehow (when it still isn't even clear if this is the case)? Come on. You can't have it both ways. They were at a resort with tons of other vacationers. Nowhere has any article stated that the parents were in a restricted area or doing something wrong.

All I can say is WOW. I sincerely hope you don't have a college age daughter.

I actually do have a college age daughter, and long before that incident, I told her a lot of things to keep herself safe, and first and foremost is to remain in sound mind at all times and to never get drunk so that she would not be reasonably in control of her circumstances. Another is to never be alone without a friend at a party or anywhere at night, basically. That is being responsible. Bad things can happen even when we ARE responsible, but we are at far greater risk of something bad happening when we are totally wasted. I happen to have experience in that area being once young and stupid, and I directly told my girls the risks. During the early fall of my youngest daughter's freshman year, the girl from the college in VA was kidnapped, raped, and killed. YES, the murderer is to blame for her death 100%!!! But, had she not been very drunk and had the safety net of staying with friends, she might still be here today.

I would say these parents just didn't understand the potential danger of the no swimming signs. I really do not fault them at all, and I cannot imagine their pain. I am very thankful they have found the child so they can at least have some closure. So very sad.

 

[CJ2008]

ETA and I'm also glad now they can stop gutting the poor alligators.

Maybe not.
They are not sure that they've found the guilty gator.
They will do forensic analysis (bite mark comparisons) on the five gators they have already euthanized and if there is no match they will continue the hunt.

Wait - are you saying the alligator is going to get pursued as if it did something wrong?

I don't know enough about alligators - but would not all gators would go after a human if given the chance? Or is it a known fact that some are "aggressive" and some aren't? Because that would the the ONLY just reason for going after the alligator.

And if that IS the case then the OTHER 3 or 4 that were gutted is even more of a shame.

 

[azstonie]

I've held the responsibility for signage at Alaska sites where unexploded ordnance is known, as well as at toxic and hazardous waste sites (you wouldn't know it had toxic and hazardous waste simply by looking). When you design signage to keep people out, or advise regarding activities, the 'standard' for signage is to use both a picture-type representation as well as words, so signage at that lake/lagoon required a pic/symbol/drawing of an alligator in addition to DANGER-ALLIGATORS PRESENT-NO SWIMMING-NO SUNNING, with a pic;/symbol/drawing of those activities with the slanted line running through them to indicate DO NOT.

Disney knows all of this, its standard when handling institutional controls at dangerous or potentially dangerous sites.

In addition, Disney has guests from all over the world, English is not everybody's default language, so a pic/drawing/symbol of an alligator and even a skull/crossbones (internationally recognized symbol for mortal danger) was called for here.

 

[kenny]

ETA and I'm also glad now they can stop gutting the poor alligators.

Maybe not.
They are not sure that they've found the guilty gator.
They will do forensic analysis (bite mark comparisons) on the five gators they have already euthanized and if there is no match they will continue the hunt.

Wait - are you saying the alligator is going to get pursued as if it did something wrong?

I don't know enough about alligators - but would not all gators would go after a human if given the chance? Or is it a known fact that some are "aggressive" and some aren't? Because that would the the ONLY just reason for going after the alligator.

And if that IS the case then the OTHER 3 or 4 that were gutted is even more of a shame.

It may be instinct/natural ... but humans don't take too kindly to animals killing their children.
When an animal does it once humans want that particular animal destroyed.

 

[CJ2008]

I've held the responsibility for signage at Alaska sites where unexploded ordnance is known, as well as at toxic and hazardous waste sites (you wouldn't know it had toxic and hazardous waste simply by looking). When you design signage to keep people out, or advise regarding activities, the 'standard' for signage is to use both a picture-type representation as well as words, so signage at that lake/lagoon required a pic/symbol/drawing of an alligator in addition to DANGER-ALLIGATORS PRESENT-NO SWIMMING-NO SUNNING, with a pic;/symbol/drawing of those activities with the slanted line running through them to indicate DO NOT.

Disney knows all of this, its standard when handling institutional controls at dangerous or potentially dangerous sites.

In addition, Disney has guests from all over the world, English is not everybody's default language, so a pic/drawing/symbol of an alligator and even a skull/crossbones (internationally recognized symbol for mortal danger) was called for here.

Good point about the picture. Yes, people come from all over the world with all different languages and levels of intelligence and common sense. It's first and foremost on Disney to communicate any and all dangers clearly.

 

[kenny]

I've held the responsibility for signage at Alaska sites where unexploded ordnance is known, as well as at toxic and hazardous waste sites (you wouldn't know it had toxic and hazardous waste simply by looking). When you design signage to keep people out, or advise regarding activities, the 'standard' for signage is to use both a picture-type representation as well as words, so signage at that lake/lagoon required a pic/symbol/drawing of an alligator in addition to DANGER-ALLIGATORS PRESENT-NO SWIMMING-NO SUNNING, with a pic;/symbol/drawing of those activities with the slanted line running through them to indicate DO NOT.

Disney knows all of this, its standard when handling institutional controls at dangerous or potentially dangerous sites.

In addition, Disney has guests from all over the world, English is not everybody's default language, so a pic/drawing/symbol of an alligator and even a skull/crossbones (internationally recognized symbol for mortal danger) was called for here.

But they'd lose money by scaring customers.
By Disney having less-scary signs they've probably made 10 times the money that they'll pay out to this family.

Disney a publically-traded business.
There are shareholders to answer to.

Follow the money ... remember?

 

[CJ2008]

ETA and I'm also glad now they can stop gutting the poor alligators.

Maybe not.
They are not sure that they've found the guilty gator.
They will do forensic analysis (bite mark comparisons) on the five gators they have already euthanized and if there is no match they will continue the hunt.

Wait - are you saying the alligator is going to get pursued as if it did something wrong?

I don't know enough about alligators - but would not all gators would go after a human if given the chance? Or is it a known fact that some are "aggressive" and some aren't? Because that would the the ONLY just reason for going after the alligator.

And if that IS the case then the OTHER 3 or 4 that were gutted is even more of a shame.

It may be instinct/natural ... but humans don't take too kindly to animals killing their children.
When an animal does it once humans want that particular animal destroyed.

Yes, I've heard of that being done to sharks too. The one story that really bothered me was a surfer going after the shark that had bit him like the day after and killing him. You're in the water. That's where the shark LIVES.

And how did he know it was even the same shark?

Again here I don't know enough about sharks - if it's a scientific fact that there are aggressive versus non aggressive sharks then I could entertain the idea. If done properly and by someone who can sure ID the right shark.

Otherwise, it's just cruel and not right.

 

[azstonie]

I've held the responsibility for signage at Alaska sites where unexploded ordnance is known, as well as at toxic and hazardous waste sites (you wouldn't know it had toxic and hazardous waste simply by looking). When you design signage to keep people out, or advise regarding activities, the 'standard' for signage is to use both a picture-type representation as well as words, so signage at that lake/lagoon required a pic/symbol/drawing of an alligator in addition to DANGER-ALLIGATORS PRESENT-NO SWIMMING-NO SUNNING, with a pic;/symbol/drawing of those activities with the slanted line running through them to indicate DO NOT.

Disney knows all of this, its standard when handling institutional controls at dangerous or potentially dangerous sites.

In addition, Disney has guests from all over the world, English is not everybody's default language, so a pic/drawing/symbol of an alligator and even a skull/crossbones (internationally recognized symbol for mortal danger) was called for here.

But they'd lose money by scaring customers.
By Disney having less-scary signs they've probably made 10 times the money that they'll pay out to this family.

Disney a publically-traded business.
There are shareholders to answer to.

Follow the money ... remember?

Agreed.

Many of the entities that were fined in Alaska for their toxic and hazardous waste dumping simply included the fines in their yearly budgets.

 

[packrat]

animals don't have that reasoning like we do of oh that's a hamburger, I like those, I'm eating that. Eh, that's a hot dog blah. They don't have hands to feel something, their "nibbles" are at times fatal. So, as in with sharks, they investigate what's in their territory w/their mouths. They're not gentle like your dog handing you the ball in his mouth or taking a treat from your hand. It's a wild animal, not a domesticated pet. They have to swim fast and check shit out-some prey bites back or has the ability to inflict pain on them-those weird eyelid things roll over to protect eyes, and they attack from below, sometimes very forcefully and breech the water. There's no, ugh shit is this a human or a seal..hmm..I better go eyeball it to be sure before I eat it. Predatory instinct. vibrations in the water = food. Dark shadows seen from below = food.

I found a shark forum many years ago, and I still am friends w/several of the posters there. There was *so* much debate on there about consumption and investigatory bites. I don't believe that if a shark bites a human it will continue doing it on purpose necessarily, (Jaws, anyone? No) as in that's a human I'm eating it-we aren't what it wants to eat--but if we look like what it wants to eat, of course it's going to try a taste. Sometimes they come and take a bite and swim away, then come back to check it out again. Sometimes they take a bite and eh that's not what I'm looking for. Humans aren't built to take that, and it's oftentimes fatal. A lot of times not, however. The general consensus was being more comfortable in the water w/a Great White than w/an alligator.

Alligators are different in that they will consume, to the best of my knowledge. But I don't know that they would be any different as far as *specifically* seeking out humans to the exclusion of their natural prey. Predatory animals are opportunistic-if somethings there it's maybe going to want to eat it. Given the choice of natural prey and a human, I would think the animal would go for natural prey. But if the animal is there and no other natural prey is in the immediate vicinity, and you are..well..it stands to reason you would be in line to be checked out.

 

[sonnyjane]

animals don't have that reasoning like we do of oh that's a hamburger, I like those, I'm eating that. Eh, that's a hot dog blah. They don't have hands to feel something, their "nibbles" are at times fatal. So, as in with sharks, they investigate what's in their territory w/their mouths. They're not gentle like your dog handing you the ball in his mouth or taking a treat from your hand. It's a wild animal, not a domesticated pet. They have to swim fast and check shit out-some prey bites back or has the ability to inflict pain on them-those weird eyelid things roll over to protect eyes, and they attack from below, sometimes very forcefully and breech the water. There's no, ugh shit is this a human or a seal..hmm..I better go eyeball it to be sure before I eat it. Predatory instinct. vibrations in the water = food. Dark shadows seen from below = food.

I found a shark forum many years ago, and I still am friends w/several of the posters there. There was *so* much debate on there about consumption and investigatory bites. I don't believe that if a shark bites a human it will continue doing it on purpose necessarily, (Jaws, anyone? No) as in that's a human I'm eating it-we aren't what it wants to eat--but if we look like what it wants to eat, of course it's going to try a taste. Sometimes they come and take a bite and swim away, then come back to check it out again. Sometimes they take a bite and eh that's not what I'm looking for. Humans aren't built to take that, and it's oftentimes fatal. A lot of times not, however. The general consensus was being more comfortable in the water w/a Great White than w/an alligator.

Alligators are different in that they will consume, to the best of my knowledge. But I don't know that they would be any different as far as *specifically* seeking out humans to the exclusion of their natural prey. Predatory animals are opportunistic-if somethings there it's maybe going to want to eat it. Given the choice of natural prey and a human, I would think the animal would go for natural prey. But if the animal is there and no other natural prey is in the immediate vicinity, and you are..well..it stands to reason you would be in line to be checked out.

Lots of misinformation here that I, as a marine biologist, take umbrage with. Sharks absolutely do have the ability to distinguish between prey items and absolutely do have different "levels" of bites, sometimes slow and investigative, sometimes leaping at full speed out of the water ("air jaws"). What varies is the visibility in the water, which is why they say don't swim in murky water or at dawn or dusk. Sharks are some of the MOST primal, so the fact that they can distinguish prey items is quite telling. When you made the blanket statement that "animals don't have the reasoning ability we do", it's incorrect. Many aquatic predators make distinctions all the way down to the specific subspecies of salmon they prefer, or going after seals when they are at their fattest, etc.

I am NOT a herpetologist, so I won't say much about alligators, but it's wrong to say that animals don't use reasoning when hunting. They are not all "mindless killing machines".

 

[packrat]

I didn't say they were mindless killing machines. I don't believe they are.

 

[CJ2008]

sonny so help me understand...

what about what I was wondering...

if a shark kills/goes after a human can we deduce that it has learned to prefer and / or is actually choosing humans.

(ETA I'm sure it's not as black/white as this...but could we with some certainty deduce if it does it once it might do it again.)

 

[arkieb1]

We have Crocodile attacks here all the time, people swim in places they shouldn't, they fish where they shouldn't not everywhere is signed but when it is it looks like the signs below. Places with lots of tourists and children should have adequate signage for people who are idiots. When the lady got taken by a Croc two weeks ago here they captured it sedated it and flushed it's stomach contents out to make sure it was the right one. On the flip side of that when the child at the zoo who climbed into the Gorilla enclosure was happening literally at the same time here a large shark off the coast of Western Australia took an experienced diver and they captured and killed the shark. Two days beforehand in the same area a surfer had his leg bitten off and later died from a shark attack, they hunted and killed that shark too. I was reflecting at the time about the social media sentiments for the Gorilla at the zoo that was killed to save the child yet the exact same time we were hunting and killing sharks that killed people who not only went into the sharks environment, but actively knew there were large possibly aggressive sharks in the area at the time.

The lady that got taken by a Croc two weeks ago here;

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-03/%27target-animal%27-caught-and-killed-after-fnq-crocodile-attack/7476572

These were the shark victims;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/06/05/female-diver-killed-in-another-wa-shark-attack/

These are some examples of signs that are at popular tourist areas having said that there are many areas that are not tourists spots where there are Crocs too up in Northern Australia, I think they try and sign as many places as they can with Croc signs where tourists go and they put some in multiple languages, but even despite the signs sometimes people are idiots and go near the water in these areas anyway;

 

[sonnyjane]

sonny so help me understand...

what about what I was wondering...

if a shark kills/goes after a human can we deduce that it has learned to prefer and / or is actually choosing humans.

(ETA I'm sure it's not as black/white as this...but could we with some certainty deduce if it does it once it might do it again.)

To be quite frank, I can't think of many examples of a shark that has attacked a human and been PROVEN to be a repeat offender. One that comes to mind were the Matawan attacks of 1916, which were perpetrated by a bull shark, perhaps the most aggressive species. What made that shark desperate enough to attack multiple people is unknown. It swam upriver, perhaps away from normal prey, perhaps it was distressed and going after anything it saw, etc. Sadly many times sharks that have killed humans are killed in retaliation which is why I don't think we really know if they'd go after them again are not. We are certainly NOT the most desirable food choice.

Sometimes they kill bears that get into campsites because the Bears learn to associate humans with food. I don't agree with that either. We're packing up picnics and bringing it into their habitat and then getting upset when they're tempted.