Zoo questions

| Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

I was amused by the letter “Zoo logic” (April 22). “Zoo illogic” would have been a more apropos headline, as the writer second-guessed the zoo regarding the decisions about the African painted dogs. He then attempted to link that decision to an elephant killing its keeper a decade ago.

I was troubled by the writer linking of these two seemingly divergent, random events, but his letter reminded me of management's lack of logic in removing these animals.

While one can bemoan the tragic events that led to the death of a child, one can hardly blame the painted dogs for doing what wild animals do instinctively.

Sending these animals to another zoo seems silly to me. In doing so, does the zoo shift the blame to the animals? Should the dogs have behaved more responsibly?

Does this act somehow exonerate zoo management? What about the other natural predators there — are they one tragic accident away from banishment?

These are just some troubling questions regarding how institutions seek to protect themselves from legal exposure and responsibility in this age of litigation.

Dennis R. Jones

Washington Township

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.


Show commenting policy