So long bears.
From the RTD:
The boy and a parent - whom officials would not name - climbed a 4-foot wooden fence to enter a restricted area around the bear habitat on Saturday. The boy apparently tried to feed one of the bears an apple through the 10-foot chain-link fence that surrounds the bear exhibit and was bitten.
As you probably know I loved the bears. I mean I even included them in my list of super awesome Richmond things. Now they are dead because some idiot parent thought it would be ok to climb into a bear enclosure? What a waste. My illustrious wife wrote a scathing letter to the editor the other, which if printed, I will post.
The whole thing is strange, but feels like something all of Richmond will be mad at. I would hate to be that parent I tell you what.
Feel free to vent below.
as i said before:
“they should be held responsible to replace the bears. in the meantime, the whole family should have to live in the enclosure wearing bear suits.”
but seriously, they could have given the kid the horrible rabbies stomach shots (or whatever) and everything would have been fine.
— Wolf | @
the whole thing is fully retarded. idiot parents.
— havoc | @
Yeah I wonder why they decided to euthanize the bears so quickly (which I guess is the point of the investigation, or one of the points). I wonder if it was part of a pre-approved process, like if anything bites a person it must die. Maymont could have just been following procedures.
Still sucks, I would still hate to be that family. They might be the most hated family in Richmond at the moment. Heh.
— MaxPower | @
Did the kid jump the fence on his own and the parent went to go get the child? Or was it the parent who said “hey lets go feed the bear this apple?” Second if the kid was bitten but only had a slightly broken skin - didn’t need stiches - was the kid truly bitten? or did the child just get a scratch from something like the fence they were climbing over? I’m just thinking bear - kid missing 4 fingers - not a scratch.
The parents should now have to pay for euthanizing the bears, fined for trespassing, and must pay for getting 2 new bears. Then must leave town and not allowed to be around any animals forever…
— Eric | @
are they getting new bears at all?
also, did they kill them both cuz they didnt know which one did it?
what would the punishment be if someone walked into the park and shot both bears with a rifle? that’s what the parents/kid should get. plus public ridicule for being idiots.
— midas | @
yeah midas, they killed both because they didn’t know which one did it.
my question: were those the only two bears there?
— stephanie anne | @
to answer your question, yes, both bears were put down because they didn’t know which one gave the idiot child a small scratch.
— nic | @
from maymont, some info on why they killed the bears, regulations and so forth: http://www.maymont.org/bears/statement.asp
and here is the “bear memorial fund.” they say the money can’t be used to buy new bears, but that they will replace the bears with “bears that cannot survive in the wild,” so at least some new bears will appear someday to maybe finish off that meddling kid: http://www.maymont.org/bears/memorialFund.asp
— midas | @
link to the timeline on that page also has info on what happened and why.
— midas | @
I still just find it hard to believe that a 4 year old - went on his own - climbed a fence on his own - to feed the bears. It’s not the 4 years old fault - some type of criminal (neglect) charges should be put on the parent for this.
— Eric | @
maybe their other kid had crawled under the buffalo fence and was about to be stampeded, and they were off saving him, so they didnt see the one kid getting love bites from the bears, who were SUPPOSED to be babysitting him. maybe they are HEROES!
— midas | @
I doubt it, they sound like idiots.
Those buffalo are frickin scary though. I love them!
— MaxPower | @
whose kid were the otter’s tossing around?
— nic | @
“VDH contacted the Rabies Division of the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta which advised that the rabies shots for the child would be invasive, long-term, painful and contain risk and recommended that both bears be euthanized for rabies testing before submitting the child to the rabies treatment. ”
From http://www.maymont.org/bears/timeline.asp
Hmm. I guess that makes it reasonable to kill the bears. Then again:
“Postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) is indicated for persons possibly exposed to a rabid animal. Possible exposures include animal bites, or mucous membrane contamination with infectious tissue, such as saliva. PEP should begin as soon as possible after an exposure. There have been no vaccine failures in the United States (i.e. someone developed rabies) when PEP was given promptly and appropriately after an exposure.
…
In the United States, PEP consists of a regimen of one dose of immune globulin and five doses of rabies vaccine over a 28-day period. Rabies immune globulin and the first dose of rabies vaccine should be given as soon as possible after exposure. Additional doses of rabies vaccine should be given on days 3, 7, 14, and 28 after the first vaccination. Current vaccines are relatively painless and are given in your arm, like a flu or tetanus vaccine.”
From http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/rabies/Prevention&Control/preventi.htm
So, a month of shots that are relatively painless vs. killing two bears? Then again, a 28 day schedule of shots may be too much for these parents to handle.
— RMSzero | @
Okay I have contacted a med student. We’ll get to the bottom of this here at haduken.
— RMSzero | @
Yeah please do, I thought the shots were “painful and contain risk.”
— MaxPower | @
BEARS LOVE HONEY-HEAD KIDS!
— fetzer | @
can’t someone develop a test for rabbies that doesn’t involve the subject being dead first?? also alzheimer’s please.
— Wolf | @
see i thought usually they just observed the animal for symptoms. if it starts displaying them, start the medicine. since the animal had to have rabies 1st (to give it to the person) it should start showing sooner and you would have time to start the treatment.
someone at work was bitten like 1.5 years ago by a feral kitten. they couldnt catch the cat to bring it in, so they were like let’s start the shots JIC. but they wait, see if they can catch it. last day, go into the hospital to get the shots. hospital is OUT. like they used it all. they say, “well, we have this other rabies medicine, we can give you that.” takes medicine, go home, find kitten in trap. doh!
1 year later, letter in the mail from the hospital. “it has come to our attention that the batch of medicine that you receieved on date X was found to have contained at least 2 samples of LIVE RABIES VIRUS. if you recieved one of these, YOU WILL DIE.” anyways by that point it was well beyond the incubation period, but WTF?????
i think you are right about the painless shots though.
— midas | @
Yeah the CDC site didn’t say anything about that, but I found a website that did.
http://www.emedicinehealth.com/articles/13096-6.asp
“If the animal has the potential for rabies and is available for sacrifice and immediate examination by the local health department, then treatment may be withheld pending the results of that test. This would include animals such as any wild animal, or an unwanted stray dog or cat, if you know where the animal is (dead or alive).
“If the animal has the potential for rabies and is unavailable for sacrifice and examination, then you will be given rabies shots in the emergency department. ”
I’d categorize the maymont bears as unavailable for sacrifice.
Also here’s an interesting tidbit from that website:
“Both human rabies immune globulin (HRIG) and the various rabies vaccines are safe in pregnancy.”
Really? Because I’d think that they’d be horrible in pregnancy if they’re so rough on a four year old.
— RMSzero | @
ahhh.
— midas | @
Yeah I don’t think we understand bear rabies enough to look at the bears and say for sure that they don’t have rabies.
— RMSzero | @
this story reminds me of Old Yeller and brings a tear to my eye. remember, the put old yeller in the makeshift log cage and then he got all rabbified and the boy had to shoot him and burn it to bits. man, that was one sad movie. but then there was Baby Old Yeller, and everything was OK!
— Wolf | @
Man that movie would kill me I think.
Did you hear the bears are in a landfill? WTF? The Mayor said he wanted them exhumed from the landfill. This is like some crazy story you read in your middle school literature book.
— MaxPower | @
they could have done something with it- like make some yummy bear meat and a sweet bear fur rug/jacket. i guess that’s insensitive.
— Wolf | @
I hear there’s a dead bear off in yonder woods. I reckon we ought to go take a look-see. You coming? Or are you yellow?
No in all seriousness, I thought that too. Landfill? What the hell?
I hope someone is writing this stuff down somewhere. World of Mirth family is murdered? Bears are sacrificed and left in landfills? It’s the end of times for SURE.
— RMSzero | @
Here’s a thing, though: thank god this hasn’t cracked the national media. Phew.
— RMSzero | @
— midas | @
long post: where do I start…
it’s amazing to me that not only is this the biggest story in Richmond right now, but also that it’s been in the forefront for as long as it has. i’m the first to admit i do not love animals to the extent that i would inconvenience myself to help an animal i’d never met. that being said, i also appreciate the magnificence and uniqueness of animals, and acknowledge God put them on this earth for good reasons. i’m all for endangered species and “respecting” animals. i also love (most) pets of friends and family, including those of my parents and maxpower. so, it’s safe to say i neither hate nor absolutely love animals.
here’s what bothers me about this whole situation, and the fallout since it’s happened. people posting messages on RTD website saying bears didn’t get due process of law–when did they become humans.
i couldn’t agree more that they should not have been killed, and we should be good stewards of God’s gifts, the animals. what is more, they certainly shouldn’t have ended up in a landfill. but what’s done is done. should resources really be wasted to exhume the bears when a fitting memorial can be constructed without their remains. i don’t think so, they are still JUST BEARS. besides many people adequately grieve for lost loved ones after plane crashes and other events where bodies are not recovered, and that mourning is for people, not bears.
i want to echo maxpower in feeling sorry for this family being as hated as they are, and perhaps take it a step further. to those saying the boy couldn’t have gotten over a 4-ft fence in a matter of seconds, you certainly are not/have not been around children much, especially adventurous little boys. until convicted of neglect, i’m going to believe the mother’s story (most of it at least). why aren’t the people who cry for due process for the bears extending that due process to the mother?
i apologize for the scattered thoughts so i’ll try to summarize before you rail me. 1. everything that’s happened has been very unfortunate, and officials acted too quickly in euthanizing the bears. 2. i believe the reason for retrieving the bears’ remains is unmerited, although some sort of memorial should be constructed. 3. i’ll be the only person in richmond, apparently, giving the mother the benefit of the doubt until convicted of neglect. 4. if people were as serious about crime, social injustice, urban renewal, etc. as they are about some dead bears, maybe real progress would be made in this city.
the 1 good thing about all this bear hoopla in the news is that we haven’t been as depressed by news coverage of all the murders, burglaries, and other crimes that continue to plague our city on a daily basis.
ok, i’m all done, sorry for the length. bring on your comments.
— mcvmmx | @
Exactly.
Richmond man, we are a vortex of reality!
Check out RVABlogs on bears to see what people are saying. If you page back a couple pages you will find a couple people who are dubious of The Woman’s story. Mostly dubious stuff in the timeline. Blogger is down, so I can’t find the article myself.
— MaxPower | @
I’ll tell you why the bears are such a big issue. This is richmond. We love to argue about stupid stuff. There are people here that thing droopy drawers legislation is a good idea and that Sa’ad El Amin should be City Councilman. There are people here that believed in VAPAF. There are people here that successfully protected an imaginary slave trail from being turned into less of a dirty armpit of carjacking and bars. If we can all agree on bears, that’s a step in the right direction.
— RMSzero | @
my 2 points of view on the same topic:
1. i’m not a parent, but however it happened in however short of time, if your 4 year-old ends up in a bear enclosure (even if there was another layer of protection) sticking his hand thru to where bears are, then you are negligent. the kid is 4!
2. on the other hand, as i stated a long time ago, i’ve jumped that fence (which i remember as 2 or 3 wood planks between posts = pathetic), and fed a fox and bears through the same fence as this kid. boys will be boys. except i wasn’t 4.
honestly, as stupid as this kid and his parents might be, i do think maymont did a pretty poor job of separating bears from people. a little wood fence (seriously, a 1yo could crawl thru it as i remember it) around a chain link fence is not enough. especially at the back of the enclosure where anyone can go unsupervised. the kids hand could easily have been completely removed.
also, i’m fine with the bears being buried in a landfill. i really am. they are dead bear bodies. i’m just not sentimental about burials of animals. i can see how people would be upset though.
also, rmszero, baggy pants is a pandemic that must be stopped. if you think bird flu is scary, think about a world of baggy pants. oh my!
— Wolf | @
i thought about it, and put on a belt.
— RMSzero | @
Parents should have to pay all costs associated with replacing the bears or make a public apology.
The officials who made the decision should be fired immedietely.
I’m sorry, but I consider the course of action that was took to be something out of the dark times. Ancient. Obsolete. The “oh the animal must be killed right now if it bites someone!” to check for rabies thing is getting tired. Especially in this situation. Seriously. What are the chances that a rabid animal just happened to be around and just happened to decide to wander up to a couple bears and bite them? The chances are so remote that it was logically ridiculous to kill the bears, especially both of them, to test for rabies. Christ… I really, really hate humans.
Raise your hand if you are awaiting the day aliens come here and blow us all up because of stupid primative acts such as this.
— Joe | @
yeah also this “aids” thing is totally lame and 1990s. i’m tired of it, so i think everyone should stop practising safe sex or abstinence. also we should stop checking blood transfusions, cuz like what are the chances that the person who donated blood had aids? like 100 to 1? what is this, the middle ages?
— midas | @