How do they close all the beaches?

[dislovefrommn]

No they haven't said how long this will last.

 

[T_O]

I would think perhaps a visually appealing heavy nautical type rope suspended on large posts "x" number of feet from the waterline (I'm thinking 15/20 feet) with signs designating the waters edge as unsafe for any use due to alligators and bacteria. They may not like posting the truth but I think they are going to be liable if they don't. Sorry, the good times are over.

Exactly!

 

[JennaDeeDooDah]

not that I have heard/ read - I think they are evaluating the situation. If they end up going that route Port Orleans Riverside is going to present some interesting challanges

And I think about resorts like Polynesian, Beach Club, and Caribbean Beach. Those really need a beach. Even if people can't access it, I think it needs to be a visual, you know?

 

[monorailrabbit]

And I think about resorts like Polynesian, Beach Club, and Caribbean Beach. Those really need a beach. Even if people can't access it, I think it needs to be a visual, you know?

I was thinking the same thing. We are staying at CBR for the first time this year... without a beach it will just seem odd I think... I hope the accessible beaches are not removed permanently. I do understand the need for extra precaution at this time - and my thoughts and prayers are with the family.

 

[warrenz1963]

My question is whether all the people here who think that "No Swimming" still allows for "wading" will think that "Beach Closed" means that they can't lay a towel down on the sand, but they can still go in the water. After all, the beach is the sand and not the water. So the literalists will need better warnings, right?

Oh yeah, people will always parse meanings to justify their behavior. I think "swimming" includes wading, but maybe the language should be changed to "Going in the water is prohibited" to satisfy those who will always lean on semantics. (And even with that specific language, some folks won't see the signs, and some will see them and ignore them for whatever reason.)

In my personal work experience "literalist" is code for "willfully ignorant", they know exactly what they are doing. (Caveat for the flamers ready to pounce: I do not think or mean to imply that the family that is suffering from this horrible accident were in any way willfully ignorant, or aware of the potential dangers that a lakeshore in Florida at dusk in June can hold.)

I worked at a national park on Lake Michigan. Nasty rip currents due to weather occasionally. Lifeguards specifically had to use the wording "the waters are closed" when rip currents were present, because if they said the beach is closed, visitors would argue they're not on the beach, they're in the water. A child's argument they knew was ridiculous. So then the same folks would literally pick up their belongings and move a mile or two down the shoreline to where there were no lifeguards keeping them from going back in the water, and they'd get back in the water. Same potential for rip currents, same danger, same signs, but nobody to make them get out of the water. And on rare occasions people have drowned after doing this. It's federally managed public land, so access remains open to thise beaches without lifeguards because in some situations it's rightfully expected the visitor will participate in their own safety and make their own best choices.

The ultimate solution I think is to do what many have suggested in the threads here, and that is to create educational messaging about the specific danger and roll it out to the public, including signs at the beaches and shorelines. Some people will still ignore them, though, but many will become more aware, hopefully reducing the possibility for another accident like this.

 

[Jestocost]

Oh yeah, people will always parse meanings to justify their behavior. I think "swimming" includes wading, but maybe the language should be changed to "Going in the water is prohibited" to satisfy those who will always lean on semantics. (And even with that specific language, some folks won't see the signs, and some will see them and ignore them for whatever reason.)

In my personal work experience "literalist" is code for "willfully ignorant", they know exactly what they are doing. (Caveat for the flamers ready to pounce: I do not think or mean to imply that the family that is suffering from this horrible accident were in any way willfully ignorant, or aware of the potential dangers that a lakeshore in Florida at dusk in June can hold.)

I worked at a national park on Lake Michigan. Nasty rip currents due to weather occasionally. Lifeguards specifically had to use the wording "the waters are closed" when rip currents were present, because if they said the beach is closed, visitors would argue they're not on the beach, they're in the water. A child's argument they knew was ridiculous. So then the same folks would literally pick up their belongings and move a mile or two down the shoreline to where there were no lifeguards keeping them from going back in the water, and they'd get back in the water. Same potential for rip currents, same danger, same signs, but nobody to make them get out of the water. And on rare occasions people have drowned after doing this. It's federally managed public land, so access remains open to thise beaches without lifeguards because in some situations it's rightfully expected the visitor will participate in their own safety and make their own best choices.

The ultimate solution I think is to do what many have suggested in the threads here, and that is to create educational messaging about the specific danger and roll it out to the public, including signs at the beaches and shorelines. Some people will still ignore them, though, but many will become more aware, hopefully reducing the possibility for another accident like this.

For what it's worth, according to the pretty thorough legal analysis of the potential liability at the link below, Florida courts have held in past alligator attacks that swimmers ignoring 'No Swimming" signs were fully liable for their own injuries. Still, the article is careful to note that all of these situations are very fact specific and there are a number of variables.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/15/opinions/hotels-may-avoid-liability-alligator-attack-danny-cevallos/

 

[Bluegrrl]

They just can't close the beaches "Jaws" style. Gators are clever and an apex predator. I think a "gators sign", nice ropes, and a "don't feed" sign" is about best they can do. By now, most tourists have heard of this horrible happening and probably don't need a warning.

People need a reason not to do stuff sometimes. Just saying "don't swim" doesn't always work. But signage saying "don't swim because there is bacteria that will kill you and alligators and use the darn pool which is a bunch safer" might work better.

That and doing three other things: stop the excessive land development that destroys alligator habitat, stop tourist feeding of alligators, and curb alligators over a certain length. Of all that, #1 seems the best to help gators and people.

 

[SaintsManiac]

I have a feeling they will be regularly rounding up gators from the lagoon. It's going to be a full time job.

 

[Jestocost]

I have a feeling they will be regularly rounding up gators from the lagoon. It's going to be a full time job.

Reportedly they have done this on a regular basis in the past, although I would expect that they will be more vigilant going forward.

 

[tj6285]

For what it's worth, according to the pretty thorough legal analysis of the potential liability at the link below, Florida courts have held in past alligator attacks that swimmers ignoring 'No Swimming" signs were fully liable for their own injuries. Still, the article is careful to note that all of these situations are very fact specific and there are a number of variables.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/15/opinions/hotels-may-avoid-liability-alligator-attack-danny-cevallos/

This is a great article. I'm sure a Corporation as large as Disney has a great Legal Department and reviewed possible scenarios. While not all scenarios can be predicted, if the signage or alligator control efforts was not enough, I'm certain the Legal Department would have been all over it before this tragedy happened.

If you are hiking in a National Park and are bitten by a rattlesnake, is the Government liable? If you are swimming off the beach at Daytona and was attached by a shark, is the city of Daytona, Volusia County or the State of Florida liable? If you are at a cookout at your Aunt's and you get stung by a bee (and you are allergic) is she liable?

I am definitely not trying to downplay this horrific situation and wish this would have never happened.

 

[luvthemouse71]

Gators are surprisingly apt at getting places you think they couldn't.

for example.

A barrier like that wouldn't do anything. They usually are scared of people though, although feeding them can change that, to the point they get really upset when folks don't feed them. It's highly likely the gator at the Grand Floridian was fed in the past by guests to the point it had no fear of getting close to a noisy beach.

Great video, I shared it..

 

[bryanb]

I know a lot of people are talking about legal liability, which is outside of my area of expertise. Regardless of what the law says, Disney doesn't want its guests to feel unsafe or to get hurt. So I think they're going to keep evaluating the situation and learning from it.

 

[DLM1980]

I haven't bothered to search the inter tubes, yes a gator can climb a fence, but what about those with a 45 degree bend at the top on them, like you see around prisons, airports, etc? Could said gator crawl that?

If it extended out far enough the gator would be upside down. Could he hold on without falling off and still climb over?

In this scenario we are fencing off the public areas of the waters to make it harder for gator to come to the beach, he's still in the water. If he somehow was already in the public area (came across a street or such) he could still climb the fence, get to his water, but would have to take the long way out

 

[IrishNYC]

I have a feeling they will be regularly rounding up gators from the lagoon. It's going to be a full time job.

They can't just round up gators willy-nilly. By state law it's not allowed.

 

[McKelly]

I hope they don't get rid of the beaches or fence off the beaches. I don't think it will look as nice. Is this the first incidenct like this at WDW from what - 1971 - when it opened? I think they should change the signs to say caution - alligators - no swimming.

 

[Bluegrrl]

One other thing - look at seven seas + bay lake. Bay lake is natural lake with 7 seas a man made that connects. Now imagine fencing off just the resort areas. That can't be done. The gator will creep into every area it can. It won't just be like "oh, the front of grand Floridian is blocked, guess I can't go there!" These guys will go anywhere they darn please. They have been here since the Dinos, with the only change of them getting smaller. I have a Ds, and would be devastated if this happened to us. But gators are apex here. Fencing the lake is impossible. We must adapt not the gator. I do really feel horrible for the family, honestly.

Again, our son is 4, and if this happened to us, I would die. My husband said he wouldn't recover if something like that happened. So please don't think I'm cold. Just pointing out that fences won't work because these reptiles rule here.

 

[SaintsManiac]

They can't just round up gators willy-nilly. By state law it's not allowed.

http://www.wesh.com/news/disney-wil...utinely-removes-gators-officials-say/40075110

 

[IrishNYC]

http://www.wesh.com/news/disney-wil...utinely-removes-gators-officials-say/40075110

Yes, and if you read or watch it says "any time they see or have a complaint about an alligator, that alligator is taken out...Disney does everything by the book." It doesn't say they round up alligators.

 

[SaintsManiac]

Yes, and if you read or watch it says "any time they see or have a complaint about an alligator, that alligator is taken out...Disney does everything by the book." It doesn't say they round up alligators.

You can argue up and down all day, but I would stake money on the fact that they make changes. Whether it's an overreaction or not, I can see them doing it.

 

[Bay_Lake_Tower]

I for one will be disappointed if they make significant changes to the waterways/beaches on property. While what happened was absolutely terrible, I don't think it calls for an overreaction like that. Unfortunately many people seem to be out for Disney's head when in reality I think it was a perfect storm of many little occurrences that caused this and I don't think Disney (or the family) shoulders the blame.