Eh, who needs the gym. I never understood the need to pay someplace tons of money just so I could go lift things...

The tiger incident was at the San Francisco Zoo, not LA.

Seems logical. I know the San Diego Zoo uses dry moats.

Actually, having a place to go is a motivator for many. It is easier to make it a schedule-able event which helps prevent flake-out.

Though I am amused by the concept of driving to a place to workout.

For a lot of people, the fact that they're paying for it makes them actually do it. Less likely to fall prey to laziness when it's costing you hundreds of dollars. That's the theory anyway.

By the way, if anyone feels the need to pay my hundreds of dollars as a form of self motivation, I'd be happy to help.

However it is a tad more difficult for the critter to get a running start via a water filled mote. Unless by "mote" they mean deep cement trench.

I am amused by it, and I often drive.

For me, unless I rode my flat-tire'd bike, walking would take much longer than driving... which is annoying, given I probably only have 45 minutes to break a sweat, tops. Walking just doesn't do it for me, and I have a torn meniscus (knee thing), which makes running awfully painful. Hopefully I will have some surgery to fix that one day.

Alas, no gym for me today, though... I just realized that there's no better time than the present for a bath and a nap. I'll have a few weeks off when I move to Utah; I can go to the gym all I want then. Oh, and I've promised myself I'd go tomorrow.

What? Like there's a difference?


Sincerely,


Moonliner. Bitter east coaster

Where our tigers don't eat the visitors. Sure the orangutan's get loose and pummel folks now and then but not the tigers.

Mine is $35 a month. Apparently I'm not paying enough to motivate me, since I've only gone twice since I purchased the membership.

I neglected to notice my Loser, Double-Loser and Triple-Loser statuses (or is that statii?)... But, I just noticed that I'm a Quadruple Loser!

Yes, that is frequently what a zoo means when they say moat.

And if the tiger successfully jumped over the moat then it doesn't really matter if it had water it in or not.

That said, I'm not a huge fan of the San Francisco Zoo. It has been improving but it still has too much of the old style concrete exhibits for my happiness (though not nearly so horrible as the Sacramento Zoo). Zoos are a net good, in my opinion, but I think they should be run on a model where easy viewing by the public is of secondary importance.

That is one of the reasons the Washington Park Zoo in Portland (I refuse to go along with the name change) is one of my favorites. Many times an animal has been unviewable because they're in the back of a large enclosure behind some tree or log. Sucks for me, but I'm glad for the animal.

I'm not too bothered by the tiger's escape. It is horrible but **** happens and any containment system is going to occasionally fail (in 40 years no tiger had ever jumped over that wall, so apparently it wasn't a very big risk). I'm more bothered by the fact that police from outside the zoo were on scene before any keepers from the zoo itself. And that it took so long for them to determine if any other tigers had escaped so that police and paramedics could behave appropriately.