Many people have heard about the Cincinnati Zoo incident involving gorilla Harambe and young boy Isaiah Dickerson through viral tweets and celebrity statements, making this appear to be a black-or-white issue. But the truth of the matter is much more complex and undefined. Dealing with something like comparing one life to another is very opinion-based, so it would be impractical to write this as anything other than an editorial.That being said, I have seen many false statements spread around social media causing many people to become misinformed.
Isaiah Dickerson was one of the many spectators of the gorilla exhibit at the Cincinnati Zoo when he allegedly began to crawl through the bars. (Whether he crawled through or fell through the bars is still up for speculation.) He then fell into the exhibit. That is when Harambe, one of the zoo’s most beloved gorillas, emerged from his cave. Isaiah and Harambe’s encounter lasted around ten minutes, and there is video footage of Harambe dragging Isaiah through the moat of his exhibit. In video footage of the occurrence, the parents can be heard urging their son to stay calm. The zoo was able to clear the other two gorillas out of the area Isaiah was occupying, but they were not able to control Harambe. After ten minutes, the zookeepers came to the conclusion that the only option would be to shoot the gorilla. Was this fair? No. Was this the only logical conclusion? Unfortunately, yes.
If the zoo had done nothing and allowed Isaiah to stay in the exhibit, there is an almost definite chance that he would have come out with more injuries than a mild concussion and a few scrapes, and he would possibly face death. In 2012, a toddler was mauled to death at the Pittsburgh Zoo & PPG Aquarium. The zoo had never experienced an onsite human death, but they still were almost considered to be shut down and they stayed closed down temporarily, although they eventually agreed on a settlement.
Many claim that the zookeepers should have shot Harambe with a tranquilizer dart, but if they had done so, it would have taken up to ten minutes to go into effect. This would have also caused Harambe to become more agitated and possible cause him to attack Isaiah in a more vigorous fashion.
The most important thing to note is that the zoo did not want to shoot Harambe. Not only does the zoo work with Harambe daily and has grown attached to him, but he positively impacts the zoo economically. It took the zookeepers ten minutes to decide to shoot, proving that this was not a decision derived from panic or corruption.
So what can you do in response to this catastrophe? First, make sure that you are always following rules and regulations at zoos; these rules are not just laid out to protect you but also to protect the animals. Also, reach out and start petitions to try and improve living conditions for animals at zoos. Luckily, most zoos benefit animals by not only allowing them to maintain their population by preserving a portion of them in captivity, but also by educating people on their importance to the environment. Lastly, comment below on your stance on this issue. This is a very complex issue with no true right answer. Harambe faced an unjustified death, but shooting him was the conclusion with the least amount of consequences.