If you are 42 inches tall, you don't have to take a parent with you on the rides at the zoo. And if your parent wants to ride with you, they have to pay.
I discovered this yesterday, when I took Carter to the zoo (in the cute new overalls he's sporting below). I noticed this because Carter happened to stand next to the sign, and his slightly messy hair hit the 42" mark. I've since measured and discovered that he's only 41.5" (in shoes) when his hair isn't so poofy. But still. I don't think they really WANT kids that are under 3 going on the train alone. I checked growth charts, and a six year old girl in the 5th percentile could still take her parents on the train for free, but on a bad hair day, my two-and-a-half year old couldn't?!
What's the deal with using height as the determinate? Where money is involved, I get that they probably don't want to use age because it would entice folks to lie. So, I don't really have a better solution to propose. I only know that my little boy is going to be very sad someday when all his friends are playing in the balls at Chuck E Cheese, and he isn't allowed in. The upside would be that he's allowed in earlier than his peers, but in many cases that would be dangerous and scary for him now.
For the record, no one hassled us about his height at the zoo, and even if they did, I wouldn't MIND paying the $1.50. But I'm starting to see our future, and I think it might involve a good bit of slouching...
Uncle Patrick (and parents), we're going to need some of your advice in this area over the next 16 years or so!
