A small plane towing a blunt message that read “Columbus Zoo Sucks” circled the Columbus Zoo and nearby golf courses last Monday, turning a simmering dispute over ride wristbands into a spectacle in the sky. The banner directed anyone looking up to a website run by the man behind the protest, who says he is trying to call out how zoo staff handle visits by his autistic son.
Photos and posts from people on the ground show the banner passing over Safari Golf Club and Muirfield Village Golf Club on Monday, July 13, while the zoo hosted the Jack Hanna Legacy Cup. The flyover immediately lit up social media and pulled fresh attention to a long-running back-and-forth between the family and the park.
Banner flight tied to Dublin father, report says
According to reporting from The Columbus Dispatch, the banner linked viewers to www.columbuszoosucks.org and was chartered by Dublin resident Kevin Finisterre. The Dispatch reports that the plane made passes over zoo property and the surrounding golf courses on July 13.
Family says new wristband rule triggered dispute
On Finisterre’s website, the family lays out its version of events. He and his wife say they first sought an ADA accommodation in March 2025, explaining that their son cannot tolerate the Tyvek wristbands the zoo now requires. The Columbus Zoo’s membership FAQ states that Gold members must pick up a gold wristband at kiosks to access rides and animal feedings, and that printed or digital membership cards alone are not accepted at individual ride or feeding locations. The FAQ also details the kiosk process and the zoo’s Code of Conduct for members and guests.
Zoo cites safety and conduct, responds with ban and lawsuit
The zoo says it offered workarounds, including allowing the wristband to be worn on a different part of the body or carried by a guardian. After repeated contacts, the park barred Finisterre from visiting, and the organization later filed a harassment lawsuit in Franklin County, according to reporting and court documents. The Columbus Dispatch reported that zoo spokeswoman Nicolle Gómez Racey said the ban applies only to Finisterre, not his son, and that the zoo remains committed to accommodations and inclusive experiences for guests with disabilities.
Where disability law and house rules collide
The conflict sits at the crossroads of federal disability protections and a venue’s responsibility to protect its staff. Federal law bars retaliation against people who request disability accommodations under 42 U.S.C. § 12203, according to Cornell Law School, while the Columbus Zoo’s membership terms reserve the right to revoke membership or deny admission for conduct the zoo considers threatening, harassing, or disruptive. That push and pull, reasonable accommodation on one side and enforcement of conduct rules on the other, is likely to be central if the lawsuit moves forward.
For now, the airplane banner has turned a local disagreement into a highly visible fight over accessibility, behavior, and how far a protest can go before it becomes potential fodder for legal action. Both the family and the zoo say they want disabled visitors to have safe, respectful experiences, and it may fall to the courts to decide whether the family’s advocacy crossed into harassment or whether the zoo’s response crossed into unlawful retaliation.
