White Tiger kills keeper at Zion [Archive]

Sniper

28th May 2009, 09:56

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5jo6IJIB_kAlxJCVw62yA_TjsLutg

And then they shoot the animal? Absolute bastards! They want to clean the enclosure, then move the tiger out or lock it up when it goes to bed. They should know that they are keeping a wild animal that doesnt sleep on your bed at night, so why shoot it for doing what it does best???? Silly prick shouldnt have been cleaning the cage in front of tourists anyway.

The story claims that its because the tiger didnt let the keepers body go, which I find odd because another artical states that he died on the way to hospital and yet another states that he got away from the animal and then died waiting for an ambulance.

That place should be shut down, appauling work by all involved.

Grahameeboy

28th May 2009, 09:59

I agree...still a wild animal and if you keep a wild animal in an enclosure and there is lack of overall care then tthis happens....the Tiger should not have been shot....typical of our society

sinfull

28th May 2009, 10:05

The cat should have been shot after the first incident, it had the taste !
Keeper was a fool to think that because he had befriended it prior to the first attack, that it would not have him !
I don't like the thought that the cat, as rare as it is, was taken out of the breeding program, but it would have been a seriously dangerous animal to be around ever again !
Don't agree with the comment of closing the place down, but unfortunately the only funding the park has is from tourists and that calls for interactive shows !

Hemex

28th May 2009, 10:05

Yeah its absolute fuckin bollocks! Trying to 'protect' a species and killing it for what it does best? what a load of shit... why cant they shoot the likes of William Bell and the Glassie homo's?? Pisses me off...

Blackshear

28th May 2009, 10:06

It really is disgusting.
I don't care if you can play hopscotch with the fucking tiger, a tiger is a goddamn tiger.
A massive ball of meat and killing instinct, with a vice jaw full of lung punturing teeth and a thousand pounds behind a swipe it might take.
I mean come the fuck on. If they kill the animal for doing what it was born to do, what the fuck does that mean?! Jesus Christ, Jim, that bird is FLYING. Kill it before it can do any more harm!

It's as bad as people that sleep with snakes, fucking loopy braindeads.

Man it's awesome having a bowl of rage for breakfast. Lumpy, needs more milk.

ynot slow

28th May 2009, 10:07

And the guy who knows the animals best is in employment court trying to get his job back.Who knows if he could have helped prevent it,but they are wild animals and unpredictable with it.

Trudes

28th May 2009, 10:33

I agree...still a wild animal and if you keep a wild animal in an enclosure and there is lack of overall care then tthis happens....the Tiger should not have been shot....typical of our society

My thoughts exactly.
Doesn't matter how much handling a wild animal like a tiger gets or how "tame" it may seem, at the end of the day it is still a wild animal that will do what comes naturally to it. Let's face it, if it wasn't for the gun the Tiger would be higher on the food chain than us so we deserve to be killed and eaten by them if they get the chance, so good on the Tiger.:mellow:

Winston001

28th May 2009, 11:04

Have to agree with everyone. It is damned sad that a good man is dead and the tiger is now dead too.

A former Zion staff member spoke on TV last night saying that the manager (Craig Busch's mother) knows nothing about large cat control and procedures. It sounds like corners were cut to save money.

Tigers, lions, cheetahs etc are wild animals and potentially dangerous. Nevertheless they are worked with safely by trained people all over the world and this sort of tragedy is rare.

The guy who died was very experienced so maybe it was just one of those unpredictable things. It happens. Steve Irwin died in completely unexpected circumstances.

blairh

28th May 2009, 11:13

Absolutely disgusting that they shot the tiger. It was just doing what it is naturally meant to do. I saw somewhere that it wass actually a protected species, with only around 120 left in the world?? =(

Really awful from a place that is meant to be protecting the animals...

BMWST?

28th May 2009, 11:42

A guy on cambell who had worked with the keeper and the tiger said...."Shit happens" "you know the risks".The ONLY justification for shooting the WHITE BENGAL TIGER would have been if the keeper was still alive and the cat wouldnt release him which is prolly what happened.....Once they have got "the taste" you have to accept that they cannot be trusted. period.

Blackshear

28th May 2009, 12:19

This thread needs youtube video's.
Tiger swimming in a pool:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYi5V59rBQE&feature=related

Owl

28th May 2009, 12:25

It's not like African's are an endangered species!

EJK

28th May 2009, 12:28

This thread needs youtube video's.
Tiger swimming in a pool:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYi5V59rBQE&feature=related

The cat looks like a colourful hippo

Lissa

28th May 2009, 12:32

I am surprised that the Tiger was shot for basically doing what it does best... being a predator. Although it is extremely sad that the keeper lost his life doing his job, it really seems that the safety standards at the enclosure were lacking and lead to his death. I am sure that there are other methods of getting the cats out of the enclosure while its being cleaned rather than putting the keepers inside with them at the same time. It should be closed down and the cats relocated to more adequate zoos.

Swoop

28th May 2009, 12:35

Shooting the fucking tiger? FFS!

Ship it off to a wildlife park where it can roam freely without all the cuddly-crap going on.

Too late now though. Not as if the planet doesn't have enough humans and has an over-abundance of white tigers.

Tosser who shot cat = fail.

terbang

28th May 2009, 12:38

They are cats and we are great apes. Big cats kill and eat apes. Apes take revenge with the death penalty. Seems to be the way things are. Two precious lives lost, what a shame.

Devil

28th May 2009, 13:20

WhatThe???

28th May 2009, 13:33

really its just something you always have to be careful of, they know they are working with wild animals and its always possible that could happen. like others are saying its a wild animal doing what it does, protecting its space. it is sad that there were tourists watching, but did they really have to shoot it? typical really, disposing of the animal....

PirateJafa

28th May 2009, 14:31

As for not shooting the tiger, well, what do you tell the family? I'm sorry, we dont have anything left of him except this pile of cat shit with bones in it cos we didn't want to hurt the tiger. Save the body i'd say. It would mean something to me if it were my family.

I know that if I was his family, I'd be right fucked off with them for shooting the tiger.

He spent his life looking after these endangered animals - it's what he loved doing.

And now there's one less of the 120 remaining in the world.

Makes what he spent his life doing a bit more futile, doesn't it?

YellowDog

28th May 2009, 14:52

There have been some good points made here. Particularly in relation to the errant processes putting the keepers in serious danger.

I am an animal lover and Tigers are one of my favorites. I do however agree with them killing this Tiger though I don't blame it for its instinctive reaction(it should never have been put in this position). Now it has learnt to kill a keeper it could not stay.

They were talking about culling around 30 lions & tigers. Best to start with the ones that have or may potentially attack keepers.

Devil

28th May 2009, 15:28

He spent his life looking after these endangered animals - it's what he loved doing.

Valid point in this case i guess.

Mikkel

28th May 2009, 15:30

This thread needs youtube video's.
Tiger swimming in a pool:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYi5V59rBQE&feature=related

Awww it's soooo CUTE! :rolleyes:

You can't domesticate predominantly predatory animals such as cats - and no, the common house cats aren't domesticated, they're just sneaky!

I know that if I was his family, I'd be right fucked off with them for shooting the tiger.

He spent his life looking after these endangered animals - it's what he loved doing.

And now there's one less of the 120 remaining in the world.

Makes what he spent his life doing a bit more futile, doesn't it?

+1
Indeed, it's fairly ironic!

Winston001

28th May 2009, 15:42

The cat should have been shot after the first incident, it had the taste !

Not sure that I agree about having the taste. Man-eating tigers in the wild are unusual and normally old and sick. I wonder if this isn't just something we have all heard and believe without proof.

Where the danger lies is that once a tiger/lion etc has attacked a keeper, it has learned that the unthinkable can be done. Up till that moment it respected the humans but now they are proved no match........it's all on any time puss feels a bit ornery.

imdying

28th May 2009, 15:54

The cat should have been shot after the first incident, it had the taste !

it would have been a seriously dangerous animal to be around ever again !lulz wot?

Had the taste? :laugh: It's a tiger! 'The taste' is buried deeper into it's basic make up a lot further than some cuddles as a baby are ever going to reach.

'Dangerous animal to be around ever again' :laugh: It was a dangerous animal to be around anyway, it's a fucking tiger.

phred

28th May 2009, 15:57

So we all agree shooting a Tiger for being a Tiger is just plain dumb and really highlights the arrogance of mankind.

No one in the news has bothered to point out that no one died at Zion on the lion mans watch. Perhaps his mother should think about that.

cc rider

28th May 2009, 16:00

So tragic to hear.
What now though, for the Park/Zoo. There are few enough facilities for 'wild' animal preservation.
Who is the governing authority for such places? I would think that to operate in most countries, in the first place, there would be stringent guidlines & codes of practice. Licencing? I'm sure we will find out more of the actual circumstances once the coroners (& any other) inquiry commences.
Closing down would a tragedy in it's self. It would not prevent accidents happening else where.

Where I lived in Canada, a kid at p/school had a 'pet' Canadian Lynx (not a cub) he used to bring to class sometimes. We'd play with it. Kids - no fear, ay.

terbang

28th May 2009, 16:12

You can't domesticate predominantly predatory animals such as cats - and no, the common house cats aren't domesticated, they're just sneaky!

And we're bigger than them.

Mikkel

28th May 2009, 16:15

There's a bit of a difference between "up to 40 kg" and "up to 300 kg" of cat if you know what I mean ;)

And we're bigger than them.

True, they'll still eat us if we cark over though :yes:

ManDownUnder

28th May 2009, 16:19

Like all naughty pussies it needed a load up it!

...and now exit - stage left!
:chase:

Mikkel

28th May 2009, 16:34

Hello kitty:
<img src="http://www.downtownpet.com/blog/uploaded_images/tiger-hugging-man-791658.jpg"

Man-eating tiger:
[r rated]http://www.hogrockcafe.com/Man%20Eating%20Tiger%20Picture%201.jpg[/r rated]

sinfull

28th May 2009, 17:21

Not sure that I agree about having the taste. Man-eating tigers in the wild are unusual and normally old and sick. I wonder if this isn't just something we have all heard and believe without proof.

Where the danger lies is that once a tiger/lion etc has attacked a keeper, it has learned that the unthinkable can be done. Up till that moment it respected the humans but now they are proved no match........it's all on any time puss feels a bit ornery.
Tigers can be bluffed where as a lion won't be, cause they have a few clues ! (tigers that is)
Yes man eating tigers are usually old and sick and very very hungry and man is easy meat, but what yr saying about what we heard and believe is true ! A tiger won't leave a hunting ground if there is easy prey, thats why if a tiger has killed, a hunting party always has gone out to deal to it before it kills again !

lulz wot?

Had the taste? :laugh: It's a tiger! 'The taste' is buried deeper into it's basic make up a lot further than some cuddles as a baby are ever going to reach.

'Dangerous animal to be around ever again' :laugh: It was a dangerous animal to be around anyway, it's a fucking tiger.
Just like your tabby bro just like it, only bigger ! You raaark ya cat up and it'll rip ya right, but if ya don't let it from a young age and stick to the rule it wont !
That cat ripped the noob's legs up cause the guy had no idea and it was prolly only playing with him !
But it got the taste man haha ! Yummmm fresh meat and sweetest it's ever tasted, just like pork !
Was only a matter of time before that cat killed a keeper !

Oh and dangerous yes ! But controllable (till it tasted fresh meat)

pzkpfw

28th May 2009, 17:34

So what's a Tiger taste like?

Str8 Jacket

28th May 2009, 17:34

So what's a Tiger taste like?

Bad taste dude... ;)

Mikkel

28th May 2009, 18:27

Well, it would be a bloody shame not to eat it and make a rug out of it since it's been shot dead anyway...
Hell, while we are at it they should get a posse with meat-cleavers going on that blue whale that's stranded on the westcoast ASAP - or at the very least invite the japanese researchers down for a look-see and taste. Kampei!

Let nothing go to waste.

Sniper

28th May 2009, 19:33

So what's a Tiger taste like?

Same as cat, a bit like chicken

mynameis

28th May 2009, 21:18

W0o0w what a bunch of posts here, typical of KB though.

Hardly any sensible posts showing any remourse towards the victim and his family and his little kid. And some sad mindless racist jokes.

We talk about society and the call to shoot a rare white tiger.

Wonder how many of you would have taken the answer:

Sorry we can't bring your dead fathers/brothers/husbands/sons/friends body because we had to let this rare white tiger make a meal out of your loved one.

Cosmo

28th May 2009, 22:24

Did n't the family say on the news tonight that it did not want the tiger to be shot. Surely this is a risk you must accept if you choose to work with wild animals in an enclosed space.

As for the remainder of lions & tigers at the zoo there must be a better option than putting them all down because they can no longer be cared for.

FlangMasterJ

28th May 2009, 23:12

Don't agree with the comment of closing the place down, but unfortunately the only funding the park has is from tourists and that calls for interactive shows !

They definately got to see some interaction.

"You can take a Tiger out of the wild but you can't take the wild out of a Tiger."

RIP Molambo.

98tls

28th May 2009, 23:17

Whole things sad really,sad a bloke lost his life,sad that such animals are confined to nothing more than oversize bird cages,sad that in many cases they have to be as humans are so fucking stupid.There was a Circus in town a few weeks back,later on at night walking the dog i strolled over and had a look at this Elephant in an enclosure......i know little about Elephants but from what i could see the poor buggers life was a misery,very sad.

pzkpfw

28th May 2009, 23:37

Brett

29th May 2009, 09:23

Very sad indeed, first that an experienced keeper of big and endangered cats was killed and secondly that the tiger was killed.
I can't help but wonder though, you lot who are all going on about how they shouldn't have killed the tiger etc. and that a tiger is a wild animal blah blah blah and it was going to do what it naturally did best, which is kill, what would you have been just as upset if it was someones pet dog? Certain dog breeds retain more of that 'wild' instinct than others and are more prone to attack without much notice, not too different to a hand reared large cat really. To the handlers, those cats would have been just like your pet is too you, only when they play you dont get scratched, you get mauled.

As sad as it is to put down an animal on the path to extinction, there was no other option. It had attacked a keeper once before, it had now killed another keeper and just like a dog that has gone fickle, it needed to be put down.

sarahtvet

29th May 2009, 10:06

On a more serious note, don't they have tranqualiser guns at those places?

Or would that have been too slow to try to save the keeper* ?

(* both meanings)

I figure if I worked there, I'd keep a dart gun or tazer handy at all times... (one per keeper).

All zoo's, wildlife parks etc have gun teams to respond to emergencies and they and the vets are trained in darting as well. Unfortunately the tranquilisers used take from 10-20 minutes to act in a relaxed animal and if the keeper was still alive when they made the decision a dart may have been too slow. Also the quickest drug would have killed the keeper if it had hit him anywhere. It isn't as easy to dart a moving target as it sounds, need to hit a site with good blood supply for good drug delivery.

I was privy to a similar case in the UK. There was a longer time to make the decision then and it involved an elephant. Nobody made the decision lightly and in the long run unfortunately everybody loses in such a sad situation.

We all love the thought of getting up close and personal with wildlife but it carries an inherent risk as has been highlighted this week.

I think it is unlikely that all the cats will be destroyed if the park is closed. The international wildlife group will sort places for the majority of them I am sure.

Pixie

29th May 2009, 10:16

Pixie

29th May 2009, 10:20

imdying

29th May 2009, 10:47

Sorry we can't bring your dead fathers/brothers/husbands/sons/friends body because we had to let this rare white tiger make a meal out of your loved one.It's a bit hard to have sympathy for someone who chooses to work with large predatory animals for a living and then gets attacked by one. Very tragic for his family for sure, but I'm equally sure that they were well aware that his chosen occupation carried with it a certain amount of unpredictable risk. If you don't want to be a potential meal for a tiger, then don't get in a cage with it.

Winston001

29th May 2009, 11:41

Cats have to be dominated. So long as your tiger respects you and thinks you are the boss, you are safe. However cats like to play, and also have bad hair days. A playful or warning bite from your average moggy is laughed off but when its a full-sized animal, it discovers the "boss" isn't up to the game. Hmmm.....interesting, might try that again....

The keepers use things like fire extinguishers and electric prods for safety. A dart gun would be too slow when you are trying to save a person's life. I understand the electric prod didn't force this tiger off.

sinfull

29th May 2009, 11:48

No, It had the taste.
I'm a tiger expert,I've heard on TV (don't read books-not a homo) how they become man eaters.

And I saw tigger on whinny the poo,
I know what I am talking about
Well it's funny you should say that !!! Have you had any experience with big cats ?

Winston001

29th May 2009, 12:56

No, It had the taste.
I'm a tiger expert,I've heard on TV (don't read books-not a homo) how they become man eaters.

And I saw tigger on whinny the poo,
I know what I am talking about

Oh well that's alright then. I'm convinced. :done:

Mikkel

29th May 2009, 13:05

Certain dog breeds retain more of that 'wild' instinct than others and are more prone to attack without much notice, not too different to a hand reared large cat really. To the handlers, those cats would have been just like your pet is too you, only when they play you dont get scratched, you get mauled.

Oh, is that so?

The only difference between tigers and dogs being that dogs have been domesticated for somewhere between 10,000 and 50,000 years. Dogs have been used for all sorts of purposes - war dogs, hunting dogs, guide dogs, etc.

By comparison "domestication" of the tiger goes back perhaps 2,000 years. So far "domestication" of tigers mainly relates to the entertainment industry - i.e. jumping through hoops, roaring, looking like fierce caged animals and eating gladiators (and the occasional zoo keeper apparently).

Did I forget - one is a dog the other is a cat... up to 300 kg cat mind you. Even if it did have the temperament and instincts of the common housecat I wouldn't want it anywhere near me.

mynameis

29th May 2009, 13:10

It's a bit hard to have sympathy for someone who chooses to work with large predatory animals for a living and then gets attacked by one. Very tragic for his family for sure, but I'm equally sure that they were well aware that his chosen occupation carried with it a certain amount of unpredictable risk. If you don't want to be a potential meal for a tiger, then don't get in a cage with it.

Hence the reason to shoot the big fella, irony is no one seems to express any concern over the mauled dead man but the tiger.

Carrying on almost as if it was his fault he got killed.

Brett

29th May 2009, 13:18

Oh, is that so?

The only difference between tigers and dogs being that dogs have been domesticated for somewhere between 10,000 and 50,000 years. Dogs have been used for all sorts of purposes - war dogs, hunting dogs, guide dogs, etc.

By comparison "domestication" of the tiger goes back perhaps 2,000 years. So far "domestication" of tigers mainly relates to the entertainment industry - i.e. jumping through hoops, roaring, looking like fierce caged animals and eating gladiators (and the occasional zoo keeper apparently).

Did I forget - one is a dog the other is a cat... up to 300 kg cat mind you. Even if it did have the temperament and instincts of the common housecat I wouldn't want it anywhere near me.

It is so. Because I said so.

I wasnt saying that they are the same. I was saying that you have to treat both the same. An animal that has been 'tamed' to whatever degree that then gets into its head that it likes to attach and kill people needs to be dealt with. Why does everyone cry foul because someone killed a large cat that went wild however when it is the likes of a dog (take pitbull for example as it is probably the most (unfairly) notorious dog) attacks and maims or kills someone, the same people call for its blood.

imdying

29th May 2009, 13:36

Carrying on almost as if it was his fault he got killed.Of course it was his fault. He entered into a cage with a large predator. Darwinism at its finest.

mynameis

29th May 2009, 13:37

It is so. Because I said so.

I wasnt saying that they are the same. I was saying that you have to treat both the same. An animal that has been 'tamed' to whatever degree that then gets into its head that it likes to attach and kill people needs to be dealt with. Why does everyone cry foul because someone killed a large cat that went wild however when it is the likes of a dog (take pitbull for example as it is probably the most (unfairly) notorious dog) attacks and maims or kills someone, the same people call for its blood.

+1 Good to see someone out there with all the logical cylinders firing Brett :)

mynameis

29th May 2009, 13:39

Of course it was his fault. He entered into a cage with a large predator. Darwinism at its finest.

So if anyone else enters the cage again and gets killed then what?

The park should be closed and lions and tigers sent elsewhere aye?

imdying

29th May 2009, 13:42

An animal that has been 'tamed' to whatever degree that then gets into its head that it likes to attach and kill people needs to be dealt with.It'll only kill people given opportunity.

Why does everyone cry foul because someone killed a large cat that went wildBecause it didn't 'go wild', it was alway wild... it's a large predatory cat FFS.

Fine, keep a big cat in a cage if that's what does it for you, but don't get in the cage with it, that's just asking to be dinner. I don't know if a big cat can have a 'bad day', but given that a single swipe from a big furry paw can kill a grown man, why the hell would you be retarded enough to take that chance? If you need to get near it, sedate the bugger and open the cage whilst it's asleep. Heck even then you'd want to be bloody sure it was properly sedated.

imdying

29th May 2009, 13:44

So if anyone else enters the cage again and gets killed then what?Then what? Then nothing... problem has taken care of itself... another retard entered a cage with a large predatory animal an was eaten... well fuck me, who could've predicted that that might happen :rolleyes:

The park should be closed and lions and tigers sent elsewhere aye?No, they're a pretty rare animal, so I assume they need to breed them somewhere safe, just don't get into a cage with them in an unsedated state.

sinfull

29th May 2009, 13:52

+1 Good to see someone out there with all the logical cylinders firing Brett :)
+ 2 ! I blame the mother from hell ! I have no idea what the beef the mother has with the lion fella, but the very first attack prolly wouldn't have happened (where the guy got his legs torn) if craig bush was running it (prolly wouldn't have even been hired, as they would have had to make up numbers for the workload after bush was booted) Have to wonder if the male tiger, (being male and all and not as valuable to the breeding program as a female would be) would have been destroyed then and there or at the very least islolated from any human contact, if bush had a say !
Feel for the wife and child of the dude, but i say again, the writing was on the wall !

sinfull

29th May 2009, 13:55

The park should be closed and lions and tigers sent elsewhere aye?
Where exactly would be the Question ! That park is purpose built to house them in probably the best conditions (apart from the wild) is part of an international breeding programe ! It's politics that's destroying it !

Mikkel

29th May 2009, 14:19

It is so. Because I said so.

Of course dad, please don't hit me.

I wasnt saying that they are the same. I was saying that you have to treat both the same. An animal that has been 'tamed' to whatever degree that then gets into its head that it likes to attach and kill people needs to be dealt with. Why does everyone cry foul because someone killed a large cat that went wild however when it is the likes of a dog (take pitbull for example as it is probably the most (unfairly) notorious dog) attacks and maims or kills someone, the same people call for its blood.

Yes, we put down dogs that attack people - and to me it's not the dog that is the problem, but the owner. However, there's a tad more than 120 dogs left on the planet - last time I checked dogs hadn't even made the "may become threatened in the foreseeable future" stage. There's a slight difference between putting down an attack dog because it would take up resources to keep it alive and keeping a specimen of a very endangered species alive for breeding purposes.

If this tiger was known to have attacked a keeper already, what imdying is saying is the way to go. Don't go near it, it is able to kill you with a single swipe of its paw. If this tiger has indeed been used for entertaining zoo guests up until now, that is hugely irresponsible.

imdying

29th May 2009, 14:47

If this tiger was known to have attacked a keeper already, what imdying is saying is the way to go.I'm not saying don't get in a cage with a known people muncher, I'm saying don't get in a cage with a potential people muncher. Those animals aren't house cats, and shouldn't be treated like they can be.

Winston001

29th May 2009, 16:18

I'm not saying don't get in a cage with a known people muncher, I'm saying don't get in a cage with a potential people muncher. Those animals aren't house cats, and shouldn't be treated like they can be.

Fair enough but I don't agree. People work directly with large cats all over the world. Yes, it is dangerous work. There are attacks but far less than you'd imagine. It is unusual.

The type of person who can do this is passionate and aware of the risks. There is plenty of sympathy for the dead man - it's a tragedy - but he wouldn't have wanted the tiger shot.

Cats are fundamentally different from dogs. The dog has been domesticated. The cat has not. The friendly moggy is my preferred pet but I have no illusions - you don't own a cat. They are wild animals who choose to live with you cos the conditions are optimum. :Punk:

Winston001

29th May 2009, 16:22

Short story - when I was aged 4, I "disciplined" a farm dog by poking it with a stick. My dad had told it off. The dog took exception to me interfering and I landed in hospital -> plastic surgery -> three years for the scars to heal.

But dad didn't shoot the dog. And at the age of 4, I did not want that dog shot. The attack was my fault, not the dogs.

Brett

29th May 2009, 16:45

Of course dad, please don't hit me.

Yes, we put down dogs that attack people - and to me it's not the dog that is the problem, but the owner. However, there's a tad more than 120 dogs left on the planet - last time I checked dogs hadn't even made the "may become threatened in the foreseeable future" stage. There's a slight difference between putting down an attack dog because it would take up resources to keep it alive and keeping a specimen of a very endangered species alive for breeding purposes.

If this tiger was known to have attacked a keeper already, what imdying is saying is the way to go. Don't go near it, it is able to kill you with a single swipe of its paw. If this tiger has indeed been used for entertaining zoo guests up until now, that is hugely irresponsible.

I hear what your saying Mikkel. I do agree that it is sad they killed the cat. It is also sad that the keeper died. I come from a family with quite some history in South Africa in Animal Conservation and am a HUGE animal fan. One thing to remember about any breeding programme is that they cost money. The best and most economical way to raise funding to carry on the work is to combine your conservation programme with a form of tourism. This is what Zion Gardens is. Badly run? I am guessing so, and I guess that a lot of it could well have started after Craig Busch (Sp?) went through his whole ordeal. (Have an inside edge on that too.)
However, a cat such as that tiger is immensley valuable both fiscally as well as naturally and I doubt very strongly that they would have killed it had there been another way out.
I think my comments re: putting down dogs vs big cats is flawed. I admit that. I retract it. However I do think that the point I was making stands.

But I think it is wrong of you guys calling the keeper a moron for going into the enclosure. It is something he probably did a hundred times safely and was probably used to it and didn't see the harm. Yes safety protocols there CLEARLY need to be reviewed if Zion is to stay operating but dont miss the fact that the work this guy was doing (and from the sounds of it he wasn't just a shit sweeper) was for the good of the breed and in the intere4st of retaining a nearly wiped out species. Shit this place can be judgemental and hard on others.
I do think that it is incredibly wrong for any of the beasts to be killed if the park closes, they should all be re-homed.

Mikkel

29th May 2009, 17:17

I hear what your saying Mikkel. I do agree that it is sad they killed the cat. It is also sad that the keeper died. I come from a family with quite some history in South Africa in Animal Conservation and am a HUGE animal fan. One thing to remember about any breeding programme is that they cost money. The best and most economical way to raise funding to carry on the work is to combine your conservation programme with a form of tourism. This is what Zion Gardens is. Badly run? I am guessing so, and I guess that a lot of it could well have started after Craig Busch (Sp?) went through his whole ordeal. (Have an inside edge on that too.)
However, a cat such as that tiger is immensley valuable both fiscally as well as naturally and I doubt very strongly that they would have killed it had there been another way out.
I think my comments re: putting down dogs vs big cats is flawed. I admit that. I retract it. However I do think that the point I was making stands.

No disagreement whatsoever. And I do think you are right - if they killed the tiger it was because it seemed like the only option at the time. It's easy in retrospect to say "the keeper died anyway, why kill the tiger in revenge".

But I think it is wrong of you guys calling the keeper a moron for going into the enclosure. It is something he probably did a hundred times safely and was probably used to it and didn't see the harm. Yes safety protocols there CLEARLY need to be reviewed if Zion is to stay operating but dont miss the fact that the work this guy was doing (and from the sounds of it he wasn't just a shit sweeper) was for the good of the breed and in the intere4st of retaining a nearly wiped out species. Shit this place can be judgemental and hard on others.
I do think that it is incredibly wrong for any of the beasts to be killed if the park closes, they should all be re-homed.

For the record, I never called the keeper a moron. However, getting mauled by a tiger is a risk (no matter how improbable) when you get into that cage. It's an occupational hazard so to speak - just like commercial divers are more likely to suffer a spell of the bends than all non-divers. Yes, it is a tragedy. Anytime a person's life is cut short it is a tragedy. However, we still laugh at the Darwin awards - I know I do!
It's not done to be callous, but this existence would be much more bleak without black humour. No amount of being PC and fitting into the popular conception of what respectful is will ever change what has happened.

If I ever get eaten by a tiger, feel free to take the piss out of the situation. After all - my obiturary will rock! "Eaten by Tiger" beats "Succumbed after a decade long struggle with cancer" any day of the week.

Swoop

29th May 2009, 21:08

I am presuming that the shooter has been charged by (*insert name here) for killing an endangered animal.

* DoC.
* WWF.
* SPCA.
* MAF.

Brett

29th May 2009, 23:44

No disagreement whatsoever. And I do think you are right - if they killed the tiger it was because it seemed like the only option at the time. It's easy in retrospect to say "the keeper died anyway, why kill the tiger in revenge".

For the record, I never called the keeper a moron. However, getting mauled by a tiger is a risk (no matter how improbable) when you get into that cage. It's an occupational hazard so to speak - just like commercial divers are more likely to suffer a spell of the bends than all non-divers. Yes, it is a tragedy. Anytime a person's life is cut short it is a tragedy. However, we still laugh at the Darwin awards - I know I do!
It's not done to be callous, but this existence would be much more bleak without black humour. No amount of being PC and fitting into the popular conception of what respectful is will ever change what has happened.

If I ever get eaten by a tiger, feel free to take the piss out of the situation. After all - my obiturary will rock! "Eaten by Tiger" beats "Succumbed after a decade long struggle with cancer" any day of the week.

We have struck an accord :):done: