Steve, read more comments, now understand *G*
BBC reports:
BBC News - Cheetah attacks two keepers at Kent animal park
BBC News - 'Feisty' cheetah attacks Eagle Heights keepers
I haven't been to the park, but from what I see I think the way they are managing their cheetahs is good for the cheetahs. I wish more parks ran them on zip wires for one thing. Also, while bigcatman may have had a lot of zoo experience, he didn't seem to distinguish at all between cheetah and other big cats in terms of management. I was under the impression that most consider them much different, and much safer for direct contact. Have there been any actual cases of keepers killed by cheetah?
The question is "are they managing their Cheetah correctly and within the guidlines as set down by law and that of BIAZA as well as all the other fat of Acts and guidelines?"
In short... NO, they are not.
Given that the "mechanical lure for Cheetah" was devised at Glasgow and registered and that other devices have now came on and even bettered it, but study's have shown that such lures have a overall non effect on Cheetah. William's et al. (1996) designed a pulley system that carried a dead rabit through a zoo-housed cheetah's enclosure (similar to that done at Glasgow). Synder, 1997; made the distiction that such automated devices only allows the animal to "choose" how often it hunts and not when and by own nature. It was also noted by Law et al, 1997 (Glasgow) that big cats have been observed going back to the chase well after the prey has been caught, the reason was to expend excess testosterone and other hormones that had built up during that bout of hunt or part of chase of excitement. The whole ethos of lures and automated lures are very complex and with any pretator that gives chase to such then more studies are needed to justify such systems.
Cheetah are more passified by humans than many other larger species of cats, as mentioned by Douglas, 1992. "Until fairly recently, Cheetah was used as a hunting animal by humans. The blindfold would be removed once the intended quarry - usually a gazelle or hare - had been sighted by the handler." Just because Cheetah come acroos as more passive, better natured than their bigger or even smaller cousins, do not make the mistake that they are indeed friendly or can be made to be "tame" bu humans...they cannot and also defies good animal welfare and conservation values. One way to see it is: you may have a pitbull or akita and it is as playful and friendly to you and your pals as you would expect. But when nature for unknown forces or reasons strike, that dog then becomes a powerful and frightening beast and will rip you apart. So does that mean the Cheetah is as friendly or domesticated as a dog? Sorry No....
I'm sure there are risks, and lessons to be learnt. But personally, as long as the welfare for the animals is good, and 'bystanders' are protected, I think it's up to individuals how much risk they choose to take. There's a degree of risk with any animal (yesterday I had a nasty moment with my finger in the mouth of a pissed off pug dog, getting well chewed. Wondered how it was going to come out... answer is fine with only small puncture marks!) You can't ban every risk, and it's up to the individual where they draw the line. Off to walk the pug again later... If his owner has remembered to put his harness on today (he's fine unless I try and put it on...)
