Australia Zoo Man Bitten by Tiger at Australia Zoo

ptig said:
This happened at the tiger display at the Tiger Temple. Of course there are not going to be any animals 'put down'
Click to expand...

Australia Zoo hasn't used the crocoseum to display tigers for 7 years now....As ptig says it happened at the Tiger Temple, and why on earth would the animal be put down? Worst case would be placed into protected contact.... I cant believe zoochatters would even raise the possibility of destroying the animal :eek:
 
ptig said:
Of course there are not going to be any animals 'put down'
Click to expand...

Rough said:
why on earth would the animal be put down?.....I cant believe zoochatters would even raise the possibility of destroying the animal
Click to expand...

The question is valid as there are several countries where this is still a likely scenario.

Anyway, it wasn't a question - Hevden merely wanted to confirm the animal would not be destroyed.

:p

Hix
 
That was exactly my point and i am sorry that anyone thinks i would mean it should be put down (i infact happen to love big cats and would be sad to see this happen without an extreme circumstance). Thankyou hix for pointing this out and also yes unfortunately is what happens in certain places.
 
Not the first time (nor the last) that a member of staff has been nobbled working hands-on with tigers in Aust. Haven't heard it before at Aust Zoo, but I've heard of several 'accidents' at Dreamworld. Small soft human versus big muscular carnivores with claws and teeth, yeah not too hard to see where it goes from here. Personally I think they are asking for an accident, but then again it's not my neck on the line.
 
contributions

I am sure that Jabiru is joking as Australia Zoo and Dreamworld fund many times the rest of the zoos combined annually.
 
Jarkari said:
I'm not sure if this is meant as a joke or not but i remember reading once something along the lines of all the big zoos combined might equal the contribution Dreamworld makes alone.
Click to expand...

Regardless, Dreamworld is a theme park so obviously they are going to bring in the $$$ if they have tiger shows, and I would not expect any less (but they are doing great things with the bilby in Queensland).

However, it is sad to see that Australia Zoo needs to do such a thing in order to gain revenue. I would think that such things as the crocoseum show, elephant feeding (when they had elephants) and many koala photo opportunities would surely bring in the money that is necessary for conservation programs?

In other words, I am not doubting their conservation work, but I don't think that it is necessary to 'play' with tigers in order to help their efforts.
 
conservation funding

Jabiru, did you realize that much of the funding for in-situ conservation comes from activities that both Dreamworld and Australia zoo do with their animals and patrons? Surely people go to all the major zoos to see animals and should contribute to their conservation?
 
ptig said:
Jabiru, did you realize that much of the funding for in-situ conservation comes from activities that both Dreamworld and Australia zoo do with their animals and patrons? Surely people go to all the major zoos to see animals and should contribute to their conservation?
Click to expand...

Personally, I think it is just wrong to have humans 'playing' with fully grown tigers. And I also don't agree with hand-rearing the new Sumatran cubs (unless there is an important reason, such as the mother neglecting them).

But I will leave it at that. I hope the keeper gets better and hopefully something like this won't happen again (in saying that, it probably will). :)
 
Jabiru96 said:
Handling tigers, or carnivores of any sort, in free contact is bound to end in someone getting hurt, whether it be a bitten finger or even worse (such as what happened in Zion). I don't think it is necessary for Australia Zoo and Dreamworld to exhibit tigers in free contact as a conservation message can just as easily be achieved without the need to be in with tigers, making them climb trees, or jump, or lick milk from a carton.

But hey, that is just my opinion.
Click to expand...

Well, 99% of all zoo professionals in North America and Europe share this opinion. It`s Dreamworld and Australia Zoo which are the "odd guys out" and not the other way around.
It is just a matter of time before someone will get killed in Australia Zoo or Dreamworld, and regardless how much money for conservation they raise, how can anyone seriously think that it is worth risking human lives for??
 
Yassa said:
and regardless how much money for conservation they raise, how can anyone seriously think that it is worth risking human lives for??
Click to expand...
It is worth a foolish human's life.
Natural selection in all its glory.
Just don't shoot the tiger and let it eat as much as possible - the less stuff is left, the cheaper a funeral will be.
 
tigers

Yassa I guess you have done the survey of zoo professionals. What I do find odd (besides your 'survey') is that all of the deaths caused by tigers across Europe and North America have been in zoos that do not handle these animals and there have been no such results at the two institutions you are mentioning. Curious do you not think?
 
ptig said:
Yassa I guess you have done the survey of zoo professionals. What I do find odd (besides your 'survey') is that all of the deaths caused by tigers across Europe and North America have been in zoos that do not handle these animals and there have been no such results at the two institutions you are mentioning. Curious do you not think?
Click to expand...

Almost 100% of the AZA and EAZA accreditted zoos in Europe and North America handle their big cats in protected contact. That`s so naturally it doesn`t even need to be discussed!! And of course that says it all regarding the professional european and US opinion about free contact with big cats.

The keeper deaths you are refering to are true accidents like "keeper forgot to close the door". All totally avoidable but sadly people make mistakes. And that is absolutely enough of a risk. You really don`t need to add to that by purposely going into the tiger cage - then people get hurt even when all safety procedures are adhered to.
 
tgier incidents

Yassa said:
Almost 100% of the AZA and EAZA accreditted zoos in Europe and North America handle their big cats in protected contact. That`s so naturally it doesn`t even need to be discussed!! And of course that says it all regarding the professional european and US opinion about free contact with big cats.

The keeper deaths you are refering to are true accidents like "keeper forgot to close the door". All totally avoidable but sadly people make mistakes. And that is absolutely enough of a risk. You really don`t need to add to that by purposely going into the tiger cage - then people get hurt even when all safety procedures are adhered to.
Click to expand...

Yes Yassa, Those were tragic 'accidents' but please do not purport to speak for all zoo professional based on the stances of the associations. As a note to your dialogue. There was a 'near miss' at Hamilton Zoo in New Zealand about a year ago. It may have had a tragic outcome as a door was not locked but fortunately for the keeper involved the tiger had come from a handled program and luckily had no injuries as a result.

Not all institutions need to do it the same way and there can be more than one correct answer. I would not expect that most zoos, with little to no expertise in handling and training of cats, to start a program without dramas.

Dreamworld and Australia Zoo are outside 'your box' and I am sure we both can live with that. Both of these institutions do considerable amounts for conservation and hopefully you would applaud that outcome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top