Australia Zoo Tiger Bite

Media observation

That is very true. If you are scratched by a cat you are scratched - if you are scratched by a lion you are "mauled"!

On a similar note - horses kill more people in this country every year than sharks, snakes and crocodiles combined. A human being killed by a horse barely rates a mention. But, if a shark or a reptile kills someone......just watch the media feeding frenzy.:confused:
 
On that last note steve. A gentleman on a property down the road from ours was just this weekend thrown from a horse so hard it snapped his urethra (sp?) or whatever it's called off his bladder completely, flown to sydney by helicopter, not a single word mentioned in the local paper. My old man breaks in horses alot and he's often argued that he'd rather be in with a lion then some of the horses he's dealt with.
 
Yikes a scratch from a 135kg tiger, (juma is quite large for a sumatran). then again must be a usually thing that the keepers deal with day in day out, just like a cat tigers need some form of play!
 
From an objective viewpoint, there exists quite a prominent numeric discrepancy of horses/tigers kept. So if "horses kill more people in this country every year [than sharks, tigers or whathever big predatory animal]", then that's because far more people have direct contact with far more horses than they have with tigers. If more people had direct contact with more tigers, the number of accidents would consequently rise-and most likely easily surpass that of horses, given the nature of tigers and other big cats...As a consequence, the media interest in such accidents might fade-or turn into a witchhunt, similar to the ones against so-called "dangerous dog breeds".

All a question of proportionality.
 
Last edited:
Horses and tigers

I will of course doubt that statistics are present to compare the two. I certainly do not doubt that there though would be more accidents if there were equal amounts of tigers handled as horses. The latest argument was though about the media and the fascination with "sensational" stories.

Millions go swimming in the ocean every year and a couple dozen are attacked by sharks. When you read the paper though one may think that to swim in the ocean your chances of surviving it are much smaller than the facts suggest.
 
Steve Robinson said:
Not with some of the lions that I've dealt with! LOL :D
Click to expand...

Haha. Yeah I think if he had the choice he'd stick with his horses. lol, not me however. I personally think that the situation and the media response varies depending on the incident.

Australia Zoo and Dreamworld- The staff that interact with these cats are that, staff. Now they accept the risks involved in the job when they take it and I'm sure there have been more incidents than the media knows about. that comes with the job. Of course an incicdent where a keeper requires a trip to hospital has to be reported to workcover.

If a member of the public is hurt the media coverage is even greater. There will even be calls for the interaction to stop etc.

Steve, If you don't mind I'd like to use you as an example for this next bit? having worked with lions and probably other big cats up close (unsure if you go in with your adult lions) but would I be right to say you have been injured by them even only minor injury on more than one occasion in your years working with these animals?

I would be willing to put money on the fact that if Steve got bad scratch from a lion the media coverage would be different again. Although many keepers have good relationships with their charges it's not often that people can say that the animals really are a part of the family, Steve lives with his cats and the media would make it out to be nothing more than a scratch from something like the family pet.

On a little off topic note Steve. I have been told many times that of all the big cats to interact with Lions are the best option and most affectionate toward their keepers as they are social cats. Do you think that is true in most cases?
 
If a staff member is injured in any way at a zoo it is the responsibility of management to follow WorkCover [in Queensland] requirements. The media [should] have nothing to do with it. Given the nature of our industry, you all know how that works in reality!

Media cover would be pretty much the same no matter who is scratched by a big cat - their interest is in who did the scratching, not who got scratched.
 
ptig said:
Millions go swimming in the ocean every year and a couple dozen are attacked by sharks. When you read the paper though one may think that to swim in the ocean your chances of surviving it are much smaller than the facts suggest.
Click to expand...
Uncontrolled finning makes sure that the odds of encountering a shark, no matter if dangerous for humans or not, are even smaller. Wish the media would rather focus on that...
However, there are some "hot spots/times" in this world where chances of problematic encounters with sharks are more likely possible-nothing new to Australian members of the forum, and something the public should be aware of.

Local insurance companies and hospitals could probably come up with statistics if needed, but that's a minor matter.
About media interest: I think it does matter for the media who gets scratched. If Average Joe is the victim, it's mainly a short-lived affair for the local news. But if Nicole Kidman's skin gets nipped by a tiger, this "important issue" is broadcasted all over the globe...;)
 
Steve Robinson said:
If a staff member is injured in any way at a zoo it is the responsibility of management to follow WorkCover [in Queensland] requirements. The media [should] have nothing to do with it. Given the nature of our industry, you all know how that works in reality!

Media cover would be pretty much the same no matter who is scratched by a big cat - their interest is in who did the scratching, not who got scratched.
Click to expand...

On the sydney news today was a story about the baby langur born at Taronga. I'm pretty sure the media was contacted by the zoo.
I may have misinterpreted your post, Steve, but I am sure the zoo didn't want the media to have nothing to do with this story. i guess zoos have to take the good with the bad. Hopefully there isn't anymore accidents in any Australian zoos and from now on all the stories are about the great work being done by the zoo staff all throughout Australia.
 
media

Of course it is a bigger story if Nicole Kidman get scratched. My point though was that the media is a really poor resource for what is happening in the world. Their interest is to figure out what interests their audience and not what is truly important info. There are exceptions but not that many.

Tiger incidents sell and the majority of the time are frankly not that important to read about.
 
This thread seems to be going around and around so lets move on from here guys, Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top