Dreamworld Tiger Bites Handler » Dreamworld

24-05-2011

Sometimes 'outsiders' do see more clearly in many situations!

I'm not particularly bothered what happens to the humans, they do have a choice; so long as the animals, who are in captivity not out of choice, get the best care they can get!

24-05-2011

I would hope that all of us, irrespective of our views on FC, would agree with your last statement.

It is partly for that very reason that I argue for people to have the right to work FC with particular individual animals - I have seen, and continue to see, just how enriching it can be for the animals themselves.

24-05-2011

I think that you'll find that the cheetahs get such a great deal of enrichment in their lives out of such interactions [as do Dreamworld's tigers] that the practice will continue whether the public are involved or not.

29-05-2011

Hix wrote: "Let me pose a question for the Protected Contact advocates:

last year a keeper was killed by a Killer Whale - should shows that involve keepers in direct contact with cetaceans now be ceased, as the potential is there for more deaths in future?"

The trainer was NOT in free contact. Protocol banned free contact with this individual whale as it had a track record of being involved in two human deaths already. Captive killer whales are well known for being problematic in captivity, smaller cetaceans to a much lesser extent. Perspective is need here.

Many things we ask exotics to do for the public can be done through conditioning without a keeper being in the same space. In some facilities (and the killer whale one springs to mind) keepers may actually have very little say about the OH&S concerns of working in with potentially dangerous animals.

The message we are trying to get across to the public by using free contact can be viewed in many lights, but it is important to understand what you are getting across and if indeed it is being received that way. Personally I see a lot of free-contact theatrics as Disneyfication of animals, with keepers having to be involved because that is the ONLY way we think the public can make a connection. But isn't it taking the animal out of context, and should we have more faith in the public and be trying to steer them in other directions such as animals existing for themeselves, in their own environments, not for human interaction/entertainment, etc? What messages are we sending? It reminds me of A Bug's Life, where the makers believed the way to make the ant more appealing was to depict it as four-legged! Is it even still an ant?

I have no doubt free contact can have beneficial effects for the animals, but one has to weigh up the degree of contact and the risk to the keepers involved, along with public perception.

Just my ramble, and no offence intended

29-05-2011

There may be at least one AZA accredited facility that still does it - Six Flags Discovery Kingdom (Vallejo, California). Home of the famous diving tiger show (Odin's Tiger Temple). Not sure if keepers still go in directly since they built the new stadium a year or two ago, but I suspect they do.

The aforementioned Out Of Africa (not sure why the poster added the derogatory term "infamous") in my state of Arizona has been doing their Tiger Splash show for nearly two decades without incident. Not one single serious injury in years and years of daily shows. If an accident with big cats really was inevitable, something bad would have happened long before this.

According to a video put out by the Feline Conservation Federation (an advocacy group for private wild cat ownership in the U.S.), if you go strictly by number of annual deaths you are statistically more likely to be killed by having a snack vending machine fall on you than by a wild cat.

Respected wild cat researcher Jim Sanderson, who has recently become a personal friend of mine, states that when he does fundraisers for small cat conservation, he gets a higher donation rate when a professional handler is at the event with a live cat for people to meet up close.

Obviously the public should always be kept away from large, dangerous carnivores. Even the aformentioned Feline Conservation Federation states this in their guidelines (and they are VERY pro-contact and pro-private ownership). But I see no reason why professionals should not have direct contact and I agree with the previous sentiment that it is indeed more enriching for the cats. I know of at least two scientific zoo-based studies in the U.S. that back this up.

30-05-2011

Despite the fact a quick internet search suggests the keeper was in free contact with the orca, my question was "should all shows cease because the potential for death exists?" Particularly in light of your statement "Captive killer whales are well known for being problematic in captivity".



Hix

30-05-2011

As someone who works with aquatics, my understanding of the terminology used is that free contact for aquatics involves swimming with them. Blanche was in semi-protected contact - still land-based. Yes, there is a difference.

You can have cetacean shows with semi or protected contact. You don't have to do roman rides or synchronised swimming with them.

30-05-2011

Has anyone done the serval encounter at Werribee Zoo yet? A little bit on the pricey side ($70), but it looks great!

30-05-2011

There are plenty of photos of her swimming and riding the whales. Maybe not Tilikum, but the fact she wasn't in the water with him at the time does not invalidate my original question.



Hix

05-06-2011

I concur with Steve R.I am going to throw some 'oil on the fire'.I reckon there are 'those who can and those who can't'.The handler that was bitten 'can ' but obviously injured as a result of working with his tigers.If we are all to be levelled at mediocrity then skills developed in the past will be lost.All zoo's/attractions rely on being or having unique exhibits to attract the visiting public so where do we get off telling stakeholders whether they should be FC or PC.This is peoples' livelihoods and they have trained developing necessary skills to manage the aforementioned species in captivity.I see the visiting public enjoy the observed interaction or personal just as visitors have since the first zoo's opened in Europe.Man has an affinity with the natural world and in the 'west' we know best and we will define it for the rest of the world to follow,I hope we don't and for those who disagree,disagree,you will not convince me otherwise.