Zoo intern killed by escaped lion

I agree. I don't want other keepers to come into contact with dangerous animals. I remember a heated argument about whether keepers should enter big cat enclosures. I agreed with the head keeper of cats at the zoo that it was too big a risk.

Captive big cats can be dangerous. If they are kept in zoos, there should be no risk of keepers occupying the same space as unanaesthetized big cats. Zoos should look at enclosures to ensure that keepers cannot come into direct contact with dangerous animals.

Yes,I have heard of umbrella species and I understand how they can be used to protect other animals. I joined the RSPB after reading that it had bought a habitat in Sumatra to protect tigers, rhinoceroses and other animals. This is a more positive way to save endangered animals than keeping animals in zoos with no likelihood of any captives being sent to the wild. Conservation organisations should try to save as many species as possible and I think that zoos should be concentrating more on small and medium-sized species that can be bred and reintroduced to the wild, while conservation organisations should be working towards ensuring that large species have enough space that they can survive in the wild.

 

Wait a minute. I'm not even joking, I feel that this whole thread is built off of assumptions for the following reason:

1. I did not see anything in the article that had to do with the intern being in the enclosure with the lion. It states that she was in the designated human area, in which the lion left the locked space, entered and killed her.

Am I missing something?

 

When the lion entered the designated human area, he was in the same area as the intern and therefore the intern was in the same area as the lion. I do not know if the'designated human area' is part of the enclosure.

 

But what happened was the lion left it's enclosure, entered where the humans were (which means that the people were NOT in the enclosure) and attacked.

 

The keepers (there was at least one more with the killed intern-the article made it seem as if there was at least two others) were in the enclosure cleaning it. IE the cat was moved indoors (or other area) while they were
cleaning the space. IE not public area.

 

I agree that zoos need to be doing more to help lesser known endangered species, 100%, but they cannot do that if people are not visiting the zoo, which many would not do if there wasn't something like a popular big cat to attract them.

The point is so that the taxa does not go Extinct... Why is it any less ok for the Bay Cat, a species with no captive population atm, to go Extinct than any one of the tiger subspecies? They're still an endangered species in need of protection. The fact of the matter is that zoos can't keep every endangered species, and big cats are highly endangered, easier to keep compared to many other species, and extremely popular and as such there are many reasons zoos will want to prioritize keeping them. And if they're going to keep them, why not focus on an evolutionarily distinct subgroup?

Why are you under the impression that big cats cannot be reintroduced into the wild? While there aren't many examples of this, it has happened before and there's nothing stopping this from happening again. Large predators are hard to reintroduced, but not impossible.

Zoos ARE breeding smaller species, many in large numbers. The European Wildcat is a very common zoo animal in Europe and is apart of a huge international breeding program, but it's still not more popular than a big cat. You've already agreed, big cats inherently inspire the public more than smaller species. This is the way it is, it may change in the future but the future is not now, zoos need to bring in visitors now. Zoos also have very little control over what animals the public is interested in most. Species like Meerkats are only common and popular because of pop culture.

You're also still ignoring my point that many smaller and more endangered cats are much more difficult to keep and breed than big cats, and as such lack of interest in keeping them is often not the cause of their small populations.

Lots, go read up on SSPs, TAGs, and the various AZA and EAZA small carnivore programs.

No, lack of available animals not obtained through dubious practices seems to be the main issue. Also these animals needs permits to be exported and there are many, many, many legal hoops to jump through, which often lead to dead ends.

Well I included them because they matter towards your overall point. You're contradicting yourself heavily by complaining that zoos are not keeping highly endangered species, then using very "unendangered" species with smaller captive populations than more endangered species as examples. Your questions have been answered in-depth multiple times now, but you insist on ignoring them in favor of re-asking the same questions. I agree that Meerkats are over-represented and I'd prefer other, more endangered mongoose species be kept. The fact is, though, that Meerkats are another species that get visitors through the gates.

I really don't understand your point here, you're complaining that zoos aren't focusing on more obscure endangered taxa but then you're questioning why bother keeping obscure highly endangered subspecies over the more common varieties. It doesn't matter if the average zoo-goer is bothered, the zoos are and this plays right into how these big cats are important for conservation.

No, it's really not. This is the reason the zoo keeps white tigers.

I bet you have seen lots of people highly interested in lesser known animals (not that clownfish or Narwhals are lesser known animals) when at the zoo, I have, too. When I visited the Cincinnati Zoo in 2013, I was very pleased to see people being highly engaged in the activities of their Banded Civet, Garnett's Galago, and various gibbon species. These examples, though, are from after the visitor is inside the zoo. Once inside the zoo, the average zoo-goer will be fascinated by hundreds of species they've never heard of before, but that is not why they visited. Most visitors go to see great apes, elephants, bears, hippos, rhinos, giraffes, zebra, monkeys, seals/sea lions, parrots, crocodiles, and yes, big cats. These are the animals they complain about not being present when they visit a zoo without them, these are the animals they came to see, and these are the animals that will get the most visitors paying admission. It's a frustrating truth, and I also wish things were different, but the facts are what the facts are.

@Echobeast brings up the excellent example of umbrella species. It's really a genius tactic and one which the WCS (and undoubtedly others) have mastered. A great example from a zoo I know best is Bronx's Congo Gorilla Forest. The zoo has a $6 extra admission fee to enter the exhibit, which is also home to species like Okapi, Red River Hog, various smaller primates, various birds, and many herps, fishes, and inverts. The larger 90% of zoo-goers would never pay an extra admission fee to see these species, but they will for gorillas and then they're given to opportunity to learn about and be intrigued by all of the other species they'll see as well. At the end of the exhibit there is then a series of donation booths set-up, not just for gorillas, but for some of the other species as well. The money from those as well as the extra admission fee all goes towards conserving rainforests in Central Africa and all of the animals living in them. The gorilla is the face of this program, but hundreds or even thousands of other species may benefit from this. The zoo, and zoos in general, have similar programs incorporating elephants, sharks, bears, bison, and of course big cats. Bronx is also a good example here because it is odd in the fact that they exhibit no non-Panthera felids (though they do have Cheetah and I think Clouded Leopard bts, and their other zoos keep other species). Bronx and the WCS will be doing more for endangered small felids in the wild than any other zoo in the US, but your arguments suggest that since they do not exhibit any to the public, these efforts lose their weight and the larger felids they exhibit- which they will also be doing more for in the wild than most zoos- are wasting valuable exhibit space.

And as for your Black-Footed Cat example, this species has a program within US zoos. It has been attempted to be kept in European zoos as well, but the population has never been successful.

~Thylo

 

Marcus was on surplus lists for a long time and was offered to many other zoos, all of whom refused. The exact same thing would have happened if he was a big cat and no one could/would take him in.

You're not missing anything, this thread is entirely built off of assumptions.

~Thylo

 

This was exactly what I was alluding to a while back when I said I did not like the use of 'escaped' in the headline. The exact logistics aren't quite as clear as a keeper being in an enclosure or an animal being amok.

All that said, the article on page 1 isn't the best source on the matter I've seen...

 

And your post was what got me thinking, and one thing led to another and eventually led me to post !

 

Copenhagen shortly afterwards killed a few lions as well if I'm not mistaken.

Or, equally likely, human error. There is no design, no policy and no protocol that can prevent human error in all cases. I don't know what happened, but blind speculation and blaming based on that speculation is not a good way to deal with tragedies like this.

 

I am not aware that I "defamed" you. I am sorry if it appears that I did. I disagreed with you and called you out for your posts. You may well be a lovely, caring and delightful person. But some of your posts in this thread have been, as I stated, insensitive.
As I also stated, to make the general case that keeping of dangerous animals has risks that may be unacceptable is certainly a point worth discussion. To use this woman's death - with very little actual info on what happened - to make the case for negligence is ghoulish IMO.

What you may or may not have said about other forum members has never been an issue to my knowledge.

 

According to another article, they were cleaning the lion's exhibit, but the lion was in a separate holding space.

 

Thanks for taking the time to reply to my comments, Thylo. I realised that my comments would be contentious, but I am willing to listen to alternative views and I find that I learn more from this than from people who agree with me.
I understand that many visitors come to zoos to see ABC animals, but that doesn't mean that zoos shouldn't encourage people to see other animals. In the past few years, there has been an increase in interest in sloths, especially three-toed sloths. It seems that the only zoo outside Latin America with three-toed sloths is the Dallas World Aquarium.
Zoos can cope without some ABC animals, such as elephants or polar bears, and there are zoos that don’t have lions or tigers. I think that zoos should co-operate so zoos that the same species does not occur in zoos that are quite close together. This could encourage people to visit different zoo, rather than having all their favourite animals in the same zoo.

I think that conservationists should try and conserve as many species as possible. The bay cat shouldn’t be considered less important than a subspecies of tiger. Bay cats have been kept in zoos, but the species is very elusive and should probably build up a viable population in Borneo before any attempt to keep them outside Borneo. I have seen Sumatran rhinos in 3 zoos, but the attempt to build up a viable zoo population was generally unsuccessful, especially considering the number of rhinos dying in transit. I accept that zoos can’t keep every endangered species, but it would be better for big cats to be conserved in their natural habitats, rather than having thousands in zoos with no real chance of them being released into the wild, especially as this is rapidly disappearing. Keeping them in zoos is not true conservation; having people in the wild to save big cats is conservation. I have met people who work with zoos to conserve animals in the wild, even though the zoos do not have captive examples.
Going back to the original topic, if a zoo keeps big cats, for whatever reason, there should be no opportunity for the cats to come into contact with keepers – ‘human error’ should not come into working with dangerous animals. Zoos that cannot safeguard their staff from dangerous animals should not keep the dangerous animals.

One of the big problems with introducing large carnivores involves many countries being unable to feed living prey to carnivores. If big cats were to be reintroduced into the wild, they would have to be able to hunt live prey. How would they do this? As the cats would probably associate people with food, how would conservationists minimise the chance of the cats killing people or livestock? How would introduced big cats affect the ecology of an area? Would there be enough viable prey.
The only case I know of an attempt to reintroduce tigers into the wild involves South Africa (In South Africa, Chinese tigers claw their way back to life). Ina world where the human population is increasing and natural habitat is being destroyed, I don’t feel there is enough time, or desire, to train captive big cats to survive in the wild. It would be more realistic, but still difficult, to save big cats in the wild.

I realise about zoos breeding smaller species and commend zoos that breed relatively unpopular species. In 2015, I saw several water vole enclosures at Wildwood, where voles are being bred for release into the wild. London Zoo has bred many field crickets, which have been released. I accept many people prefer that big cats to water voles and field crickets, but at least the conservation process for the voles and crickets are viable. Breeding big cats and sending the young to other zoos to boost the captive population, which will take up more space at the expense of other species is good for the captive cats, but does it really help the wild animals?

I’m sorry if you feel that I’ve ignored your point. I accept that you probably know more than I do about the viability of keeping some small species. I would appreciate it if you could send me details of small cat species that have been difficult to keep in captivity. I feel that some species of small cat could be kept in more zoos, but I don’t know if this due to the fact that big cats are more popular, several zoos aren’t interested or that zoos can’t keep the cats for various reasons. As you say, much is due to problems with obtaining animals legally and I wouldn’t want a return to zoos obtaining animals illegally.

I’ve tried to develop my views since yesterday. I hope I haven’t implied that zoos don’t keep very endangered species; I know this isn’t true. I’ve seen several endangered species at zoo and know that various endangered species are kept behind the scenes.

I find this comment confusing. You’ve said that big cats attract zoo visitors, even if the visitors aren’t bothered about the subspecies. If it is important to keep pure subspecies, why do so many zoos keep generic big cats? If the big cats are not part of a reintroduction programme, does it matter if they are pure subspecies or generic? Surely, it would be better to protect the big cats in the wild, why is so much money spent on captive populations? Does the average visitor consider any subspecies of lion or tiger to be obscure?

I agree that many people expect to see popular animals at zoos, but I have noticed a trend in books and TV programmes showing more obscure species and I have met people who want to see species that London Zoo did not have. On Friday, I visited the photography exhibition at London’s Natural History Museum. A young boy was watching a display of slides and was very good at identifying the animals. I think that some zoos underestimate the level of knowledge some children have about animals and assume that children want to see the same animals that their parents saw decades before. I realise that people have to enter the zoo before they can see an obscure species, but surely marketing departments could try and interest people in seeing the only examples of a species in a state or county, rather than advertising animals they can see in many other zoos. I was impressed by the number of signposts pointing towards a gavial enclosure at Prague Zoo. How many people go to a zoo to see gavials? Despite this, Prague Zoo wanted people to see them.

I went to the Bronx Zoo in 1991 and was impressed by several exhibits. I’m confused by your statement about large and small cats. People do not need to see species to want those species to be conserved. When I visited Shepreth, there were several displays encouraging people to help conserve species not kept in the collection and I suspect that many people like animals they have never seen alive. Similarly, the area occupied by a big cat enclosure could be occupied by an exhibit showing several endangered, interesting, active animals,

I saw a black-footed cat at Colchester Zoo and I hope to see one again. I hope that American and European zoos can cooperate so that more species can be kept in both continents.

 

Thank you, Zooplantman. I accept that this has been a very emotive issue. I accept that you and I can disagree about issues and I hope that both of us can learn from considering alternative views. I agree that I didn't phrase the following comment properly: "It seems that some deaths are almost treated as collateral damage, as if keeping dangerous animals in zoos is more important than the chance of keepers being killed." The words 'seems' and 'almost' were lost, so the comment could easily have seemed that I felt that zoo managers didn't care about their staff. I know this isn't the case and I'm sorry about the clumsy way I wrote that comment. I want zoo staff to be safe and not to come into contact with dangerous animals. That was why I commented on this site and definitely not to upset relatives and friends of the intern. I shall wait to see the causes of the intern's death. My main concern with my comments has been a hope that such events are not repeated.

 

Thanks, TLD. This is all news to me. Do you know anything about some of the small cat species found in South-east Asian zoos.

 

Investigation on hold
Government shutdown delays investigation of fatal lion attack :: WRAL.com

 

According to the coroner's report, a ball prevented a gate from shutting. The keeper was pulled by her ankle, then dragged around the enclosure. She died from multiple lacerations to her neck that caused severe blood loss. The family seems to be disputing this. Family of intern killed by lion at Caswell County preserve questions coroner's report :: WRAL.com

 

Seems weird that the coroners report would include why the lion had access
to the keeper, but that at least seems to confirm that only one lock would have seperated the lion from the keepers. I read last week that it would take 4-6
months for a full report of the incident, which seems unnecessarily ridiculously long.