Tiger put down because it killed a man

[PeterCH]

Yes they do. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger#Man-eating_tigers
We're not prefered prey but they'll settle for us once in a while.

The tigers which do target people are put down in their natural habitat.

Unless of course you want to sell your house and give the money to the WWF so they can create a wildlife reserve. Please don't dictate how other people should interact with their environment from the comfort of a 1st World setting.

 

[Sackboy]

That tiger should have been put down earlier, after the first attack. This guy would have been alive if they did their jobs properly.

An animal which attacks a human being needs to be killed, otherwise this animal will target people in the future.

Too little too late - good that their labour department is investigating.

This is pretty unfair. The poor animal is very good at it's job -hunting and killing prey - so we put it down.

It should never have been put in a zoo in the first place.

 

[Sly21C]

Yet another proud display from that most pathetic of creatures.... MAN

+1 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 ..................

 

[semaphore]

That tiger should have been put down earlier, after the first attack. This guy would have been alive if they did their jobs properly.

An animal which attacks a human being needs to be killed, otherwise this animal will target people in the future.

Too little too late - good that their labour department is investigating.

Your comments on this matter are just totally retarded. Like everyone is saying, tigers where built as predators not fluffy little kittens. It was following its natural instinct. It would have done the same thing in nature. Just because the zoo had incompetent handlers is there own fault. And you would most likely find that these handlers teased or possibly abused the animals to get them agro.

 

[BCO]

I'm siding with the critically endangered big cat here.

+1

Absolutely unacceptable to kill one of the last 120 of these tigers in the world out of some kind of act of vengeance.

 

[Geriatrix]

The tigers which do target people are put down in their natural habitat.

I'm sure they are.

Unless of course you want to sell your house and give the money to the WWF so they can create a wildlife reserve. Please don't dictate how other people should interact with their environment from the comfort of a 1st World setting.

I did that? Where? I merely said tigers will hunt and kill people. Especially in the wild.
Why so defensive?

 

[hj2k_x]

I am with the cat on this one as well.

Wonder what caused it to attack. Seems somewhat strange...If you don't want them eating you, don't catch them and put them in cages, and then go into those cages. Simple. And to prevent the need for this in the first place, stop destroying their actual habitat.

 

[Balstrome]

I dont like caged animals anyway, the tigers better off and so are some humans.

I wonder how much the skin is going for? Probably out of my range, though the paws would look interesting on my golf clubs

 

[Shake&Bake]

With the tiger on this one.

If the cat was deemed dangerous, return it to it's natural habitat.

 

[noxibox]

It does seem strange to kill an animal in captivity for this. It makes very good sense out in the wild as I would expect cats to go after whatever food is easiest and there are few things easier to catch than a human.

"The masteerios dak foses are behind it!"

It is a white tiger. Maybe Helen Zille is behind it.

 

[Sackboy]

I wonder how much the skin is going for? Probably out of my range, though the paws would look interesting on my golf clubs

I would say the claws would look good embedded in your arse

 

[PeterCH]

With the tiger on this one.

If the cat was deemed dangerous, return it to it's natural habitat.

It's an endangered species which means it won't survive long in it's natural habitat, whether because of attacks on humans and people defending themselves or poachers hunting them down.

What you suggest will not work.

 

[Sackboy]

It's an endangered species which means it won't survive long in it's natural habitat, whether because of attacks on humans and people defending themselves or poachers hunting them down.

What you suggest will not work.

There are alternatives such as parks.

 

[PeterCH]

This is pretty unfair. The poor animal is very good at it's job -hunting and killing prey - so we put it down.

Because we've already put down bears, lions, wolves and other predators in Europe, North America, Southern Africa and much of Asia so we can live comfortably and moan about broadband access instead of sharing habitat with
dangerous wild animals. What's not fair is someone moaning about this when their own ancestors wiped out animals in their own countries.

It should never have been put in a zoo in the first place.

Where else will young children see a live big cat? How else to stimulate the attention of kids and bring the plight of the decline of nature to the attention of the future generation? Sure they can watch Discovery Channel but seeing a big cat live is much more emotional experience. Secondly, better in a zoo than somewhere where poachers would have ended it years ago.

My condolences to the poor man who died a horrible death at the hands of this beast. Good riddance to the tiger.

 

[PeterCH]

There are alternatives such as parks.

I'm sure most of them are in nature reserves. A few in zoos are insignificant.
As for the ones in parks - well these parks need to be in the right climate zone, and chances are that these animals come from 3rd world countries where poaching may still occur in reserves. Who knows....the ZOO btw has experts,
we're not experts here - criticizing them is like having a game tracker who's never seen a computer criticize your network setup strategy.

 

[BCO]

Because we've already put down bears, lions, wolves and other predators in Europe, North America, Southern Africa and much of Asia so we can live comfortably and moan about broadband access instead of sharing habitat with
dangerous wild animals. What's not fair is someone moaning about this when their own ancestors wiped out animals in their own countries.



Where else will young children see a live big cat? How else to stimulate the attention of kids and bring the plight of the decline of nature to the attention of the future generation? Sure they can watch Discovery Channel but seeing a big cat live is much more emotional experience. Secondly, better in a zoo than somewhere where poachers would have ended it years ago.

Agreed.

My condolences to the poor man who died a horrible death at the hands of this beast. Good riddance to the tiger.

Not agreed. Putting down this tiger was nothing but an act of vengeance. The zoo should have taken a lesson from this and looked at their feeding methodology, NOT killed an endangered tiger for doing what it does best - hunting prey.

 

[PeterCH]

Agreed.



Not agreed. Putting down this tiger was nothing but an act of vengeance. The zoo should have taken a lesson from this and looked at their feeding methodology, NOT killed an endangered tiger for doing what it does best - hunting prey.

I don't think it was done in vengeance. In killing a keeper the tiger realised that people and especially staff are no longer the masters of his habitat, any respect through fear has disappeared and the tiger is likely to repeat this act.

It's the same with a dog. Once a dog realises that you're not in control, you're in danger, as long as the dog knows who the master is - no problems. Tigers aren't domesticated animals but I'm sure this sort of psychology works here too upto a level.

 

[BCO]

There are only [-]120[/-] 119 left of these tigers in the world now, Peter. It's NOT like a dog of which there are millions. When you're dealing with an endangered species, I believe that every attempt should be made to preserve the lives of each living member of that species. The zoo should have implemented a safer feeding/cage cleaning system, not removed one of the last survivors of a beautiful species from the gene pool.

 

[ShaunSA]

I believe that every attempt should be made to preserve the lives of each living member of that species. The zoo should have implemented a safer feeding/cage cleaning system, not removed one of the last survivors of a beautiful species from the gene pool.

Especially when you consider that it's all out fault that these species are endangered

 

[porn$tar]

If an animal kills a human its putdown...
Something about the taste of a humans blood...

It's a carnivore, it was born with the taste for blood, any blood. It's human arrogance that makes us think we're immune to it. It's easy to say you're on top of the food chain when you buy your meat nicely wrapped in cellophane.