Sad: Lioness killed for walking out of enclosure at Australian zoo!!

[xDardentlove]

Keepers shoot escaped lion at Australian zoo


The lioness wasn't even showing aggression or anything! She had merely just gotten out of her enclosure and was just walking around. I cannot believe that they killed her for walking around! They called it "putting her down". This really upsets me! I understand that there was potential for danger, but considering that she was born and raised in captivity she probably has a handler that could've easily corralled her back into her enclosure. There had to have been an alternative!

[rabbitsncavyluv]

I imagine they wanted to be safe than sorry, and avoid being sued. I don't understand why they could not have just sedated her or used a tranquilizer, and/or gotten a trainer to get her back to her enclosure.

[guineapigluver1]

I agree, rabbitsncavyluv. They could have just sedated or tranquilized her and taken her back to her enclosure. They didn't need to kill the poor thing.

[Paula]

Heartbreak behind decision to shoot escaped lion | smh.com.au

This article provides some explanation for the reason the zookeeper made the decision she did. Unfortunately, it's impossible to know which would have been the "right" decision, or what a different action may have meant for the lion or the tourists.

[wheekypigs]

A lioness was shot in Malibu for coming down from the mountains to look for food. One has been spotted digging into a trash can. It is so so sad. We are driving these wild animals out of house and home to such desperation, I feel so sorry for them.

[xDardentlove]

There had to have been a better solution for the problem. Killing the lioness couldn't of possibly been the best way to solve the problem. All I am saying is that there had to have been a better way of dealing with the escapee. I don't know, it's just really upsetting.

[AnmlLvr14]

Having to do this to any animal is sad. Unfortunately, it is what has to happen in most (if not all) zoos when it comes to large carnivores (and other potentially dangerous animals). Public safety is always thought about first. I used to work with a mountain lion who was hand raised and a very sweet kitty. However, if he were to ever get out of his enclosure into an area where he had access to the public, we would have had no choice but to shoot him. Like the article Paula posted stated, tranquilizers take at least a few minutes to work. Sometimes, one dart may not even be enough, which would make that process last even longer. So, no, tranquilizers are not the way to go. Trying to have the trainer lead them back is too risky. Even if they are hand-raised, have been around humans their entire life, etc, they are still wild animals and can be unpredictable. I would put the blame on the keeper that was responsible for her escape, not the person that had to do the unfortunate deed. When something this drastic happens at one zoo, all zoos will be learning from it.

[Paula]

Originally Posted by xDardentlove

There had to have been a better solution for the problem. Killing the lioness couldn't of possibly been the best way to solve the problem.

I agree that it certainly seems that way, yes.

But decisions like this have to be made in a matter of seconds, and it's impossible, looking back, to appreciate the totality of the circumstances facing the one tasked with making that decision in the moments it had to be made.

Yes, it's possible that they could have tranquilized the lion and it all would have worked out just fine. It's also possible that they would have tranquilized the lion only to have her maul several tourists, at which point the animal would have no doubt been destroyed anyway. It is not possible, however, to know how it would have worked out, or could have worked out, if a different call was made.

Imagine the outcry if the lion had attacked and hurt a person or persons. Then people would wonder why the decision to put the animal down didn't come sooner. It's just an impossible situation, and despite the tragedy, it just isn't possible to know what would or wouldn't have happened if they had done anything differently.

In my opinion, the true fault here lies not only with the keeper who let the animal escape, but that there weren't more measures in place to keep this type of thing from happening at all.

[lmarieaa]

Ugh. this is awful. I believe that ALL caretakers of potentially dangerous animals should be required to have a tranquilizer on their person at all times, as well as being trained to use it properly. It should be the law. It saves animal as well as human lives.
I put the sole blame on the people running the zoo. They are idiots for not having tranquilizers on hand...oh but they had a gun handy...ridiculous!

[Paula]

I agree that it's awful, and I agree that fault lies solely with the caretakers at the zoo.

And they did have tranquilizers available. The choice was made not to use them, but to go with lethal force instead, but not without consideration. In the end, they opted to shoot the animal because tranquilizing her might have allowed her too much time to do damage and could possibly have caused her to act aggressively towards tourists.

If they (and other zoos) had a contingency plan in place for just this type of incident, then the outcome might have been different. That they didn't is irresponsible, yes, and hopefully they are working to get one together now, should it ever happen again. Hopefully another animal won't have to die this way - for a person's mistake and for a greater failure of zoo personnel to protect the animals in their care and humans in the event of such a crisis.

[Nymphae]

I understand the zookeepers decision to shoot the lioness on spot and I even agree with it. She didn't have a choice, she would have endangered both her life and of the numerous visitors. I just hope the director will learn from this and instill new rules to keep both the people AND animals safe this time.. Though I think these should have been instilled a long time ago.

[katiewilson]

Originally Posted by paula.m.moore

Imagine the outcry if the lion had attacked and hurt a person or persons. Then people would wonder why the decision to put the animal down didn't come sooner. It's just an impossible situation, and despite the tragedy, it just isn't possible to know what would or wouldn't have happened if they had done anything differently.

It saddens me greatly that the lioness had to be killed, and I sincerely wish there was ANY way they could have avoided this. But you are quite right, Paula, that from a zoo's standpoint, they simply could NOT have allowed the lioness to roam free with tourists nearby.

Tranquilizers can take several minutes to work, and as they start to take effect, wild animals will often react aggressively. They are scared, confused, and they can't understand why they're suddenly feeling so strange. Sadly, they come to the conclusion that whoever is nearby is causing them danger, and they have been known to attack in an attempt to protect themselves.

Rest assured, the zoo will be receiving plenty of unwanted attention for this, and I imagine that will result in more than a few changes to their security and escape-prevention methods.

At the very least, perhaps we will start looking into quicker/more effective tranquilizing methods for this very thing. It's too bad we had to lose a beautiful lioness in the meantime.

[AnimalHouse36]

There had to have been a better solution for the problem.

Yes. Not having zoo's.

[Nymphae]

Originally Posted by AnimalHouse36

Yes. Not having zoo's.

A lot of zoo's actually take part in breeding programmes to keep species like Tigers from dying out. Some also take in animals that wouldn't survive in the wild, 'Monkey World' for example. Please broaden your views a bit, okay?

[Paula]

Originally Posted by AnimalHouse36

Yes. Not having zoo's.

This would be a fine goal; but, realistically, zoos do exist and be that as it may, there needs to be a reasonable plan in place for when they abscond from their enclosures in zoos so that people don't get hurt and the animal can survive the incident. There is surely a way to prevent the animal from dying and also to prevent the animal from harming others, or at least minimize the risk if the animal does escape.

[AnimalHouse36]

Paula: I know that...but I think not having them is the best way of avodience.

As for Nymph: I would clacify that as a sanctuary of sorts.