Yes, Nature preserves seem to accomplish much more that benifites the whole community of Life!

R.I.P. Jorge.

It all sounds suss. Keep us updated on the reports and findings if you can JD.. it's totally suss. I wonder if it was caught on tape.

If the woman was alive at the time, then they surely had no choice but to shoot Jorge.. but if she was dead.. well I guess they would never risk her being unconscious.. so it was obviously necessary.

BUT surely there are chemical [dart] restraining methods that could have been used instead.. the effects are almost immediate no?? At least calming Jorge down immediately before he fell unconscious..

Anyway.. the claim that J approached them when he was already in the doorway is a bit suspicious.. my intuititon tells me they shot him before entering the enclosure.. how long had the woman been in there? Were they all there when she entered? If not what caught their attention and made them retrieve a gun.. by which time she was probably dead.. anyway I believe Jorge should have been shot with an anaesthetizing dart.

Reminds me of those nutty cases where wild sharks are hunted down to be killed for killing a human.. but I wasn't there, I'm only guessing..

Poor Jorge.

You folks believe everything you see on Tee-Vee? There are no safe immobilization drugs that work within seconds. Well, unless you accidently hit a large vessel, the heart, intracranial space, in which case the quick action is fatal. At best you're looking at the cat going to sleep in about 4 minutes. A lot can happen in four minutes. If the patient is already amped up, like this cat would be, circulating catecolamines would fight the tranquilizer. This could negate any tranquilization, or necessitate a higher dose to get the same effect. How much more is not an exact science, thus making the whole procedure dangerous for all concerned. So maybe you dart the cat, wait to see what happens after about 10 or 15 minutes, maybe dart again, wait another 10 minutes ...

I would interpret the accident this way. And this is just my interpretation. There was a break down in protocol or equipment such that the keeper did not know where the cat was, or a cage door that should have been locked, wasn't. The keeper entered an area where the cat was and was attacked. It does say how rescue was alerted, but I've certain heard my share of terrified screams of agony, calling for help on the two-way radio. When rescue arrived, they had seconds to assess the situation. They saw the injured keeper, but also found the cat present. They were not readily able to get the cat to move to another area of the cage, perhaps a bedroom, where it could be locked off. Unfortunately it would have been completely normal behavior, when presented with a novel situation, for the cat to respond aggressively. With a dangerous animal like that, you don't take chances and hope for the best. With time of the essence, in fear of further injury to the keeper and possible injury to rescue personnel, the cat was killed. Had trained personnel with a dart gun arrived first, an attempt may have been made to tranquilize the cat. If the darted cat had further attacked the keeper before going to sleep, or if there was some question that the keeper might have been saved had they not waited 5, 10, 20 minutes for the cat to go to sleep ... well, you can imagine the lawsuit. It's a tragedy for all concerned.

I find it incredible that anyone who ever owned a hamster or saw a wildlife show fancies themselves expert in wild animal care. I can guarantee no one took the death of the cat lightly. I don't work there and I'm choking up about it. I'm not a little pissed no one here expressed concern for the death of the keeper. Zoo keeping is not a high paying profession. One does it for the personal satisfaction of caring for a living thing. It may not be the purest form of conservation, but many species own their continuing survival to captive breeding.

You can all kiss my spotty white ass.