Child mauled by tapir at Dublin Zoo!!! :(

Amirani · 09-08-2013 12:58PM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

This little girls life has been changed forever and i hope she will be compensated accordingly

I doubt Dublin Zoo have any liability here.

SEPT 23 1989 · 09-08-2013 12:58PM

NiallSparky wrote: »

I doubt Dublin Zoo have any liability here.

100% liable

tin79 · 09-08-2013 01:00PM

NiallSparky wrote: »

I doubt Dublin Zoo have any liability here.

How exactly do you figure that?

Amirani · 09-08-2013 01:01PM

tin79 wrote: »

How exactly do you figure that?

I presume her parents had to give legal consent.

suicide_circus · 09-08-2013 01:01PM

Tapir babies are Sweeeet!!!

http://www.rte.ie/presspack/files/2013/03/DUBLINZOO-003.jpg

OpenYourEyes · 09-08-2013 01:02PM

Not the Tapirs fault - its an animal and probably felt it's newborn calf was threatened.

Not really the parents fault, assuming the child wasn't jumping on top of it and screaming at it - if the keeper was there and said it was ok etc. then I think it was reasonable of the parents to think the situation was ok.

That leaves it as the keepers fauly unfortunately. I say unfortunately because the keepers in Dublin seem to be a good bunch doing an excellent job for people and animals alike in a well-run and modern zoo.

But a mistake is a mistake, and the poor child has obviously gone through a lot. I'm sure the keeper will be disciplined accordingly, and the animal won't be destroyed.

Amirani · 09-08-2013 01:02PM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

100% liable

In a legal sense? Do you reckon?

steddyeddy · 09-08-2013 01:03PM

[QUOTE=Tabnabs;85911284]I'm no zoologist, but a quick google shows that Tapir attacks are not unknown and generally occur when the young are around or nearby.

http://www.igorilla.com/gorilla/animal/tapir_attack_in_Oklahoma_City_PartTwo.html

http://www.tapirs.org/news/interviews/carlosmr-echandi-interview.html[/QUOTE]

Well then you have a lot in common with most Dublin zoo staff. The zoo has attracted international attention for it's lack of qualified zoologists. A lot of staff got the position because of family members I'm sad to say. That's not critique of the staff's skill by the way, Dublin Zoo is generally very well run.

Uriel. · 09-08-2013 01:04PM

It's silly from the parent and equally if not more silly from the zoo.

You'd wonder though how they managed to get a supervised visit so close to the animal(s)? How does one get this kind of permission. I know the zoo says they do these kind of visits regularly, but how do you go about it. I am just wondering if the mother in question had some clout/pull.

I can't see the animal being destroyed.

Obviously, no one wanted this to happen and it's an unfortunate incident, but you would certainly see the zoo being liable here. I wonder if they (the visitors) had to sign a waiver/terms and conditions.

I would have thought that allowing any non-qualified person near a wild animal so soon after that animal gave birth would be totally off the radar.

I hope the girl makes a full recovery.

steddyeddy · 09-08-2013 01:04PM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

100% liable

This!

Grayson · 09-08-2013 01:04PM

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Supervised visit or no supervised visit, you'd want to be an absolute thick to put a tiny child in there, with a new mother/wild animal.

Jesus, even a cat would tear you asunder if you were at her kittens a week later.

Actually, as someone who's had cats that have had litters, the mothers were always docile and friendly. They'd let us pick up the kittens no problem.

I'd imagine the tapir is kinda like having a pet pig or any other animal. It's probably incredibly domisticated at this stage and used to children. However like any animal, and that includes the most docile family pets, there is always a risk, however small, that the animal could attack.
I'd feel just as safe letting a child near it as I would letting it near a shetland pony or a guide dog for the blind. And I'd believe the risk to the child would be similar.

seamus · 09-08-2013 01:04PM

vitani wrote: »

Maybe the keeper didn't have a choice. It wouldn't surprise me if management 'encouraged' them to keep supervised visits going.

Any keeper worth their salt would never allow managements' direction to override basic sense. If that is the case the both the keeper and management need firing.

It's kind of core to the running of any Zoo that keepers have the last word when it comes to the treatment of the animals and public access to the animals.

I'm withholding judgement on this though. From being at Fota a few weeks back (which is owned by Dublin Zoo), I'd be surprised if the Zoo were intentionally stupid about this. Tapirs wouldn't in a cage, but there would be a small fence you could hop to get to them. As pointed out above, the fact that the keepers didn't intervene suggests to me that maybe the child and her mother had wandered away from the keepers and got too close, but who knows without more information.

Sir Humphrey Appleby · 09-08-2013 01:04PM

NiallSparky wrote: »

I doubt Dublin Zoo have any liability here.

Fail to how the wouldn't, they allowed her in with the animal, she didnt sneak in.
Seems that allowing a child of that age in with a wild animal would reek of negligance and a failure of duty of care.

anncoates · 09-08-2013 01:05PM

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

But a mistake is a mistake, and the poor child has obviously gone through a lot. I'm sure the keeper will be disciplined accordingly, and the animal won't be destroyed.

If the keeper just decided to allow children to be in proximity to the animal, obviously that's quite serious but I assume it's a practice authorized at management level and therefore the keeper shouldn't really carry the can.

SEPT 23 1989 · 09-08-2013 01:06PM

NiallSparky wrote: »

In a legal sense? Do you reckon?

yep but they will have insurance to cover this sort of incident

if they don't bye bye Dublin Zoo

09-08-2013 01:09PM

Grayson wrote: »

Actually, as someone who's had cats that have had litters, the mothers were always docile and friendly. They'd let us pick up the kittens no problem.

I'd imagine the tapir is kinda like having a pet pig or any other animal. It's probably incredibly domisticated at this stage and used to children. However like any animal, and that includes the most docile family pets, there is always a risk, however small, that the animal could attack.
I'd feel just as safe letting a child near it as I would letting it near a shetland pony or a guide dog for the blind. And I'd believe the risk to the child would be similar.

There's a big difference between an animal that has been largely domesticated for a very long time (like a pig, a cat, a dog, etc.) and an animal that has always been predominantly wild.

steddyeddy · 09-08-2013 01:09PM

seamus wrote: »

Any keeper worth their salt would never allow managements' direction to override basic sense. If that is the case the both the keeper and management need firing.

It's kind of core to the running of any Zoo that keepers have the last word when it comes to the treatment of the animals and public access to the animals.

I'm withholding judgement on this though. From being at Fota a few weeks back (which is owned by Dublin Zoo), I'd be surprised if the Zoo were intentionally stupid about this. Tapirs wouldn't in a cage, but there would be a small fence you could hop to get to them. As pointed out above, the fact that the keepers didn't intervene suggests to me that maybe the child and her mother had wandered away from the keepers and got too close, but who knows without more information.

The new head of Dublin zoo is a zoologist. I doubt he pushed this.

OpenYourEyes · 09-08-2013 01:12PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well then you have a lot in common with most Dublin zoo staff. The zoo has attracted international attention for it's lack of qualified zoologists. A lot of staff got the position because of family members I'm sad to say. That's not critique of the staff's skill by the way, Dublin Zoo is generally very well run.

I think someone with veterinary qualifications, and some knowledge of exotic and wild animals, would be more qualified to work in a zoo than a zoologist though?

And I say that as someone with a zoology degree, and who know's vets of varying levels of experience.

steddyeddy · 09-08-2013 01:14PM

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

I think someone with veterinary qualifications, and some knowledge of exotic and wild animals, would be more qualified to work in a zoo than a zoologist though?

And I say that as someone with a zoology degree, and who know's vets of varying levels of experience.

Well a vet wouldn't have the level of expertise in animal behavior and a zoologist would generally be required for a conservation programme.

bbam · 09-08-2013 01:22PM

In fairness this looks like a serious lack of judgement in a zookeepers behalf.

Following from this the zoo are most probably liable and the insurance will take a hit.

Animals wild or domesticated don't much like people being close when they have young about. As a farmer I've seen cows go mad when you try and approach their calves, so I'd imagine a wild animal being worse.

It's horrible for all concerned. Hopefully the child and it's mam recover well and hopefully the zoo suffers no long lasting effects either. It's a great zoo and hugely successful.

keithclancy · 09-08-2013 01:23PM

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

I think someone with veterinary qualifications, and some knowledge of exotic and wild animals, would be more qualified to work in a zoo than a zoologist though?

And I say that as someone with a zoology degree, and who know's vets of varying levels of experience.

Would you say a Psychologist would make a good Prison Officer ?

Gyalist · 09-08-2013 01:49PM

I lived for many years in a small village on the Guyana/Brazil border and have been fortunate to see tapir in their natural environment.

They are normally very shy animals but the females are known to protect their young. They can move with surprising speed for their shape and size and have large sharp teeth and strong jaws.

I've seen tapir that liked to be petted but I'd never allow a child to get so close to a nursing mother.

OpenYourEyes · 09-08-2013 01:51PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well a vet wouldn't have the level of expertise in animal behavior and a zoologist would generally be required for a conservation programme.

I'm sure a vet that had an interest in or some experience (possibly abroad) with wild/exotic would have enough knowledge - and obviously in terms of modifications and improvements to their pen/habitat etc would be guided by international practice and developments, as would anyone else.

And a zoologist would be required for a conservation programme that involves wild release, but the day-to-day breeding programmes carried out in zoo's are basically exercises in animal husbandry - while there would be a zoologist/geneticist involved at a higher organistational level, I think many vets would be more than capable of handling things on the 'frontline' i.e. as a zookeeper.

jack presley · 09-08-2013 01:52PM

Whenever something like this happens, I'm always reminded of the Chris Rock sketch about the tiger attacking some handler at a zoo or something and the people saying that the tiger went crazy. Chris' line was that the tiger didn't go crazy, the tiger went tiger!

OpenYourEyes · 09-08-2013 01:54PM

keithclancy wrote: »

Would you say a Psychologist would make a good Prison Officer ?

Never given it much thought tbh :P

I don't think you're really comparing like with like though. Vets look after animals day-to-day preventing them getting sick or helping them get better when they're unhealthy - they're the kind of skills required for the majority of a zookeepers job.

While there should obviously be zoologists working at a zoo, I don't think its necessarily a bad thing having more of the keepers with veterinary experience rather than zoology experience.

Grayson · 09-08-2013 01:57PM

Deleted User wrote: »

There's a big difference between an animal that has been largely domesticated for a very long time (like a pig, a cat, a dog, etc.) and an animal that has always been predominantly wild.

No there isn't. It depends on two things
1) the species
2) how it was raised.

Some species are naturally violent. Most non mammels for example can't really be trained (try training a snake:)). Even with mammals some can't. But most are ok so long are they're raised correctly. This tapir was probably raised in captivity.

wolfpawnat · 09-08-2013 02:00PM

One thing I have noticed with many of the zoo keepers from the tv programme and my visits to the zoo. These "professionals" don't actually have zoological related degrees. Now of course they are not essential for the care of these animals as long as those in charge in general are suitably qualified such as the nutritionalists and vets. Rule 1 in this world NEVER get between a new mother and her baby, regardless of her species. My father suggested taking my newborn for a walk earlier this week. I nearly screamed the house down. Rationale is not a new mothers strongest attribute. That keeper(s) has a lot of explaining to do.

On a random side note. I can imagine Crumlin/Temple street were a bit baffled with how to treat the injuries.

ebbsy · 09-08-2013 02:04PM

Apparently the mother will bring the child to the Lion enclosure today.

Gyalist · 09-08-2013 02:06PM

jack presley wrote: »

Whenever something like this happens, I'm always reminded of the Chris Rock sketch about the tiger attacking some handler at a zoo or something and the people saying that the tiger went crazy. Chris' line was that the tiger didn't go crazy, the tiger went tiger!

It was a joke after Sigfried and Roy were attacked on stage by their white lion during a show in Vegas.

GLaDOS · 09-08-2013 02:10PM

Girl seems to be doing ok in hospital

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/toddler-stable-after-tapir-attack-at-dublin-zoo-603164.html

Seems like a major Fúck up on the zoo's part.

Child mauled by tapir at Dublin Zoo!!! :(

Comments