http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...T.DTL&tsp=1

Poor.. everything all around. *sighs* I can't help but wonder... will the two lives lost today, switch places in the next...

And the tiger died......... doesn't that count as a loss aswell?

People just don't understand that this animals belong in the wild, not in a city, so if it kills someone it's not the tigers fault, it's human beings to blame.


My point is, he shoudn't have gotten shot! Coudn't they just send him to sleep.


EDIT: I think tigers are endangered or close to be. A shot in the neck sends him to sleep immidiatly.

To put a tiger to sleep, wouldn't be the solution after killing one person and mauling two others....It is a sad situation, especially if the tiger is endangered, but who is to say that something like this wouldn't happen again if they didn't kill him....As unfortunate as this incident is, it's more fortunate that the other tigers didn't follow him out and cause more harm then what was already done..

Putting him to sleep is the best solution, even if he killed someone, it's an animal after all, correction: a wild animal.

I don't understand why you say killing him is the solution, is it for vengeance? Vengeance on an animal? On an wild animal? Oh come on we are human beings for goodness sakes, we should know better than that.



The solution to this is keeping him locked up properly (poor animal) not killing him. Actually all animals locked up have a chance to escape ( like this tiger had), so must we kill all the animals in the zoo for this? Because they might escape? I prefer to leave them in the wild then.

I'm not arguing with you about keeping them in the wild, but they are not...And that's the point here..A human was killed, so obviously, no matter how strong the cages are, he still managed to escape...The word vengence is a little strong. Vengence to me are these poachers who go out and kill endangered species for their trophies, not protecting other humans from an animal who tasted blood and may have gone for more.....If we could leave them in the wild, where they belong, it would be wonderful, but unfortunately it's not to be....

And who's fault is that? The tiger's? I think not. And so the tiger is not to blame when escaping from his bars and killing someone, because they, in a a way, took him out of his natural habitat where he woudn't have killed any human being.

The same point remains: His death under those circumtances was unnecessary.

they shot him while he was attacking someone, not after, so they did it to stop him from killing, not revenge

Alex, this is the same tiger that mauled the zookeeper last year....They kept it alive then, only to kill one and maul 2 more people..The bottom line is that the tiger was "not" in it's natural habitat, he was in a cage. The circumstances warranted the tiger being killed, and I'm assuming he was killed when one of the two other people were being mauled...I'm not going to argue with you, but if it's between an animal's life or a human being's, then I opt for the human being to live

Sad all the way around but to kill the tiger was wrong its a wild animal. Tigers are far and few yea I feel bad for the humans that died but a wild animal locked up for years and gets out has humans trying to get him back in putting the tiger in fear so he defends him self...... what did they expect him to do? Its a sad story for all.

there is another thread about this around here somewhere. i posted this there but felt like i should interject here as well:

well, this is my problems with zoos & things of that nature. i feel for the victims & their families, but i don't have a problem with the tiger. they are WILD animals that have been placed in captivity for all of us to go gawk at. big cats are predators by nature and pound for pound some of the baddest mofos on the planet. they should be left in their natural habitat. obviously, they don't want to be locked-up like that, so, if they get out, this is what's gonna happen. now, the tiger is dead, one person is dead & 2 other people are all ripped-up. i guess the zoo is actually to blame & will get sued now. whatever . . . . . . . . . . wild animals just need to be left in the "wild" to do their thing. i know if some damn aliens or something captured me & locked me up in a box, just to sit there "lookin' pretty" for their entertainment and i ever got out, i would go on a killing spree too .

i understand what alex is saying. obviously, a human life is more important. however, it's not the tiger's fault. isn't that kinda why they have tranqualizers??? they chose to cage the wild animal & then kill it for following it's natural instincts. i hate that a human lost his life, but i hate it for the tiger as well. WILD ANIMALS DON'T KNOW BETTER.

if this particular tiger attacked someone before, maybe that should have been a clue that she wasn't gonna do good in captivity. maybe she should have been released back into the wild, way out somewhere, where she wouldn't have to be around humans.

Well that's a good point of view.



You can set the tiger to sleep in a matter of seconds during that time he will be weak and confused. Still I stand on my point, his death was not necessary.

One of the lives I ment.. was the tiger's. Calm yourself.

The tiger was actually attacking a person he had already mauled when it was shot. Killing the tiger saved a life.

Now for the big picture: If there were no zoos, we wouldn't have this problem. I don't know what the solution is, I go to zoos too, but I feel the tiger was short-changed too.

Ok... so when the cops come up on a HUMAN in the process of killing someone and the killer turns on them they should take the time to go get tranquilizer guns to subdue him?

If there were no zoos there would be far more extinct species already as well.

True. That's why I am un-opinionated on this subject. They do good, but when something like this happens, it makes one wonder if there isn't a better way, for humans and animals both.

catch 22 for most.

Tigers would be extinct if it wasn't for zoos. Yet some feel zoos are cruel for keeping animals in cages. However if humans would stop putting value on verious animal parts.. like fur and verious organs... we wouldn't really have to worry about them being hunted into extinction.

So in a way, I'd rather stick with zoos. It's not like these outbreaks happen every day. It's tragic when it *does* happen, all around. But really, zoos *are* keeping many species from becoming extinct.

I remember years ago I took my boys to the zoo we were in the house of BIG CATS and there were some of the animal keepers in there cleaning up and talking to some of the lions no big deal kind of nice to see that tey care for the animals ya know. But this one guy(animal keepers) came in just walkin by the cages and these lion got pissed off BIG TIME I mean they were really upset and all the time they had their eyes on this one man. I could sence and some other visters and animal keepers picked up that they did not like this man if they could get to him I think they would of killed him. Not saying these men did mean things to this tiger.

Some animals just *don't like* certain people. I've had dogs that just hated a friend of mine, and my friend had done nothing to them.. there was just something about the guy they hated..

Yes, there is a guy my dad knows who has been attacked by bears three times. One time the bear walked into their camp, passed by a few guys and attacked his friend. No reason, maybe he smelled funny, not sure.

But as to zoos, how else can we observe and hopefully preserve so many of our animals that are endangered in the wild. Hopefully humans will learn sooner of later that we share this planet and we need these animals to preserve the balance of nature.

SAN JOSE, Calif. - Police are reportedly investigating whether one or more of the young men mauled by a tiger at the San Francisco Zoo may have taunted the animal before its deadly rampage, a possibility the father of one of the victims said Thursday he hoped wasn't true.

"I don't think my son would do something like taunt animals," Carlos Sousa told ABC's "Good Morning America." "It's unbelievable, but only the evidence can prove that. And right now I can't say much."

His son, Carlos Sousa Jr., 17, was one of three men attacked by a Siberian tiger around closing time on Christmas. Police shot the 300-pound animal to death after it killed Sousa and severely mauled two brothers who also were visiting the zoo.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, police found a shoe and blood in an area between the gate and the edge of the animal's 25- to 30-foot-wide moat, prompting the possibility that one of the victims dangled a leg or other body part over the edge of the moat.

Police on Thursday could not confirm the Chronicle's report to The Associated Press.

"I don't think this deserves to happen to anybody — taunting or not taunting," Carlos Sousa told ABC. "Animals should be protected from the people and the people should be protected from the animals."

Police Chief Heather Fong said Wednesday the department opened a criminal investigation to "determine if there was human involvement in the tiger getting out or if the tiger was able to get out on its own."

The zoo was to remain closed Thursday.

One zoo official insisted the tiger did not get out through an open door and must have climbed or leaped out. But Jack Hanna, former director of the Columbus Zoo, said such a leap would be an unbelievable feat and "virtually impossible."

Instead, he speculated that visitors could have been fooling around and might have taunted the animal and perhaps even helped it get out by, say, putting a board in the moat.

Ron Magill, a spokesman at the Miami Metro Zoo, said it was unlikely a zoo tiger could make such a leap, even with a running start.

"Captive tigers aren't nearly in the kind of shape that wild tigers have to be in to survive," he said. He said taunting can definitely make an animal more aggressive, but "whether it makes it more likely to get out of an exhibit is purely speculative."

The same tiger, a 4-year-old female named Tatiana, ripped the flesh off a zookeeper's arm just before Christmas a year ago while the woman was feeding the animal through the bars. A state investigation faulted the zoo, which installed better equipment at the Lion House, where the big cats are kept.

Zoo director Manuel Mollinedo said Wednesday he gave no thought to destroying Tatiana after the 2006 incident, because "the tiger was acting as a normal tiger does." As for whether Tatiana showed any warning signs before Tuesday's attack, Mollinedo said: "She seemed to be very well-adjusted into that exhibit."

It was unclear how long the tiger had been loose before it was killed. The three visitors were attacked around closing time Tuesday on the 125-acre zoo grounds. Four officers hunted down and shot the animal after police got a 911 call from a zoo employee.

The zoo has a response team that can shoot animals. But zoo officials and police described the initial moments after the escape as chaotic.

The first attack happened right outside the tiger's enclosure — Sousa died at the scene. Another was about 300 yards away, in front of the zoo cafe. The police chief said the animal was mauling one of the survivors, and when officers yelled at it to stop, it turned toward them and they opened fire.

Only then did they see the third victim, police said.

The two injured men, 19- and 23-year-old brothers from San Jose, were in stable condition Wednesday at San Francisco General Hospital. They suffered deep bites and claw wounds on their heads, necks, arms and hands, said Dr. Rochelle Dicker, a surgeon. She said they were expected to recover fully.

Sousa's parents told the AP they didn't know why their son went to the zoo Tuesday, but it should have been a fun Christmas Day activity.

"It's not a safe place for kids," said his mother, Marilza Sousa. "People go there to have a good time, not to get killed."

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

ok, i already didn't think it was the tiger's fault. now to hear that the victims may have been taunting the tiger & possibly helped it escape, i'm thinking these fools kinda got what they deserved. i hate to say it, but it's true. if you play with fire - you get burned, right??? well, if you play with a tiger - you get ate.

Like I said and maybe im wrong but seems like the tiger was upset .....somebody pissed her off. But when you get down to it it's sad on both sides. Animals sense when humans are not good or up to no good I had a very sweet doberman boy she was great she loved everyone EXCEPT my uncle who she gave many warnings to. One day he came over to see my aunt who lived with us (long story) and she bit him after he was told to waite outside well later my dad told me he abused animals and hated them and the worst part he was caught having sex with sheep back in the day. I always disliked him now I know why.

LOL - a guy in my home town got caught doing it with a goat. i don't get it. i've never been in a drought bad enough to have to turn to livestock .

Waaaaaaay too much information. ugh!

In my opinion, natural reserves are much better than zoo's , the animals have much more ground and do not feel trapped. See, most mammals feel sad when they are locked up, that's why in the zoo most are sleeping, or just sitting, doing nothing interesting.

In a natural reserve they are in their own habitat or similar, have a lot of ground to cover, and they don't see bars every morning when they wake up.

tiger=carnivor it was bound to happen

OOPS

very sad..........
y dont they maintain proper security................

It's very normal for this to happen, I don't think an animal, specially a Feline would like to be locked up for little bald people to look at youall day, without any privacy whatsoever and not being able to live the way you'd like to.