Grex Agora47 Conference

Item 61: Tiger attacks Roy of

Entered by richard on Sat Oct 4 23:07:52 2003:

from wire reports:

LAS VEGAS Oct. 4   Illusionist Roy Horn of the duo Siegfried & Roy 
remained hospitalized in critical condition Saturday, a day after a 
tiger attacked him during a show, and authorities said they still 
didn't know his chances for recovery. 

Horn suffered a serious injury to the left side of his neck and 
underwent surgery late Friday.

"The overwhelming likelihood is that we'll have to wait two or three 
days before we really understand the full extent of these injuries," 
Alan Feldman, an MGM Mirage spokesman, said Saturday.

Horn, along with longtime partner Siegfried Fischbacher, have been a 
Las Vegas Strip staple for years, performing their magic show to sold-
out crowds at The Mirage hotel-casino. The shows, with their signature 
white tigers and lions, are among the best known and most expensive on 
the Strip.

Halfway into Friday night's performance, Horn appeared alone on stage 
with the tiger and told the crowd the animal was making its debut in 
the show a claim hotel officials said was part of the act.

The tiger, which weighs about 600 pounds, then lunged at Horn, who 
tried to beat the animal off with a microphone.

"I knew he was in trouble right away. I was horrified," said Diane 
Weightman, who was in the audience. "I wanted to jump on stage and help 
him. I didn't know what to do."

Andy Cushman, also in the audience, said Horn "looked like a rag doll" 
as the tiger dragged him off the stage.

Feldman said stage crew members used fire extinguishers to distract the 
animal and free Roy.

After the attack, Fischbacher appeared on stage and told the 1,500 
audience members the performance was canceled, Cushman said.

Hotel officials said the show has been canceled indefinitely. The tiger 
involved in the att
82 responses total.

#1 of 82 by scott on Sat Oct 4 23:36:36 2003:

There's a Simpsons reference here, of course.  8O


#2 of 82 by gull on Sun Oct 5 00:13:33 2003:

"Pardon me, Roy, ain't that the cat who chewed your new shoes?"


#3 of 82 by mcnally on Sun Oct 5 01:35:44 2003:

  re #1:  for those whose Simpsons memory is weak, there's a gag in
  one episode ( http://www.snpp.com/episodes/1F08.html ) where 
  "flamboyant" (the show's description) magicians "Gunter and Ernst"
  (transparent Siegfried and Roy clones) are mauled on stage by their
  own white tiger when the tiger gets fed up with the humiliation
  involved in riding around on stage on a unicycle wearing a funny
  costume..

      > Inside one of the showrooms, Gunter and Ernst demonstrate their
      > talented albino tiger riding a unicycle.  "A round of applause,
      > please, for Anastasia.  She loves show-business.  So much
      > nicer than the savagery of the jungle, ja?"
      >
      > In a flashback, we see Anastasia sleeping peacefully in Africa.
      > [Africa?  -mcnally.] Behind her two men approach in a jeep.
      > "Hey, tiger!" one of them calls out, "Wake up!"  He shoots a
      > tranquilizer dart into her, and she slumps over.  The memory
      > angers her sufficiently to attack her owners and tear them
      > to shreds.

  Life seems to be imitating the Simpsons frequently lately.  I recently
  read an article about the CEO of Red Lobster being driven out because
  of disastrous losses from the chain's misguided "all you can eat crab
  legs" promotion, virtually the same problem that afflicted Captain
  McAllister when Homer discovered the "all you can eat" seafood special at
  The Frying Dutchman... ("'Tis no man. 'Tis a remorseless eating machine.")


#4 of 82 by aruba on Sun Oct 5 03:34:17 2003:

Well, I hope Roy's OK.


#5 of 82 by richard on Sun Oct 5 06:19:13 2003:

ignore the next two items, they are duplicates of this one.  I was lagging
when I entered this item and hit enter on backtalk more than once...oops


#6 of 82 by happyboy on Sun Oct 5 06:38:41 2003:

he had it coming.


#7 of 82 by slynne on Sun Oct 5 15:59:03 2003:

I hope he is ok. But, I cant really feel sorry for him. I mean, he was 
working in a dangerous job but unlike most other people with dangerous 
jobs, he was very well compensated. 


#8 of 82 by rcurl on Sun Oct 5 19:19:33 2003:

I would say that he voluntarily accepted the risk, and compensation seems
irrelevant. 


#9 of 82 by richard on Sun Oct 5 19:44:45 2003:

according to news reports, prognosis on Roy of Siegfried & Roy is grim.  the
report at www.lasvegasreviewjournal.com indicates he's had massive blood loss,
from the bite to the neck and as a consequence later suffered a stroke.  
Employees of the Siegfried and Roy show at the Mirage have been told they have
to consider other options in their careers.  Very sad.  I guess it raises the
argument, which PETA and other animal rights groups often make, that exotic
animals shouldn't be make to perform in shows.  However, PETA couldn't claim
these tigers were mistreated because as stated, they had a huge facility and
lived like kings.  They live a lot better no doubt than the elephants who work
in the Barnum and Bailey circus no doubt.  


#10 of 82 by slynne on Sun Oct 5 20:10:18 2003:

I dont know. There are some people who take high risk jobs because they 
dont have any other options and thusly arent really paid well. I feel 
sorry for those folks. I was watching a documentary about railroad 
workers in the 19th century recently that made me think of that. I 
mean, I felt sorry for all the guys who lost fingers, hands, legs, 
their lives working for a few bucks a day. I dont feel sorry for Roy 
really and the major difference is that he was compensated well for 
taking the risk. *shrug*.

PETA can very well claim the tigers were mistreated. The truth is that 
they probably werent. However, I think this illustrates that keeping 
animals like Tigers is a dangerous business. They arent meant to be 
kept as pets or as trained performing show beasts. It is dangerous to 
do so. If people want to take on those risks, it is ok with me. I 
imagine that Siegfried and Roy knew what they were doing and didnt put 
the public at risk, just themselves. 


#11 of 82 by richard on Mon Oct 6 01:13:57 2003:

slynne, you must also remember that siberian tigers are an endangered species,
and Siegfried&Roy regularly subsidized breeding programs and are among the
world's largest benefactors to programs to protect exotic animals.  Siegfried
has said it is their way of paying their performing tigers-- the tigers
perform and in exchange tens of millions of dollars go to protecting and
breeding their species so their kind will survive.  It is a fair tradeoff.
These tigers do a lot more for their kind by performing than they would
otherwise.  Siegfried&Roy even have a tiger maternity ward in their facility
at the Mirage where they directly subsidize the breeding of these endangered
animals.

Montecore, the seven year old tiger who attacked Roy, according to stories
won't be hurt or killed because of what happened.  Montecore got confused and
put his jaw around Roy's arm.  Roy hit Montecore with his microphone, which
is a trainer's technique to get him to stop.  But Roy's microphone was on
since he'd been talking to the audience.  Thus when he hit the tiger with it,
the sound of the mic hitting the tiger resonated throughout the building on
the speakers.  The amplified sound spooked Montecore and he reacted
instinctively.  As stated, Montecore is a siberian tiger, an endagered
species, and it is illegal to harm him.  He will probably be fired from his
job as a show tiger, lose his cushy digs at the Mirage, and be sent off to
a zoo somewhere.  


#12 of 82 by md on Mon Oct 6 02:16:22 2003:

Re 10: A man gets his neck torn open by a tiger, and you don't feel 
sorry for him?  What exactly would it take?


#13 of 82 by bru on Mon Oct 6 02:45:20 2003:

Perhaps they are getting to old to deal with the tigers.   I mean, he is what
65 now?  He lost his focus for a moment and it cost him.


#14 of 82 by happyboy on Mon Oct 6 06:09:51 2003:

re12:  an man willingly gets into a cage with a tiger and gets
mauled.  why should i feel sorry for him, save for the pity i
feel at his having some sort of emotional disability.

yeah, i guess i feel sorry for him after all...as i do for
folks who intentionally OD or jump off a bridge.


#15 of 82 by rcurl on Mon Oct 6 06:15:33 2003:

I feel most sorry for people to whom something tragic happens through no
fault of their own. The emotion shifts, however, when the tragedy lies
in the inherent hazards in actions they have chosen. The end member is
is thinking that "at least they died doing what they love to do". However
one can still feel sympathy for their friends and relatives. 


#16 of 82 by md on Mon Oct 6 14:04:41 2003:

Reasons, so far, to say you don't feel sorry for a man whose neck was 
torn open by a tiger:

"he had it coming"  (So the tiger was actually trying to execute him?)

"he was working in a dangerous job but unlike most other people with 
dangerous jobs, he was very well compensated"  (You only feel sorry for 
poorly compensated animal-trainers who have their necks torn open?  
What income level is the cutoff point for you?)

"he voluntarily accepted the risk"  (And that hardens your heart, how?)

"why should i feel sorry for him, save for the pity i feel at his 
having some sort of emotional disability"  (That would be a very nice 
response if you weren't using "emotionaly disability" as an insult.  
Sorry for noticing.)


#17 of 82 by slynne on Mon Oct 6 14:59:45 2003:

I dont know what the income cut off point would be. I dont especially 
want to find out either. I guess that I feel that anyone who chooses to 
take on such risks and then has it come and bite them in the ass (or 
neck) doesnt get my sympathy. I really dont feel sorry for this guy. 

FWIW, I dont feel sorry for hypothetical junkies who OD or take dives 
off bridges. In fact, it is a rare suicide that makes me feel sorry for 
the person anymore. Mostly I just think they are selfish assholes. 

I do sometimes feel sorry for people who have dangerous jobs who take 
those jobs because they dont have other options or because they want to 
help people. I felt sorry for the public servants who died on 9/11. 

Anyhow, I dont have to justify my feelings. feelings dont have to be 
logical. If I knew the guy, I probably would feel sorry for him. If I 
had ever seen this show, I probably would be more prone to feeling 
sorry for him. But,  I simply dont feel sorry for this guy and his 
income has a lot to do with it. His work saving an endangered species, 
while admirable, doesnt make me feel sorry for him either. 



#18 of 82 by remmers on Mon Oct 6 16:53:29 2003:

How do you feel about firefighters injured in the line of duty?


#19 of 82 by richard on Mon Oct 6 17:33:06 2003:

The ones I feel sorry for are the kids who were in the audience and saw
that happen.  There are always a lot of kids at their shows and a gory
scene like that could haunt a young child for a long time.  

We watch a lot of high risk sports.  Like auto racing, and skiing, and
boxing.  In those sports, which we find entertaining, accidents happen and
people get hurt.  Roy told people in the ambulance, according to one
story, that he views what happened as an accident, takes all the blame
himself, and wants noone to blame the cat.  


#20 of 82 by happyboy on Mon Oct 6 17:53:40 2003:

that's the only thing that makes me feel even remotely 
sorry that he was hurt...that he recognized that it wasn't
the cat's fault.

re18:  are you serious?


#21 of 82 by anderyn on Mon Oct 6 18:08:05 2003:

Of course I'm sorry he was hurt. He loves those animals and it's sad that he
miscalculated and was injured. I'm hoping that they will take him at his word
and not harm/kill the tiger in question, who was, accordin to the news reports
I saw, a "rescued" tiger and not one which Roy had raised from birth. 



#22 of 82 by slynne on Mon Oct 6 18:23:27 2003:

resp:18 - I do feel sorry for firefighters who are injured in the line 
of duty so I guess the income cut off is somewhere between firefighter 
and megastar


#23 of 82 by mynxcat on Mon Oct 6 19:01:40 2003:

I think when one feels sorry for people who work in dangerous jobs, 
besides the income level and the need to actually work these jobs, one 
takes into coonsideration whether the job really helped other people. 
Firefighters risk their lives to save people from fires. Roy risked 
his life to entertain people. Maybe not as necessary as saving lives, 
but still a public service of some sort.

If the tigers weren't mistreated, and it sure sounds like they were 
not, I don't see anything wrong with using them in a show. It's like 
having actors and clowns. Sure they're animals, and not born to 
entertain, but animals weren't born to be pets either. I doubt these 
animals were whipped till they danced or anything like that.

I feel sorry for the man. And if that news-source is true about him 
not wanting to blame the cat for his injury, I have some additional 
respect for him. It sure seems like he really loves these animals. 

(But I would assume that he would work with tigers that he'd raised 
from birth, rather than a "rescued" animal, only because you know 
their past and have a much better knowledge-base to work with when 
determining how they'd react)


#24 of 82 by anderyn on Mon Oct 6 19:41:46 2003:

According to the news (and stories I've seen in the past), Roy would study
his cats and only have them do things on stage that they could do, that they
were likely to do, anyway -- what they had a talent for. He also shared his
home with them, and would be the first to hold and clean the baby tigers as
they were born, so they recognized him *as* a tiger. Inasmuch as any human
can be so recognized, I suspect. He did his best to understand and work with
them, and while it was in the cause of entertainment, it was also because he
loved and respected them, and figured that people would want to preserve
something that gave them pleasure. 


#25 of 82 by rcurl on Mon Oct 6 20:29:54 2003:

Did he do anthing about preserving this species *in the wild*? From
what I have read about it, it seems his breeding program only preserved
the species in zoos and other captivity. It seems to me to be the penultimate
cruelty to preserve a species only outside its natural habitat. 


#26 of 82 by anderyn on Mon Oct 6 20:41:02 2003:

I thought that he donated money to the habitats in the wild. I could be wrong.
But I'd rather be alive in a zoo than my species be dead. I don't know how
an animal feels about that, but I suspect that life enjoys being alive.


#27 of 82 by rcurl on Mon Oct 6 20:48:24 2003:

And tigers pace and monkeys bounce off their bars....seems to me they
are reacting to imprisonment in much the same sense as a human would.


#28 of 82 by anderyn on Mon Oct 6 21:01:37 2003:

The Toledo Zoo has habitats that seem to be decent for the animals. The tigers
there didn't pace. And Roy's tigers had a whole estate that they shared with
him and Siegfried. They weren't caged, and had the freedom of the house and
estate, at least during the day (not sure what the nighttime arrangements
were). Not saying it's like having a whole range to oneself, but it's a damn
sight better than living free and being killed horibly by a poacher. 


#29 of 82 by rcurl on Mon Oct 6 21:16:58 2003:

The efforts of The Nature Conservancy are for habitat protection for
rare, theatened and endangered species. In the long run, this is more
economical for the preservation of species than is maintaining captive
breeding populations. Did Roy and Siegfried donate heavily to habitat
preservation? (I did some Googling to find out, but as yet without success.)


#30 of 82 by bru on Mon Oct 6 23:00:49 2003:

white tigers and white lions are not natural inany habitat.  It is a mutation
that propably occured shortly before the maharajas came to power in india.


#31 of 82 by mary on Tue Oct 7 01:53:05 2003:

Is it possible to feel sorry for the mutilated trainer
but still congratulate the tiger for, well, being a tiger?
I don't know much about the motivations of Mr. Roy but
the tiger doesn't belong on a stage, jumping through
hoops and obeying a guy in tights.  Somehow, with that one
bite, it regained some of its long lost dignity.

I also root for the bull in bullfights.


#32 of 82 by rcurl on Tue Oct 7 06:13:27 2003:

Albinism in animals (and humans) is perectly natural, bru. But albino 
animals are not a separate species and breed like any other members of the
species. They belong in the natural population as  part of its diversity.


#33 of 82 by tsty on Tue Oct 7 07:12:03 2003:

albinism is a rare occurrance (can they breed???) and is not well
tolerated by the rest of the population generally. albino offshoots
usually nee to be seapratred and protected.
  
i feel quite bad for  roy - and firefighters too (re #20) who invest
their being for our safety/enjoyment and afll victim to happenstance.
  


#34 of 82 by tod on Tue Oct 7 16:01:04 2003:

This response has been erased.



#35 of 82 by rcurl on Tue Oct 7 16:36:42 2003:

Yes, albino animals (including humans) can breed, and I have never heard
that they are "not well tolerated by the rest of the population
generally". Please cite some urls that provide data that support your
contention. 



#36 of 82 by tod on Tue Oct 7 17:06:37 2003:

This response has been erased.



#37 of 82 by mynxcat on Tue Oct 7 17:51:41 2003:

LOL

Well the tiger was acting like a tiger. No argument there. I don't 
think anyone here is advocating getting back at the tiger, are they?


#38 of 82 by carson on Tue Oct 7 18:25:45 2003:

(surprisingly not.  most animals that attack humans are euthanized; I
haven't heard that this tiger is destined for a similar fate.)


#39 of 82 by anderyn on Tue Oct 7 19:24:21 2003:

At least Roy is not advocating that. He said that he wanted it to be unharmed,
during the ambulance ride to the hospital. I don't think he or anyone he knows
were shocked by this -- I think that is why I do feel sorry for him, because
he accepted the risks and accepted that he'd been very lucky not to be
attacked. And because he had a stroke after the attack. That is definitely
not something they tell you about in tigers one-oh-one, that being attacked
by one will cause a stroke! (The news story I read implied that it was because
of the massive blood loss. I don't think I'd ever heard of a stroke from that
particular cause before. Has anyone else?)


#40 of 82 by mdw on Tue Oct 7 20:04:21 2003:

Tigers play rough with each other.  They also have much tougher skins
than humans do.  Except for the size, there's really not that much
difference in terms of psychology between tigers and domestic cats
(although in the wild it's true tigers are generally solitary and
domestic cats act more like lions.)  What's "just play" to a cat can be
pretty rough in human terms.

Strokes are basically a sudden loss of consciousness due to a lack of
oxygen in some part of the brain - this could be caused by a blood clot,
or blockage or rupture of some blood vessel, usually inside the brain.
I guess a rupture of a major blood vessel in the neck doesn't quite
qualify, but the resulting greatly reduced blood pressure can't help
matters any inside the brain.  If a air bubble or blood clot from wound
were to make its way inside the brain, that would certainly qualify
though.


#41 of 82 by rcurl on Tue Oct 7 20:18:04 2003:

Apparently some neck injuries can result in stroke. In seaching Medscape,
I found "Cervical Spinal Manipulation Linked to Stroke From Vertebral Arterial
Dissection". That "dissection" is a form of trauma to the blood vessel.


#42 of 82 by tpryan on Tue Oct 7 23:45:27 2003:

        I recently saw a PBS or Discovery show on introducing Tigers
to Africa, after captive breeding.  It was something like a 5 year
project to get two into the wild.  Brother and Sister.  In a wild
animal preserve, with a large number a acres.


#43 of 82 by glenda on Tue Oct 7 23:57:21 2003:

Are you sure it was Africa and not India.  Tigers are not native to Africa.


#44 of 82 by tod on Wed Oct 8 01:20:57 2003:

This response has been erased.



#45 of 82 by bru on Wed Oct 8 01:45:01 2003:

The White tigers are not albinos.  They do not  have pink eyes, the main
charactaristic of albinism.  They are a seperate species. They breed true.


#46 of 82 by rcurl on Wed Oct 8 03:12:29 2003:

Depends on what version of albinism you are talking about. It is, in
general, just a genetic trait of non-pigmentation. However I will
acknowledge that http://www.white-tigers.org/ asserts that "they are not
albino". However they are definitely not a separate species. This "white
tiger partial albinism"  is due to a recessive gene and only occurs when
both mates carry it. But they can mate with any other receptive Bengal
tigers. 



#47 of 82 by richard on Wed Oct 8 03:42:54 2003:

Coincidentally there was another tiger incident here in NYC.  Some guy liv
ing in a rent controlled apartment in a high rise in Harlem was found keeping
two pets, a full grown half siberian/half bengal tiger named Ming and a giant
alligator named Al.  It was a three bedroom apartment and Ming the tiger and
Al the alligator had their own bedrooms.  The tiger's bedroom had a bed and
an indoor sand pit.  The alligator's bedroom had a bed and a baby pool for
Al to swim in.  The tiger and the alligator had apparently bonded, and this
man considered them to be his brothers.  The animal control authorities have
just yesterday removed the animals and shipped them off to a zoo.  The guy
was interviewed and is heartbroken that the housing authority won't let him
have his pets back.  But really, an apartment in a housing project surely
isn't the ideal place for a tiger and an allligator to live.  The man is being
charged with reckless endagerment, even thougb it is clear he loved thos
animals.


#48 of 82 by richard on Wed Oct 8 03:48:45 2003:

and poor Ming the tiger was shown on the front page of today's papers looking
miserabler, in a cage at the zoo.  The tiger had been domesticated, used to
his own bedroom.  They are saying his readjustment will be difficult


#49 of 82 by russ on Wed Oct 8 04:22:38 2003:

Re #45:  Bruce... look up the definition of "species".  I'm sure it
will show that you're wrong (again).  I will lay money down that
white tigers are inter-fertile with the normal forest breed of
their native land, and that they're no more different species than
Siamese cats and Maine Coons.


#50 of 82 by fitz on Wed Oct 8 12:16:20 2003:

(my first wife and I lived next door to a pair of tigers in downtown Lansing,
MI.  Sorry; no stories of maulings.  "Saw a tiger today," was part of our
conversation and about as ordinary as talking about the weather.)


#51 of 82 by tsty on Wed Oct 8 15:00:25 2003:

re #35 . born and raised on a farm ... been there, seen that. dad would
separate teh albinos fromt eh general population for their protection.
  
i have seen, rarely because they were usually removed to safety early, the
resident non-albino population attack teh 'different ones.'
  
'different ones' alwyas need protection from teh general population, adn
taht applies to humans as well.


#52 of 82 by mynxcat on Wed Oct 8 17:38:16 2003:

Richard, wasn't the man in question mauled?

I can understand why the authorities would take the animals away. They 
are an endangerment to the rest of the people, even if they never 
harmed their "borther"


#53 of 82 by richard on Wed Oct 8 18:13:09 2003:

re #52...the man in question was bit on the leg by the tiger while playing
with it.  when he went to the hospital to have the bite mark tended to, that
is when authorities realized it wasn't any dog bite.  then the cops went to
his apartment and saw the tiger looking out the window at them


#54 of 82 by tod on Wed Oct 8 18:26:58 2003:

This response has been erased.



#55 of 82 by tod on Wed Oct 8 18:33:15 2003:

This response has been erased.



#56 of 82 by janc on Wed Oct 8 18:47:00 2003:

I think if I wanted to donate money to save tigers, I'd spend it largely on
captive breeding programs and the like.  Reintroducing tigers into the wild
sounds like a good way to spend a lot of money and accomplish nothing.  A
tiger takes a lot of space, and few humans are willing to share space with
them.  It seems like a doomed cause.


#57 of 82 by rcurl on Wed Oct 8 19:18:36 2003:

In the long run, habitat protection would be cheaper - and have a better
result. A captive breeding program is forever. Land needs to be purchased
just once. The main problem with captive breeding programs is that they
are initially cheaper, and hence more likely to be done, but with a worse
long-term outcome. Additional problems with captive breeding programs are
genetic drift and the threat of diseases in small populations. 



#58 of 82 by tod on Wed Oct 8 19:35:07 2003:

This response has been erased.



#59 of 82 by scott on Wed Oct 8 23:38:07 2003:

I'm finally starting to remember the famous tiger/lion/beast attack that
happened on some old live-TV variety show.  Might have been Ed Sullivan. 
Anyway, the animal attacked somebody, and because it was live and such they
best the director could do was switch to a camera on the audience.  A very
shocked-looking audience, with horror on their faces.

If I couuld remember more detail I'd probably be able to find the info on
Google.  I did see a clip of it a few years ago..


#60 of 82 by richard on Thu Oct 9 02:22:52 2003:

Siegfried was on Larry King tonight, and he said that when the paramedics
were working on roy back stage, and he was bleeding profusely, the first
and only thing Roy said to Siegfried was "don't harm the cat"  Siegfried
showed pictures of he and Roy with Montecore, the tiger in question and
made clear the tiger is like a child.  He says Roy tripped and fell, and
the tiger freaked out and acted instinctively and dragged him offstage.
It wasn't trying to kill him, as Siegfried said the tiger could have
killed him instantly if that was its intent, it was trying to protect him. 
Trainers and animals who work together for years often end up with a
parent-child relationship.  


#61 of 82 by murph on Thu Oct 9 02:25:42 2003:

Rane, how large a wild population would it take for us to let them be and have
them preserve their species?  If each tiger requires a territory of 600 square
miles[1], and those territories would have to be contiguous for the population
to meet and breed with each other, you're talking about an enormous amount
of land.  Even for Siberia.  Even if you aren't worried about poachers.  And
habitat protection for an animal that doesn't have many wild members would
still require a captive breeding program to come up with the animals that
you want to live in the preserved habitat.

I'm not saying that habitat preservation is a bad idea--especially as captive
breeding merely for the sake of species continuation is, as you say, an
infinitely long project.  I'm just pointing out that habitat preservation for
a wild tiger population is an *incredibly* costly endeavor.

[1] http://www.lpzoo.com/tour/factsheets/mammals/siberian_tiger.html


#62 of 82 by murph on Thu Oct 9 02:27:56 2003:

#60 is an interesting explanation that I haven't heard yet.  It would seem
to make sense, too: an attack would have killed Roy on the spot, but if the
tiger thought it was carrying a wounded family member to safety and didn't
realize that teh scruff of Roy's neck was a little more tender than the
average tiger cub's...


#63 of 82 by rcurl on Thu Oct 9 06:51:10 2003:

Re #61: what I couldn't find quickly is the area that would be necessary
for maintaining a healthy tiger population. The articles mostly only mention
an individual tiger's territory (which differ widely). But let's say it
is something like 2500 square miles (of suitable habitat). That is not
really enormous - Yellowstone NP is ca. 3500 square miles. Take a look
at the globe - that is a little spot. The area per-se isn't the problem,
but rather prior political claims to it against the world's desires to
protect biodiversity. 

My point was that while that is expensive, it is much MORE expensive - and
probably bound to fail - to maintain a captive breeding population for
thousands of years. 


#64 of 82 by tod on Thu Oct 9 16:21:10 2003:

This response has been erased.



#65 of 82 by rcurl on Thu Oct 9 16:30:40 2003:

You think they will both last thousands of years? 


#66 of 82 by tod on Thu Oct 9 16:45:34 2003:

This response has been erased.



#67 of 82 by happyboy on Thu Oct 9 16:58:55 2003:

 i hope so for the sake of my grandchildren.


#68 of 82 by tod on Thu Oct 9 17:04:01 2003:

This response has been erased.



#69 of 82 by happyboy on Thu Oct 9 17:14:10 2003:

/starts boiling carrots and rinsing out the mason jars
 i left out behind the still


#70 of 82 by tsty on Sat Oct 11 04:27:37 2003:

#60 is the most rational adn humanistic description (coupled with
teh LK show) i ahve held to reason.
  
that the cat could extinguish a human life is not evena question. that
a cat would *protect* (imstinct) a FELLOW CAT is teh only answer.
  
that the fellow cat was a thin-skinned human is tragic - dont harm the cat.
  
i have personally witnessed fellow-traveler-species activities many
times adn instinct is overriding.
  
granted, these were of lesser-developed species, but nontheless, the 
instincts *will* rule, including the energy of the 'bite'.
  
i hope roy recovers adn has his tiger to commune with.


#71 of 82 by happyboy on Sat Oct 11 08:41:55 2003:



                *hic*


#72 of 82 by pvn on Sat Oct 11 09:58:45 2003:

Channeling Monte I am allowed to reveal that he was simply reacting to
the threat of the gal in the audience with "big hair" who was seen by
him to be in attack mode but in an ambiguous situation.  Monte was in
watch mode when Roy apparently tripped over him.  Monte was in an
unknown situation and responded in flight mode and grabbed the most
valued item - roy-  by the scruff of the neck and tried to escape. 
Monte attempted to remove roy from a situation that risked roy. 
Unfortunately roy didn't have a "scruff of the neck" which is not
Monte's fault for not knowing.


#73 of 82 by russ on Sun Oct 12 01:06:59 2003:

Funny, Beady's channelling sounds amazingly like the
newspaper articles I've been reading.  I wonder how
he gets it so spot-on?


#74 of 82 by aruba on Fri Oct 17 19:15:20 2003:

I suppose this is in poor taste, but it's pretty funny:

Subject: Shocking video of Roy Horn tiger attack.

http://www.wnci.com/zoo/royattack.gif


#75 of 82 by tod on Fri Oct 17 19:39:52 2003:

This response has been erased.



#76 of 82 by other on Fri Oct 17 20:57:21 2003:

<falls out of chair laughing>


#77 of 82 by tod on Fri Oct 17 21:00:20 2003:

This response has been erased.



#78 of 82 by albaugh on Sat Oct 18 05:53:55 2003:

Heard on the radio Friday morning:  Part of Roy's skull was temporarily
removed (I assume to reduce the pressure due to swelling due to the injuries
inflicted).  That's interesting, I guess, but it can't be swell to have one's
injuries and treatments for them so publicly disseminated...


#79 of 82 by tod on Sat Oct 18 14:31:32 2003:

This response has been erased.



#80 of 82 by mynxcat on Mon Oct 20 17:03:17 2003:

That picture is from a local Columbus radio station's site. Yup, 
that's WNCI for you


#81 of 82 by tsty on Mon Nov 3 10:13:07 2003:

how tony of them .....


#82 of 82 by willcome on Thu Nov 27 08:03:54 2003:

once, a whore bit and clawed at me, but it was just a game.


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: