Did Jamelia Really Have to Die?
March 22nd 2009 21:00
Reading this story in the paper last week HERE, I still find it hard to understand why it was so necessary to kill Jamelia the lioness. It appears Jamelia hadn’t caused any harm, the visitors had been housed in “safe houses” and she was moving slowly – not quickly or aggressively – towards a public area. Zoo owner Sally Padley even said no one was in danger. So why couldn’t the zoo keepers have tranquilised her or made more of an effort to capture her. Surely there was time for other options to be explored before the decision was made to shoot such a majestic creature to death?
Shooting a wild animal would be understandable if it was running around loose and behaving aggressively or attacking people. But this was not the case. It sounds as if someone may have overreacted.
On the other hand, Padley was in a no-win situation. If she chose not to shoot Jamelia and someone was attacked, she would have been blamed for it. Since she chose to shoot Jamelia she is now blamed for killing a lioness and putting humans over the welfare of animals.
And what about the person who left the lion enclosure gate opened? Funny how no one seems to be pointing the finger at him/her. This whole situation could have been avoided had that person taken more care.
The part I find interesting was the story says Jamelia’s death was painless which I find hard to believe. I just hoped she died instantly.
Shooting a wild animal would be understandable if it was running around loose and behaving aggressively or attacking people. But this was not the case. It sounds as if someone may have overreacted.
On the other hand, Padley was in a no-win situation. If she chose not to shoot Jamelia and someone was attacked, she would have been blamed for it. Since she chose to shoot Jamelia she is now blamed for killing a lioness and putting humans over the welfare of animals.
And what about the person who left the lion enclosure gate opened? Funny how no one seems to be pointing the finger at him/her. This whole situation could have been avoided had that person taken more care.
The part I find interesting was the story says Jamelia’s death was painless which I find hard to believe. I just hoped she died instantly.
| 43 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Kleonaptra
Kalikapsychosis
As you can imagine, I was utterly outraged at this, but I calmed down a little when I heard Sally had raised the lioness herself and was apparently in tears over the 'decision'.
The reason I use 'decision' lightly is because I fully and utterly believe it came down to a stupid red tape zoo procedure and no one wants to admit that. She was moving quickly towards a public place, there was a chance of danger, and I think somewhere in all the zoo procedures theres one that says -
"If dangerous animal is X kilometres away from public place euthanasia is the only option"
It was explained that for an animal of her size if a tranquilizer had been used it would have taken some time to kick in - therefore stroppy lioness may have gone towards the public area mightily pissed off and not gotten sleepy enough before she got there.
Im not saying I agree - I could never agree to euthaniase an animal I raised, but I really think it was a red tape thing.
And its no win. Imagine if they did use a tranquilizer and it didnt work and she ate someones kid? I dont envy her that job, no way.
Comment by Queenie
Quirky Folk
Quirky Queenie
Yeah, it's a hard one. I think no matter what Sally did, someone would not have been happy with the outcome. But I still think other options could have been explored, especially when no one appeared to be in danger. What was with the hurry anyway? If visitors were safe there was no need to race in and put Jamelia to death.