Wild animals, particularly wild predators, cannot be befriended, and encounters with them rarely end well for people.
David Villalobos told detectives he wanted to be “one with the tiger.”
So the New York man jumped off the monorail at the Bronx Zoo and into the Wild Asia exhibit, where his 10-minute encounter with a tiger named Bashuta resulted in a punctured lung, a broken arm, and bite wounds on his arms, legs, shoulders and back.
Mercifully, and contrary to his nature as a predator, Bashuta did not kill Villalobos, and while Villalobos almost got his wish “to be one with” the male Siberian tiger, his consolation prize was life – and a trespassing charge from the NYPD.
I remember the 2012 incident well because I was working as a reporter for Newsday at the time and I was in the newsroom the night it happened, placing calls to Villalobos’ family and neighbors in an attempt to understand why he’d willingly enter an apex predator’s enclosure.
On Saturday a UK man — whose name has not been publicly released yet by authorities — jumped into the tiger enclosure at the UK’s Yorkshire Wildlife Park. He wasn’t as lucky, and zoo visitors filmed the last few moments of his life as the big cat — also an endangered Siberian (Amur) — mauled him.
A still image of a video that shows the last few moments of the UK man’s life after he hopped barriers to enter a tiger habitat at Yorkshire Wildlife Park on Oct. 10.
Like the incident at the Bronx Zoo, the enclosure at Yorkshire Wildlife Park had adequate barriers and the man circumvented several of them to put himself in danger.
The big cat was unharmed and will not be euthanized. The incident “was in no way the tiger’s fault,” said Ron Magill, a wildlife photographer and communications director for Zoo Miami.
“It’s just so hard to guarantee against someone who’s determined to do something,” Magill told CNN in an interview a few hours after the incident.
The wildlife park was evacuated and remained closed for the weekend. In the meantime, UK authorities asked people not to continue sharing footage uploaded by several bystanders.
“I say this with profound respect for my profession, but we have to do a better job of making people understand these are not Disney animals,” Magill said. “This is not a play exhibit. We do not play with these animals. They are not our pets. And they can be much more dangerous because they have lost that natural fear of people. “
They’re also territorial, and from their perspective their enclosures are their territories. Zoo visitors who drop in are curiosities to explore by pawing at them at best, and uninvited, unwanted invaders at worst.
Tigers are the largest and most dangerous big cats, and Amur (Siberian) tigers are the biggest tiger subspecies in the world. Credit: Lars H Knudsen/Pexels
It’s a lesson quite a few people need to learn, apparently. US national park rangers have been begging people to keep their distance from wild animals over the past few years after several incidents involving tourists approaching dangerous wildlife to pet them, take selfies with them, and generally infringe on their space.
In July, 65-year-old Carl Isom-McDaniel was photographing a bison with his granddaughter when the 2,000 pound animal charged at him and launched him high into the air, using its horns in a display of raw power serving as a reminder that humans are physically nowhere near the top of the food chain.
Isom-McDaniel’s incident, in which he suffered multiple femur fractures among other injuries, happened less than two weeks after a 12-year-old was attacked and hospitalized after getting too close to a bison near Yellowstone’s “mud volcano.”
At the time, park officials noted bison have been involved in more attacks on visitors than any other species in the park.
“They are unpredictable, can run three times faster than humans and will defend their space when threatened,” a statement from the US National Park Service read.
Although it may seem obvious that mixing with predators or even large herbivores is a bad idea, Magill said some people still have the impression they can somehow make friends with wild animals.
That misconception may be compounded by the ubiquity of social media posts showing tourists in Asian wildlife parks, where tigers are often heavily sedated so guests can enter their enclosures to touch them and pose for selfies with them. It is a form of animal abuse by every definition, but some people don’t want to hear that.
“We see this over and over again, people who try to get close to animals, cuddle the animals, thinking … that this is their pet,” Magill said. “That’s not the case. These animals should not be approached.”
Veterinarians removed a cyst that was causing the legendary mouser some discomfort, but it did not appear related to any larger health issue.
Not even surgery can slow him down.
Larry the Cat, the long-serving chief mouser at No. 10 Downing St. in London, underwent an operation on Oct. 8 and was back in the UK’s seat of power the following day.
Veterinarians removed a cyst from the beloved feline, who has held his post for 15 years and is currently on his seventh prime minister. Citing “a Downing Street source,” The Telegraph reported Larry didn’t miss a beat.
“He is feline much better but taking things one paw at a time,” the source told The Telegraph’s Sapphire Hope. “We are grateful to the vets for their outstanding care.”
Larry overseeing government operations in the prime minister’s office. Credit: Wikimedia Commons
Cysts are pockets of tissue that are mostly benign but can cause pain and discomfort. There’s nothing to indicate the cyst removed from Larry was associated with any larger health problem, and he reportedly didn’t skip a beat when returned to his rightful place in the UK’s equivalent of the White House, returning immediately to his usual rounds, napping and treats.
A photo provided by No. 10 Downing St.’s Ben Perry (top image) shows a patch of shaved fur and Larry’s new scar. Perhaps it will make him more popular with the female mousers in nearby government offices.
At 19 years old, Larry has outlasted a record number of prime ministers since he was appointed to his position in 2011 during David Cameron’s tenure, but The Telegraph notes he’s not yet the longest-serving mouser. Peter III, a void kitty, served 17 years until his death on March 9, 1964. Peter oversaw the activities of five ministers prime, including Winston Churchill and Clement Attlee, and enjoyed a similar level of popularity with the adoring public and overseas admirers.
Open comments, open links! Plus, we talk about cat-friendly hotels, the recent report on contaminants in cat food, Mike Flanagan’s latest Stephen King adaptation, and more!
We’re gonna try something new this week and dedicate “Caturday” to links, off-topic discussions and anything you’d like to post about.
It’s a good opportunity to touch on stories that we didn’t get a chance to go in-depth on, talk about and recommend entertainment, and follow up on stories in the news.
If there’s anything we’ve missed, something you’d like to point out, or you just want to write about what a dashing and meowgnificent feline Bud is, you can do that here too. (And don’t forget to talk about your own cats!)
The Clean Label report on contaminants in cat food
Mmmm, slop!
Thanks to Candi A. for keeping us in the loop and posting the link to her friend’s assessment of the concerning findings about heavy metals, pesticides and other nasty stuff found in cat food.
In case you missed it, here’s the link Candi shared.
I have only been able to read it once and have not yet read the full report, so I’m going to refrain from adding anything yet. I need to see all the details and whether the brands I usually buy are included. I expect they will be, as Clean Label chose samples from the 100 most popular cat food brands sold in the US. (For our friends outside the states, there could be useful information as well. The big brands are corporate conglomerates with international reach, so brands sold in the US are likely sold under different names or slightly different packaging elsewhere.)
Of course I’m not an expert on feline nutrition either, so we should all decide what’s best for our cats based on what we know about them and the information we gain from reports and analysis.
I hope to revisit this in an in-depth post, hopefully with some input from veterinarians and experts on feline health.
Contractor work and staying at a pet friendly hotel
I won’t be able to use my bathroom overnight while a contractor puts in new floors, sink, etc., and my friend who feeds Bud while I’m away will have me, but not him. (I wonder why? It couldn’t have anything to do with him practicing some light mauling on her at least three times, would it?)
There’s also no way I’m gonna leave him here with an unfamiliar person, work noise and the uncertainty of not having me there to show him it’s all okay.
So it looks like I’m gonna stay at a pet-friendly hotel that I have verified as specifically cat-friendly as well. I’m going to get a disposable litter box, bring his bowls and some food, and I think he’ll be okay as long as he’s with me and I don’t leave him alone in an unfamiliar place. I’ll pick up dinner or order delivery, and I think we should be good.
But since there are plenty of cat experts here (that’s YOU!), including those of you who have dealt with this situation, I figured it’s a good idea to ask if there’s anything I haven’t considered or if you have advice for helping things go smoothly.
I think we have a good secure attachment thing going on. The earthquake about 18 months ago verified that — we woke up to the building shaking, Bud was sleeping on me, and he popped up his head to look at me like “Are we good here, Big Bud, or should I start running around screaming?”
I was actually proud of him for that, and for taking my word for it that everything was fine. Once he got reassurance from me, he relaxed and went back to sleep.
So I think that as long as I’m there with him, my fearless tiger companion will be okay.
Cats = happiness?
So, about that study: a research team looked at happiness indicators in 93 countries, as well as rates of cat ownership, toxoplasma gondii infection rates and other factors.
They found that having a cat or cats is linked to higher self-reported satisfaction with life.
It’s pretty wide-ranging, and the researchers themselves caution against drawing any hard conclusions from the data. However, they did note a few interesting points, including:
Toxoplasma gondii infection is higher in countries with fewer cats. This tracks with earlier studies that show even though t. gondii is heavily associated with cats in the popular imagination, felines are actually not the primary transmission vector. Other factors, like rodent infestations, as well as the quality of waste and sanitary infrastructure, are much more closely related to exposure and infection in people
The total number of estimated cats in a country is not associated with higher happiness levels, but the number of “owned” cats is. In other words, the link between cats and happiness seems to hinge on our personal relationships with cats, and not merely their presence. Countries overrun by strays, for example, do not have the same correlation
Speaking of correlation, that’s as far as this goes. The researchers note the data they have cannot prove causality. In other words, countries that have higher levels of cat adoption and ownership may be wealthier in general, and wealth — at least enough to free people from true poverty — is correlated with happiness. It could be that people who have more money are more likely to spend disposable income on little buddies. It does not mean you have to be wealthy by societal definitions, and it helps to remember how fortunate most of us in the first world are compared to the true poverty of the “global south”
Overall, the study’s authors conclude we need follow-up research to firmly establish a potential causal link between felines and greater satisfacfion in life.
Telegraph columnist Hannah Betts
If you’re skeptical of a causal link between cats and happiness, here’s a take from a Telegraph columnist who admittedly loves the slobbering subservience of dogs and detests the fact that feline affection must be earned. In fact, she questions whether feline affection actually exists.
Fair warning, she has an uncharitable view of our beloved house tigers and retrograde views on what their behaviors mean, but sometimes it’s helpful to understand why certain people don’t like our perfect little angels who can absolutely do no wrong. And yes, that’s sarcasm. I love Bud in spite of the fact that he can be a jerk at times, and maybe even a bit because of it, but it would be madness to claim cats don’t feel affection toward their bonded humans.
Influencers
Speaking of Jenner-Kardashians, I’m not sure if I missed this at the time or decided if it wasn’t worth getting upset over, but while I was just searching for Betts’ column to add the link, I found this story from seven months ago about widespread disgust with Khloe Kardashian for having her cats declawed.
That the Kardashians are a family concerned with little else besides fame and money is not news, but I am planning on posting about the effect of celebrities and influencers on pet trends in the near future, and whether it’s declawing, purchasing “exotic” wildlife like monkeys as pets or keeping entire menageries of neglected, miserable animals, like it or not there are a lot of people who think it’s okay to do things because the walking examples of botched plastic surgery they idolize have made the behavior popular.
Animals are the ones who suffer, and groups dedicated to their welfare fight uphill battles trying to correct misinformation/combat harmful trends spread by influencers. There’s gotta be a better way, including holding social media platforms accountable when they elect to ignore animal welfare concerns. A video does not have to involve direct violence inflicted on an animal for it to qualify as animal abuse, and it’s crucial people understand that.
One disturbing example is a Youtube video uploaded by a young woman who adopted an adorable baby macaque, then proceeded to mentally torture the poor animal. One video involved her repeatedly offering a bottle of milk to the baby only to yank it away at the last second, laughing as if her actions were pure comedic genius. The baby became so traumatized, she stopped eating. That IS animal abuse, even if some minimally-trained, ignorant moderator employed by Youtube does not agree. Social media operators are not the ultimate arbiters of morality, animal welfare, criminality, political speech or anything else, even when they’ve appointed themselves to those roles.
These are the same people who invite teenagers and pre-teens onto their platforms, employ psychologists to help them keep the kids hooked and doomscrolling all day, provide them with filters that do little besides undermine their self confidence, provide platforms that are practically custom-made to enable anonymous bullying, then absolve themselves of responsibility when the inevitable happens. They are the last people we should trust with deciding what is acceptable or moral.
Mike Flanagan’s ‘Carrie’
Amber Midthunder, a Native American actress, played a Comanche healer named Naru who wants to follow in her brother’s footsteps as a hunter in 2022’s “Prey.”
Which finally brings us to the brand new adaptation of Stephen King’s Carrie, streaming now on Amazon.
I’m only a few episodes in so I can’t offer any major conclusions, but so far it seems to be everything we’ve come to expect from a Flanagan project — thoughtful, respectful of the source material while also giving it a modern makeover, and operating on a strong foundation of writing and acting.
It has a lot to say about bullying and the modern technologies that turbo charge the cruelty kids are capable of. Adults are hopelessly outgunned on the tech front, which makes foundational parenting more crucial than ever.
I’m especially happy to see Amber Midthunder in a major role after her exceptional performance in 2022’s Prey, and I’m really hoping we’ll see more of Cassandra Naud, who showed up briefly in one scene so far with a hint of more to come.
Cassandra Naud
Naud was awesome as the legitimately terrifying antagonist in Influencer and its sequel, Influencers, and she’s unmistakable thanks to the birthmark that dominates the right side of her face. She’s a fantastic actress and astonishingly beautiful, and in interviews she talks about her childhood decision not to have the birthmark removed because of potential complications. She came to see it as an advantage because it renders her unforgettable, but I think her work speaks itself these days.
Carrie was released this week, with all eight episodes available to stream at your pace. Frequent Flanagan collaborators Samantha Sloyan, Michael Trucco, Rahul Kohli, and Ruth Codd have returned, while Flanagan’s next project is an Exorcist sequel due early next year.
Thoughts? Questions? Links? Stories about your cats? Flattering notes about what a dapper furred fellow the Budster is? Leave ’em in the comments!
Stealthy, lethal and skilled, leopards are apex predators, but they contend with bigger cats and pack animals who pose a danger to them and their cubs.
Taxonomic name:Panthera pardus Genus: Panthera (big cats) Weight: Between 82 and 198 pounds with typical felid sexual dimorphism Lifespan: Between 12 and 15 years in the wild and up to 23 years in captivity Gestation: 90 to 105 days, or about three months Litter size: Two to four cubs who remain with their mothers for up to two years Distribution: Leopards boast the widest range of any big cat, with populations in at least 62 countries spanning from sub-Saharan Africa to Russia, China and the Koreas IUCN Red List Status: Vulnerable
Leopards occupy a precarious position in the hierarchy of predators.
They’re true big cats who are extraordinarily dangerous and skilled hunters, but they’re never the baddest on the block by measures of pure size or strength.
Throughout their range, which stretches from the savannas of Africa to the verdant jungles of Asia, they are forced to compete with animals who exceed them in raw physical power, or derive their advantage through strength in numbers.
In Africa leopards, known as panthera pardus in binominal nomenclature, play second fiddle to their sturdier, more intimidating cousins, panthera leo. Lions aren’t just bulkier and brawnier, they’re also unique among big cats because they live in social groups. Lions cooperate on hunts, allowing them to take down anything they come across, and the entire animal kingdom gives them a wide berth.
In Asia leopards bow to the biggest, baddest cats on the planet, panthera tigris. While lots of people mistakenly believe lions are the kings of the cat world, that distinction goes to their striped, stealthy cousins. Tigers are the heaviest, physically largest and most powerful cats, making them the apex predators on land.
A leopard in the Maasai Mara in Kenya. Credit: Sumeet Moghe/Wikimedia Commons
It’s not just other cats who put pressure on leopards. Hyenas, wild dog packs, dangerous herd animals and colossal animals like elephants and rhinos pose a danger to the spotted big felids, if not directly then in competition for food and territory.
So for leopards to successfully thrive, they’re forced to rely on their other unique skill sets, including impressive adaptability and intelligence. They hunt when others rest, eat in places out of reach of their competitors, and know when to cut their losses.
While tigers hunt in daylight, leopards stalk their prey in the darkness. Tigers and lions have the luxury of eating out in the open, as wild dogs know it would be suicidal to lay claim to kills belonging to a pride or a tiger pushing 700 pounds. Leopards aren’t guaranteed that luxury.
Leopards aren’t just physically vulnerable to species they share a range with, they’re also at risk of going hungry. Leopards can expend their finite energy on successful hunts only to be forced to abandon their kills to lion prides and canine packs. They can mitigate the risk by dragging their kills up into trees using their powerful limbs and sure footedness, or taking them into the tangle of the underbrush, though neither method is fool-proof.
Perhaps that’s one reason why, despite being the smallest and lightest of the big cats, leopards have a reputation for being particularly ferocious.
The Champawat tigress, also known as the Demon of Champawat, is history’s most notorious man-eater, but the lesser-known Panar Leopard was equally deadly, with more than 400 confirmed kills. The Leopard of Rudraprayag, contemporary with both, had a shorter reign of terror but took 125 human lives.
All three were killed by the legendary hunter Jim Corbett, whose name was synonymous with taking out man-eaters for decades before he became a big cat conservationist later in life. In his book Man-Eaters of Kumaon, Corbett described leopards as the trickiest big cats to track, and hunting them — as opposed to the canned kills favored by modern “sportsmen” — presents significant physical danger and risk of death even to experienced hunters.
Considering the level of self-awareness, understanding and deceptiveness displayed by animals like the Champawat tigress, who changed her tactics several times as Corbett tried to close in on her and nearly killed him by setting up a clever ambush, for Corbett to attribute even greater wiles to leopards speaks to their extraordinary ability to adapt on the fly and anticipate what their enemy might do.
When it comes to hunting man, there are two things that distinguish leopards from their tiger and lion counterparts. (And if you’re wondering where jaguars fall on the list, they don’t. There are no recorded cases of prolific man-eating jaguars, a fact often attributed to the animals’ tightly controlled abilities and reputation for calmly assessing situations. Jaguars very rarely kill humans, and when they do it’s because people have threatened them or their cubs, leaving them no chance to withdraw safely.)
Credit: Wikimedia Commons
As disruptive as man-eating tigers are, people living in areas stalked by them can find refuge indoors. Tigers hunt by day and won’t enter human-built structures, but leopards have no such limitations.
Both the Panar and Rudraprayag leopards, as well as other man-eaters of their species, were known to barrel through doors or leap through windows at all hours to catch sleeping humans unaware and drag them screaming into the night. It’s pure nightmare fuel and has a profound psychological effect. When man-eating leopards terrorize an area, there’s no true sanctuary.
While lions and tigers become man-eaters due to injuries — broken teeth most commonly — and old age, leopards do so because of opportunity and convenience.
For example, the man-eating leopards who terrorized India in the late 1910s and early 1920s acquired a taste for human flesh because the Spanish flu ripped through regions where they range. Survivors were hesitant to handle their bodies to bury them, and leopards found easy meals. From there, experts believe the big cats realized hunting humans is often easier than hunting agile ungulates and other typical prey — at least in the short term, before humans organize and retaliate.
Leopards are often confused with at least two other cat species, jaguars and pumas. It may be somewhat difficult to tell leopards and jaguars apart in a zoo without the benefit of signage, but in the wild they don’t co-exist. Anyone who encounters a spotted cat in the wild in Africa or Asia is looking at a leopard, while jaguars are native to the Americas, ranging across most of South America and the southern US.
Otherwise, there are visual differences. Jaguars are bulkier and more muscular, with shorter limbs, and their rosettes or “spots” have small flecks inside them. Leopards have longer limbs and may have broken rosettes, but generally do not have the small flecks and dots within their rosettes.
Credit: David Raju/Wikimedia Commons
As for pumas, they look nothing like panthera pardus or panthera onca (jaguars), and they are not true big cats, lacking the ability to roar and boasting a different lineage. But because pumas, jaguars and leopards are all colloquially called “panthers,” some people confuse them.
Both leopards and jaguars have melanistic (black) variants, but their coats are not entirely black. Under the right lighting conditions their rosettes are visible, making it possible to differentiate them visually. There are legends of melanistic pumas, but no one’s been able to verify them.
As opportunistic hunters, a leopard’s lunch or dinner is whatever it can reasonably catch, and along with pumas they’re generalists and will eat just about anything despite their individual preferences.
They’re masterfully stealthy and can ambush prey in a multitude of ways, including from above thanks to their excellent climbing abilities. Leopards are exceptionally strong despite their relatively small size compared to other big cats, and they’re able to drag carcasses larger and heavier than themselves up trees. They can descend from trees head-first, giving them an enormous advantage when attacking from elevation.
A leopard cub. Credit: Chris Eason/Wikimedia Commons
Sadly, leopards numbers are in decline across the world. Habitat fragmentation plays a major part, as does poaching to feed the insatiable Chinese traditional “medicine” market for big cat parts, which are used in tonics and folk recipes. They’re also hunted by nomadic tribes in Africa for their skins.
Then there’s the cruelty of nature itself. As adaptable and successful as adult leopards are, getting to that point involves trial and error, lots of learning and luck. By some estimates fewer than half of leopard cubs reach adulthood, with the others succumbing to other predators, poachers and illegal wildlife traders who sell the cubs to people who buy them as status symbol pets.
For more information about conservation efforts, visit the WildCat Conservation Alliance and Panthera, two of the largest global organizations dedicated to preserving leopards and other wild cat species.
The groomer has “a zero-tolerance policy for repeated matting,” as if people choose to have their cats age and struggle to groom difficult-to-reach places. If a cat has previously had a matting problem, the groomer can charge a “double” matting fee or refuse service.
Bud’s got a spot of matted fur again, so I’ve been looking at local groomers.
It’s in the same place it was last time, a few inches up from his tail in a spot he can’t seem to groom as well as he used to. Part of that’s because he’s pushing 13 years old, and I’m sure part of it’s because he’s slightly overweight.
There’s a cat-only groomer not far from me, which seemed like a good option until I read the details on the groomer’s site.
They don’t offer stand-alone mat removal and insist it can only happen after a “spa treatment,” as if it’s based on a finely tuned scientific approach and Bud’s gonna sit there calmly and enjoy being fussed over.
Fine. Whatever. They want to up-sell a service and I want to take care of my cat.
But wait! There’s an extra fee for cats above a certain weight. Bud’s comfortably below it, but there’s also an extra special fee for “difficult” cats, and he’ll definitely incur that one. If I don’t drop him off exactly on time or collect him immediately, there’s another unspecified “small fee.” Appointments must be canceled a week ahead of time or there’s another fee.
Then I read this:
“Matting is 100 percent preventable and [grooming business name] has a zero-tolerance policy for repeated matting.
Repeated matting will result in doubled-matting fees or denial of service.”
Seriously? Anyone who knows me will attest to the fact that I don’t just like my cat, I love him.
I’d do anything for him. The point is, I take care of the little dude. He is emphatically not neglected, and I’ve tried other things like regular brushing and the Furminator. He hates it, and I don’t blame him. It can’t be comfortable having metal teeth tugging at your hair, no matter how gently pressure is applied. Like all cats, he’s subject to the physical reality of aging, and he’s not a fan of being handled, so I do what I can within reason and within his tolerance.
That’s why I was able to keep the mat from returning for almost two years, and it’s why I am seeking the help of ostensible professionals. Of course he’s a pain in the Bud about being handled and clippers/shavers. I wouldn’t consult a professional if it were easy.
Napping after a demanding day of eating and lounging.
I want to get his matted fur completely removed with minimal fuss, without judgment and without the possibility of half a dozen additional fees arbitrarily tacked on until I’m paying $350 to get rid of a mat.
Update: After he woke up from a nap and was extremely relaxed, I got in there calmly and quickly and cut the matted fur off myself, then trimmed until he started to get annoyed. I can always go back and get what’s left of it later when he’s chilled out again, and I’ll try some dry shampoo to hopefully get rid of any oils that may have built up and could cause matting again. I have no doubt this will be an ongoing problem since his tolerance for gentle brushing is about 20 seconds, but at least I took care of 95% of the problem relatively easily and, most importantly, he seems very happy not having the matted fur on his back.
The lesson here? Don’t prejudge your potential customers and write website copy as if you’re a custody court who’s going to reprimand me for allegedly being a bad caretaker before you meet me and understand what the situation is.
I get that groomers probably see some people who genuinely neglect their pets, but a key part of honest human communication is to avoid judging people and avoid allowing past experiences color your approach. It could cost you customers, as it did with this groomer.
