http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/7019720.stm
2007-09-29 08:16:24 · 11 answers · asked by pagreen1966 3 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Oh my God that is appalling!! Surely they're 'procedure' should have included retrieving a tranquiliser gun from one of several designated locations. Or is that too sensible?? Poor chimp. I suspect this is not the first escape from whipsnade. We have visited there a few times, and the last time we went (a few years ago) the panther enclosure was being used for vultures. This was shortly after sightings of a panther were seen in the british countryside. I hope they launch a very thorough investigation into that zoo. The lives of animals and people depend upon it.
2007-09-29 08:26:29 · answer #1 · answered by Flit 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's not that easy to tranq a chimp. For a start the tranquiliser takes time to work so by the chimp absorbed it, it could have been anywhere. We had a macaque tranquilised once which then went up a high tree and fell once the sedative set in. He died from head injuries.Plus once a dart has gone into the chimp believe me he's gonna be pretty pi---d off and the chances are he would be alot more dangerous. There could be loads of reasons why they opted to shoot him but the one thing that is certain is that the keepers would not have taken that decision lightly and are probably gutted about the outcome. I'm sure it would have been the only option availible to them at the time.
2016-05-17 04:42:55 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There were two Coco was recovered unharmed, but keepers were unable to capture Jonnie safely and he was shot, said a Whipsnade Zoo spokesman.
2007-09-29 08:35:24 · answer #3 · answered by Fred3663 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Shame on them, poor chimp. I dont understand either, they said no keepers were injured-if they could shoot him they could have tranquilized him. Maybe he's better off in chimp heaven than Whipsnade if they treat their animals like that.
2007-09-29 08:26:55 · answer #4 · answered by dances 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its a great pity, they must have a good reason unfortunately
2007-09-29 20:41:31 · answer #5 · answered by ronaldmallier 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because he had done it before, was warned and told in no uncertain terms that he would be shot if he tried it again. End of story.
2007-09-29 08:21:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Ah are you sure they did and that they didn't let him loose on here, sorry.
2007-09-29 08:27:02 · answer #7 · answered by Bernie c 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Just love your reply Martin P I can't top that one .
2007-09-29 08:25:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because he was crazed on speedballs?
2007-09-29 08:24:30 · answer #9 · answered by Shambo The Magnificent 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't think they meant to, i think they got him muddled up with Mugabe .
2007-09-29 08:22:32 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋