Per Banksiaman’s statistics, no roos hit and killed anyone 2001-17. However, humans died by hitting roos slightly less than twice per year.
Perhaps because there were no witnesses left to tell the tale?
As another Aussie, I’ll defend our critters from my perspective.
I used to sail off the coast in an off the beach racing catamaran. There is a monument on the beach just in front of our sailing club to someone who was taken by a shark only a few hundred meters from the shore about 20 years ago. So it does happen. It never bothered me sailing in exactly the same area, even with the occasional capsize.
I see kangaroos from time to time hopping down my street. Given this is a near suburban street I mostly worry about one dinging my car. But driving in the outback, you try to avoid driving at dawn or dusk, as the chance of a bad encounter is real. So it does affect how one acts.
I see the odd brown snake on my property. Pretty rarely, but they are about. Taking a nice walk around the area one might see one very occasionally as well. Not being silly is mostly enough. Very rare to die from a bite as antivenin is available. But because the bite is essentially painless there have been people who have not been lucky because they didn’t know. Just recently a guy trying to catch and remove a snake from a childcare business died. Really odd why. He clearly didn’t realise he was in danger, went home without seeking aid, and died that evening, despite his wife’s efforts.
Crocodile attacks require someone to be wilfully stupid. Any fatal attack should pretty much guarantee a Darwin award nomination.
When I was quite young my family took a holiday on a secluded island (it wasn’t as posh or as special as it sounds.) I went snorkelling off the beach, and as I looked to one side of me, and two large stingrays lifted off the sandy bottom a few metres away and scooted off. Clearly disturbed by my passing. That put the fear of God into me.
As the linked to list above attests. The worst critter by far is the horse. I knew one person who became a ventilator dependant quadriplegic after falling from one of her horses. She lived some decades after, but one would have to attribute her shortened life to the fall. So neither wild not an attack.
I’m not sure there would be any clear data but I don’t think the risk of attack by a salty is qualitatively different to the risk of attack by a shark, if one enters the domain of either. Nor are there as far as I’m aware any more or more compelling reasons to enter the domain of sharks than to enter the domain of salties - indeed given that one can be avoided by simply never entering salt water more than shin deep, while the other can and does attack people near the water’s edge on land, avoiding shark attack seems easier and the reasons for entering their domain fewer.
Perhaps I’m wrong about all that but if I’m right, I’m not sure you are being consistent, given you don’t seem to suggest that shark attacks require someone to be wilfully stupid or that any fatal shark attack should pretty much guarantee a Darwin award nomination.
I was really basing this off the range of the critters. Crocodile attacks generally seem to occur in very limited ranges of water, often clearly identified as dangerous. When there is a huge sign saying “Danger, Crocodiles” and someone decides a quick dip is still fine, Darwin would seem to be a good call.
The attack off my sailing club was a very strange occurrence. The theory is that it was a female shark returning from the top of the gulf after breeding, and she was very hungry. So a very out of character attack. But it did happen.
Going out abalone diving or swimming in the Southern Ocean is a much more foolhardy escapade.
We know that is where we find the big evil creatures. But there are professional abalone divers that accept the risk. How we might class those attacks is an interesting question.
It isn’t as if we as a nation don’t have history for losing people going out spearfishing. Surfing seems to be the other activity of recent times to attract shark attacks. That probably does verge on Darwin in some waters. Surfers are somewhat renown for putting the experience ahead of safety. So, I probably agree, lots of shark attacks should count as Darwin material as well.
Croc attacks can occur anywhere in the range of crocs. Which is basically the whole of Northern WA, NT and Northern Qld. The signage is not indicative of a limited range - it is indicative of where non-locals might be tempted to swim. Tourists, basically. No one wants to lose a tourist - bad publicity. There are tens of thousands of km of unsigned beaches and estuarine river frontage that has a croc risk.
Most croc deaths are not of tourists at places with signage - they are locals who get unlucky.
It’s a matter of what you are used to - somone I know who worked on an island in the Torres St said the locals (particularly the indigenous kids) spent all their spare time swimming around the main jetty. But large crocs were not an uncommon sight. Just as every beach in Southern Australia has people swimming even though we all know there are large sharks out there.
Another Australian here. Yeah we have some serious snakes and spiders, but they generally aren’t aggressive unless you’re in their space and because of anti venom, very very few people die from bites. We have no large mammal carnivores like bears, large cats or wolves, in fact we have no native mammals that aren’t marsupials and the Tassie Devil is the size of a cat, not some 8 foot tall ball of terror.
Sharks kill 1 or 2 a year at best and Crocs are only in the far north and if you go in the water where crocs are, yes you deserve your Darwin Award.
That’s a good point. I suspect I’m suffering from a bit of media blindness. We hear of the dopey tourists, since that is deemed newsworthy. But some poor local might only reach the local newspaper.
Polar bears are deadly, no matter where they live, no question about it. They can actually hunt humans, although very rare.
Really?
Canadian here, and very familiar with our Rocky Mountain parks.
Grizzlies are common, but as long as they have an exit route, will run away before they will attack. They don’t want to attack if they don’t have to, so the best thing to do is just back away, giving them no reason to attack. Yes, I’ve seen grizzly bears in the wild. They do indeed run away if you do not threaten.
Moose and elk are pretty much the same: don’t give them a reason to bother you, and they will leave you alone. But every summer, some stupid (usually European) tourist gets injured by trying to get too close to one. Western Americans and Canadians know not to bother these creatures; Europeans seem to think that they’re nice and friendly and a fun Bullwinkle, or at least cuddly teddy bears who love posing for photos. No, they’re not, they’re wild animals and they outweigh you by about 1200 pounds, and at that weight, they are dangerous. Take photos from a safe distance; do not try anything close to them.
No matter how many warnings our parks people provide, and warnings from frequent park visitors like me provide, they don’t get it. Listen, folks, if you’re going to visit Canada’s mountain parks, then pay attention to what the wardens and the locals say, okay?
Just ask Bob Katter - it’s the most important issue!
Between never and once is not a “situation.” Tens of thousands of people visit the American (and Canadian) back country every year; some even camp in Grizzly country and somehow manage to walk out of there alive. As mentioned upthread, you are more likely to die from a wasp sting in the UK than a grizzly attack in NA.
It’s not once. From a cursory glance at bear attacks in NA, I linked to two cases where a Grizzly literally walked into a tent and carried a human away to eat them. Black bear and polar bear have also fatal predatory attacks in NA, but I didn’t go there. Wikipedia lists c. 200 people killed by bears in total in NA, after 1900.
There is a (very small) risk that you will be the target of unprovoked, lethal predation in Grizzly country in the U.S. There is no such risk in Europe, outside the extreme north fringe of the Svalbard region that is polar bear habitat.
What about boars?
Moose encounters are common in Anchorage, AK. They wander the streets, especially in winter when the snow is deep and they forage in people’s yards. They’re extremely dangerous when they feel threatened and nobody with a brain gets close to them. Way back in the 60s, My survey crew I were chased by a cow moose who thought we were a threat to her calf, and I recall news stories of people who were killed by moose. It doesn’t happen often, of course. I remember a mother and her son were killed by a bear while hiking just outside of Anchorage, and there have been people attacked by them when there is a quarrel over fishing spots. Again, rare occurrences.
A wild boar could easily kill a person. But they are extremely skittish and will evade humans to the very last brushy corner. They are in effect invading parts of Europe, because they are very hard to get to even with all the modern help, up to and including shooting with the help of artificial lighting, which is a no-no in most types of hunting.
The only realistic situation where a wild boar in the wild attacks you in Europe is when you are hunting boar, ie. seeking out the animals and trying to kill them. Then they sometimes charge, targeting your crotch and abdomen for an upward thrust with their tusks.
Tell that to Shakira…
The boars snatched her purse, while leaving her and her son unmauled. That is pretty far off a fatal attack or not even really a dangerous attack, but then so is the article you linked grasping at straws. They talk about boars attacking dogs and plundering cat-feeders (business as usual for a wild boar in suburbia, harassed by dogs and tempted by food sources).
Then the article peaks:
“In 2013, one city police officer attempted to take charge of the problem himself and shot at a boar with his service revolver, but missed and hit his partner instead.”
It’s like comedy gold.
Headline: “Wild boar attacks; police officer seriously injured”