It’s a well know trope that everything in Australia is out to get you, and that every other plant or animal you encounter there is likely to be poisonous or dangerous in some manner.
Have any scientific surveys ever been conducted to verify this? are Australian animal’s *really *more deadly on average than the animals on the other continents?
Average deadliness must be brought down a lot by the fact that there are lots and lots of completely harmless Australian plants and animals.
Native Australian flora and fauna are very different from the rest of the world. That makes them exotic to the rest of you. And, yes, there are some pretty poisonous ones. “Exotic” + “poisonous” = “gets talked about”.
Ok, take the total number of animals on a continent, and the number of people, and the number of deaths, carry the one… oh forget it. I hope we hear some good stuff about how deadly animals on different continents are now.
We do like to encourage the idea. The OP is impossible to answer really, as it is going to depend upon how you define the metric. We have lots of very poisonous snakes, but also lots of harmless ones. So what does that mean? We have some seriously evil spiders, and also cute furry ones that do little more than eat the flies. We don’t have any large predators. That is something rather interesting about Oz. No equivalent of lions, tigers, bears, or wolves. The biggest predators are exotic - foxes and feral cats, plus dingos (dogs, and thus really exotic) in the North. You can go almost anywhere in Oz without caring about predators (other than human.) Crocodiles are as bad as it gets. Don’t swim where the sign says no swimming. It isn’t hard. (Tourists it seems usually either can’t read or somehow think that they are immune.) Wild boar in the top end are dangerous, but not exactly special to Oz. Neither worry 99.9% of the population. Most large fauna is dopey and vegetarian. Our worst bitey insects are exotic (like European Wasps) and our wretched venomous toads similarly exotic. Sea life can be pretty evil in some ways. Blue ringed octopus, sharks of course, stone fish, stingrays, box jellyfish. But the actual number of people affected is very low, and we cheerfully swim in most seas, and the only people that get eaten by crocodiles are tourists.
People that enjoy walking in the OZ wilderness are usually only ever worried about annoying flies and mosquitoes and carry incest replant. You can probably take fewer precautions here than when walking in many other countries. (You do however avoid doing stupid things like sticking your arm into hollow logs or under rocks or walking in long grass.)
I’m not aware of any specific studies, but it really depends what you mean by ‘more deadly’ on average.
If you’re talking # of deaths as a portion of population, I would be comfortable saying not. Largely I think because Australia is a highly urbanised country, with ~85%+ of the population living in urban centres, with very little exposure to the dangerous critters out there.
Deaths from wildlife doesn’t even rate in the top 10 causes of death in Australia. One stat I saw, from 2007, was ‘wildlife’ deaths totaling ~40 people, half of which were lethal bee stings! (Not exactly a reputedly dangerous native Australian beasty)
If you want to look at some other measure, IE the toxicity of venom, than it is an oft repeated phrase that Australia has 9 of the 10 most poisonous snakes in the world (actual number depends upon which list you look at) Which would tend to lean in the affirmative.
Another measure perhaps are creatures that are poisonous here that you wouldn’t expect to be, IE the Blue ringed Octopus, Stone Fish, several varieties of particular nasty jellyfish, the cute little platypus (although the playtpus poison is not considered lethal).
If you want to consider the proportion of animals (in totality) that are lethal. Hard to say, we seem to have more of the creepy-crawly type dangerous critters, but we are lacking in the big land predators. (No bears, lions, etc) The closet we have to a ‘large’ predator is a Dingo, (wild dogs effectively) and they are considered dangerous to children but not grown adults.
Maybe ‘most’ is correct, but Box Jellyfish preclude swimming in the ocean for six months of the year throughout North Queensland. Unless you want to wear a stinger suit (ruins a swim IMO) or swim in a stinger enclosure.
Do you have cite for this? My impression is that far more locals are attacked and/or killed than tourists. Their stories are not as well publicised as “tourist killed by croc” stories. When I’ve been in FNQ the blase attitude of locals has been the outstanding feature, while most tourists are scared to paranoia and hence careful.
In a quick look I haven’t found any clear statistics, but this story gives some indication. It doesn’t always make clear whether the victim was local or tourist, but if you just count the cases where that is made clear, the count is three/two between locals and tourists. And if you make the (in my view entirely realistic) assumption that if the victim’s residence is not mentioned it is because they are local, then the count is 11 to two between locals and tourists.
Over 20,000 Australians are killed yearly by wild animals, and Australia
is the only country ever to have lost a war to wild animals. The Master
Himself has done a piece on the latter, although He was uncharacteristically
duped by a sanitized version of events:
No, it was really a poor attempt at humour. It makes the news when it is a tourist, when it is some unlucky local it isn’t so big. I have a sneaking suspicion that the unlucky locals are often local indigenous, and thus often beneath the radar of mainstream media.
They are a lot smaller than you think. Think small dog. Warner Brothers not withstanding. You don’t want to try to pick one up, but it isn’t any danger to people.
Endangered species (only 10-15,000 estimated to be left in the wild). They’re suffering from a contagious cancer, Devil facial tumour disease, which is believed to have reduced their population by up to half since it was first seen in 1996.
ETA: None of those responses were there when I started typing!
In no sense are foxes, cats or dingos restricted to the north of anywhere. They are found throughout the mainland.
This isn’t in any sense true. Crocodiles inhabit around a hundred thousand kilometres of waterways and another 20, 000 off kilometres of coastline. Needless to say, Australia hasn’t signposted that entire length. At best I would guess there would be signs on average ever hundred kiometres.
Pigs are in no sense restricted to the Northern Territory, nor are the pigs in NT any more dangerous than pigs in New England.
Once again this isn’t in any sense true. Australia’s worst insects are honey bees, which are exotic. The runner up are the native bull ants,which kill almost as many people as bees.
Cane toads are no more venomous than several native toads and frogs.
Not in any sense true.
Paging Doctor Freud. Paging Doctor Freud.
I assume that you are implying that snakes live in long grass, which is a popular though utterly incorrect myth.
I think we have some pretty poisonous plants from which a poison has been derived (a number of local fauna have an immunity I understand) The poison is commonly called 1080 Sodium fluoroacetate - Wikipedia