These statistics seem to be truly lacking and open ended. Itis widely known that statistics can be manipulated and misconstrued. Theopening statement itself is open to debate, what are the real numbers of tigersin captivity in the US?How many are in AZA zoos, in circuses, in licensed private zoos, as pets inhouseholds? What are the accurate numbers of tigers in the wild, even betweenconservation organizations these numbers vary widely.

From the very start these statistics are contorted to showownership of wild animals as a horrific travesty, while many of the incidentsspecifically mentioned are at large institutions, such as Sea World and otherAZA facilities. Some of these animal deaths are attributed to anesthesia orbeing euthanized by police after an incident with people and not caused by anywrongdoing from the owner. Where do these statistics come from, how accurateare the number of incidents, how comprehensive of a survey was done?

These statistics also fail to show the total numbers ofanimals in each of these categories that are owned. As an example, if therehave been 10,000 bears kept in captivity over the last 20 years then 4 human deathsdoesn't seem to be nearly as drastic a number. Without a reference of how manycaptive owned wild animals there are compared to how many have caused incidentsthen there is no scale to how problematic ownership of that type of animal is.

While these statistic here show incidents of wild animalskept in captivity, they don't show a true reference point for these numbers. 19 deaths to reptiles seems like a largenumber, but how many dangerous reptiles have been in captivity over the last 20years. In comparison how many injuries and deaths have been caused by "domesticated"animals. How many deaths and injuries can be attributed to horses orlarge breeds of dogs compared to the number that are in captivity. I can guarantyyou that more people are injured or killed by either of these domestic animalsin any given year than any of these wild animal categories.

The point of this comment is not to say that wild animalsare good pets, but to point out that statistics can be easily misconstrued.Question articles when you read them, what viewpoint are they pushing, whatinformation are they leaving out, how can they be misrepresenting information.All I can ask of people reading any inflammatory article is to take in the ALLof the facts from all sides before you decide your position. I do not think thatmost wild animals should be kept as pets, especially by untrainedindividuals, but facilities should not be lumped in the same box as householdpet owners. Individuals need to be treated just like that INDIVIDUALS. Anymoron with a horse, bull, or large dog could be as likely to be hurt, if notmore so, than an person owning a big cat or large constrictor.

What is the criteria for these statistics?  One week?  One month?  According to the animal/police shows in Alaska, the moose does kill people every winter.