Zoo escapes conviction over tapir attack

€5,000 payment to charities after normally docile animal mauls toddler in supervised ‘close encounter’

Dublin Zoo has paid €5,000 to charities and has been spared a criminal conviction for a terrifying incident in which a two-year-old girl was mauled by a Brazilian tapir.

Judge John O’Neill was given confirmation yesterday at Dublin District Court that the zoo had complied with his order in October to donate €2,500 to the Jack and Jill Foundation and the same amount to LauraLynn Children’s Hospice.

Finalising the case, he applied the Probation Offenders Act, which spares the zoo a fine and possible criminal conviction.

The toddler was attacked by the 225kg exotic plant-eating animal, named Rio, during a supervised “close encounter” experience in the tapir enclosure on August 8 last year. Photographs of the girl’s injuries were published in the Irish Medical Journal in November.

The girl, who was picked up in the tapir’s mouth, suffered stomach and arm injuries, needed treatment from surgeons at Temple Street Children’s Hospital, while her mother also required medical attention.

In October, the Zoological Society of Ireland, which was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Authority (HSA), admitted a breakdown in communication was to blame for a 2006 risk assessment not being heeded. The assessment had stated that the public should only be allowed near harmless exhibits.

Dublin District Court heard the normally mild-mannered female tapir Rio had been placid but reacted aggressively when the child “let out a screech”.

Judge O’Neill heard there had never been any incident like this in the zoo’s 180-year history and it was humiliated, apologetic, and embarrassed, and has implemented new safety measures.

It pleaded guilty to a single count contrary to Section 19.4 of the 2005 Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act for failing to implement a risk assessment.

Defence counsel Shay Fleming had described the chances of the incident occurring as “one in a million”.

HSA inspector Mairead Wall had told prosecution counsel Antonia Boyle that zoo-keeper Susan O’Brien had done a favour for a friend by letting a family with four young children have a close encounter with an animal.

It had been planned that they would get to pet a giraffe but this changed because the giraffe had already been fed and, after Ms O’Brien’s team leader agreed, they were taken to the tapir habitat instead.

The zoo-keeper told Ms Wall Rio was “chilled out, lazy” and, during the close encounter, the animal, which had had a calf a month beforehand, had been docile.

The group consisted of four adults and four children aged from two to ten.

Ms Wall had agreed that, during the five-minute visit the 108cm tall animal had been lying on its side with its eyes rolled back in contentment as it was petted. However, she added: “The child let out a screech and at that the animal was on its feet, proceeded towards the child, picked the child up in its mouth and shook it violently.”

Ms Wall was satisfied the zoo-keeper was highly qualified and experienced. However, the zoo-keeper had not seen the risk assessment stating close encounters should only be done with harmless creatures such as stick insects, rabbits, or frogs.

Ms Wall had agreed with Mr Fleming that the visits no longer happen and that safety measures, including a higher fence, in relation to the tapir enclosure have been implemented.

Judge O’Neill said he was concerned at the lack of communication about the risk assessment, but noted the zoo’s staff were people to whom their work “is not just a job for them, it is a way of life” and took into account the fact that the animal reacted because it felt threatened.

The zoo had also paid prosecution costs of €2,953.