4 ms·

Yes, it really gets old the constant hyping of Australian fauna as 'dangerous', mostly it seems by US American media. Cassowaries in the wild are really not a d

by oska 8y ago

Yes, it really gets old the constant hyping of Australian fauna as 'dangerous', mostly it seems by US American media. Cassowaries in the wild are really not a danger to humans even though they have the potential to do possibly lethal harm. The cassowary is only going to act to defend itself; it's not a predator (unlike salties).

crispinb 8y ago
Of course. There are attacks, but the cases are tiny in number. Anyone who has lived here knows that bogans are by far the most dangerous wildlife species here. (It's a shame that Australia is known for its wildlife being dangerous to humans, whereas the reality -- that our humans are extremely dangerous to wildlife, often choosing to drive whole species to extinction -- is less well advertised)
nkozyra 8y ago
Do you think it's unfair to classify it as the most dangerous bird? What other would qualify?
- Intermernet 8y ago
  In Australia you're much more likely to be injured by a magpie than a cassowary. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/injury/injuries-involving-magpies/formats https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/injury/injuries-involving-ma...
  - elyobo 8y ago
    Can confirm. Have encountered more magpies than cassowaries and have been attacked by more magpies than cassowaries. Not much of a pain, but if you're on a bike on a busy road it's somewhat more threatening...
- crispinb 8y ago
  Sorry to be a bore, but it really depends on what someone means by 'dangerous'. If you mean 'potentially dangerous if encountered', then I guess it would be. When it comes to birds that might slice your abdomen open, it's in a class of its own. If you mean 'actually dangerous in terms of causing injuries or deaths', you could say most. But the baseline for death-by-bird is so low that the word 'dangerous' seems a bit daft (Cassowaries exist in decreasing numbers in areas of relatively low human populations, are infrequently encountered and not usually aggressive). On the numbers, if Cassowaries are 'dangerous', then dogs, horses and cattle are all catastrophically homicidal.
  - nkozyra 8y ago
    > When it comes to birds that might slice your abdomen open, it's in a class of its own. Right. I don't think the intent here is "look how deadly Australia is!" as much as "here's a crazy animal rarely talked about that recently was in the news." As an American, I think the assumption is that, say, the outback is a sparsely populated area with some dangerous wildlife like swaths of Africa and South America. When I think of Australia my head goes to the coasts.
    - crispinb 8y ago
      > When I think of Australia my head goes to the coasts Right. That's where we (nearly) all live. As it happens, cassowaries are also coastal creatures, but exclusively tropical. The tropics have been sparsely populated, though North Queensland has been 'growing' fast, so unfortunately the cassowary's days are numbered.

by oska 8y ago

crispinb 8y ago

Of course. There are attacks, but the cases are tiny in number. Anyone who has lived here knows that bogans are by far the most dangerous wildlife species here. (It's a shame that Australia is known for its wildlife being dangerous to humans, whereas the reality -- that our humans are extremely dangerous to wildlife, often choosing to drive whole species to extinction -- is less well advertised)

nkozyra 8y ago

Do you think it's unfair to classify it as the most dangerous bird? What other would qualify?

Intermernet 8y ago
In Australia you're much more likely to be injured by a magpie than a cassowary. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/injury/injuries-involving-magpies/formats https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/injury/injuries-involving-ma...
- elyobo 8y ago
  Can confirm. Have encountered more magpies than cassowaries and have been attacked by more magpies than cassowaries. Not much of a pain, but if you're on a bike on a busy road it's somewhat more threatening...
crispinb 8y ago
Sorry to be a bore, but it really depends on what someone means by 'dangerous'. If you mean 'potentially dangerous if encountered', then I guess it would be. When it comes to birds that might slice your abdomen open, it's in a class of its own. If you mean 'actually dangerous in terms of causing injuries or deaths', you could say most. But the baseline for death-by-bird is so low that the word 'dangerous' seems a bit daft (Cassowaries exist in decreasing numbers in areas of relatively low human populations, are infrequently encountered and not usually aggressive). On the numbers, if Cassowaries are 'dangerous', then dogs, horses and cattle are all catastrophically homicidal.
- nkozyra 8y ago
  > When it comes to birds that might slice your abdomen open, it's in a class of its own. Right. I don't think the intent here is "look how deadly Australia is!" as much as "here's a crazy animal rarely talked about that recently was in the news." As an American, I think the assumption is that, say, the outback is a sparsely populated area with some dangerous wildlife like swaths of Africa and South America. When I think of Australia my head goes to the coasts.
  - crispinb 8y ago
    > When I think of Australia my head goes to the coasts Right. That's where we (nearly) all live. As it happens, cassowaries are also coastal creatures, but exclusively tropical. The tropics have been sparsely populated, though North Queensland has been 'growing' fast, so unfortunately the cassowary's days are numbered.