That is my understanding of what I have read. Add to that, the visitor having a new hairdo, arriving in a car not familiar and holding up a stuffed animal in front of her. Another sad incident, that could have been prevented, as you said, if non-professionals who have no business housing such animals in their homes were unable to do so.

The TV here did rather a lot of mocking of politicians for bothering to spend time on the issue, which seems bizarre given this incident.

Here's the recent news: The House just passed the Captive Primate Safety Act. And here's a NYT editorial.

The word is just in..."The brother of a woman mauled by a 200-pound chimpanzee in Connecticut last week is taking legal steps to prepare a possible lawsuit.

Michael Nash has filed an affidavit in Stamford Probate Court saying immediate action is required to secure the assets of any potential defendants. He's also asking the court to take swift action to preserve evidence to protect his sister's ability to recover damages in future litigation.

Nash wants the court to appoint him as a temporary conservator over his sister, 55-year-old Charla Nash. She was attacked on Feb. 16 in Stamford by a chimpanzee owned by her friend, 70-year-old Sandra Herold, who is not named in the affidavit."

The Hartford Courant

In addition to the dramatic paradoxical reactions, like Ace Rage, I've had far-too-personal experience with  long-term psych drugs creating a more-subtle, and incredibly dangerous, lowering of bite threshold in dogs.

Some vet or behaviorist blithely prescribes the drug for "anxiety" and the dog that was previously growly and snappy -- or even just fearful but non-violent -- just goes straight to the full-force uninhibited bite.

Animals cannot sit down and chat with the shrink, describing their inner state, dry mouth, feelings of dissociation,  suicidal thoughts, etc. until the doses can be adjusted to be "just right."

Hell, I once had a reaction to a prescription allergy drug that was supposed to have no affective side effects -- made for a very scary experience driving alone in heavy traffic while fighting an out-of-body experience.  Difference was, I got to decide that I would never take that drug again.

That said -- the quest for an explanation for this poor chimp's "aberrant" behavior is a red herring.  I agree, he went Chimp.  He did something that a normal chimp should be expected to do when treated in an abnormal manner.

As for the notion that "vegetarian" animals are peaceful and never normally violent -- well, hippos kill more African humans than lions, moose kill more Alaskan humans than grizzlies, and Cape buffalo and elephants will both stomp you flat for looking at 'em funny.  Or I know some Holstein bulls that you are welcome to go pet.  You can turn your back on my rooster when he's in a pissy mood and there's no dog there to keep his beak clean.  Run through the rhino pen at the zoo.  Invade the personal space of my late, great, 5' iguana, Don.  Report back on how that works out for ya.

I would note that keeping chimps and other primates is already illegal in that state, this animal was 'grandfathered' in because it was acquired before the law changed.

SusanG. and Dr. K. point out something more people should be aware of, especially in conjuction with Lorri comment. Those cute exotics are hard to care for (their health is often compromised), they can cause physical harm to their owners and visitors, and when they are released (and many are), they can come to further harm to themselves and others. The environmental problems with messing up an ecosystem and impacting native vegetation and creatures are huge. And something that many are unaware of is the physical problems exotics can cause to flood control areas (ex. nutria and iguanas), as well as trees, buildings, and parks (ex. starlings) costs taxpayer dollars to fix. Interesting site to see iguana damage in South Florida: http://www.iguanatrapper.com/problem.htm

Legislation isn't meant to prevent an individual from being happy - it's to prevent everyone else from the likely bad outcomes of that individual's actions. It's not the animal that's the problem (whether an iguana or a pit bull), it's the health and welfare of everyone (especially including the animal) that needs to protected - and since we can't legislate smarts, then we've got to legislate actions. As for deciding which creatures are not to be kept, I think a sliding scale of "Learn about and pass a test and yearly home visits, and you can have an animal from List A. You want something from List B, you need to do a hell of a lot more to get okayed for that. As for List C - only zoos, aquaria, and wildlife sanctuaries need apply." That idea is fraught with problem, too, I realize, but it's a possibility.

well the story has been changed a few times but yeah as to the original post
Very good point on up and downs with pets you never know
As far as keeping a pet that big. I dont want anything stronger than me hanging out. i guess that just makes me a wuss eh?

Has the ex cimp attcked before i saw something on oreilly

Yes, Lorri, but the majority of people can realistically take care of a hamster or a dog. They may not provide what some of us consider "ideal" care, but they provide the animal with a secure home safe for both them and their pet. These animals are easy to take care of and there are many resources available for owners who are having problems doing so (trainers, shelters, veterinarians, etc.)

For primates, it's just the opposite: the absolute majority of people could never provide even close to adequate care where both the animal and his or her caretakers are safe, have proper enrichment, a proper diet and etc. Also, there aren't any good options when things go wrong. Most veterinarians do not have experience with and so wouldn't feel comfortable working with non-human primates. There aren't local trainers you can contact about having a consult when your animal reaches sexual maturity and develops huge canine teeth and a fondness for challenging authority. There aren't any rescues or shelters to take most of these guys, either, and because they are taken from mom so early, they're often socially maladjusted so you can't rehome them and zoos just aren't an option.

AH the slippery slope.

Now, don't mistake my reluctance to support banning of certain animals as pets, as support that people should be allowed to have them, but it's that "allowed" thing.

I really hate a government that tells me what I can and can not have in my home.

I personally find primates generally disturbing and don't care for them, but forbad people to have one, I don't know....

realistically some people are too stupid to own a hamster much less anything else, but stupid unfortunately isn't really something we can legistate either.

I know people who should have children, and yet, there they are with a whole car full.

Some people shouldn't any kind of pet much less one that really isn't pet material. It's a terrible shame what happend to the injured woman, maybe people who want to own "exotics" should have to have required training or something along those lines, but  any animal can hurt someone. You only have to glance at the pit bull controvery to see that.

I live in California, where it is illegal to own a primate as a pet (geez, it's technically illegal to own ferrets- Ca Fish and Game doesn't mess around) and no one seems the worse for it. I don't hear people pining how their lives would be so much better if only they had a chimpanzee. At the end of the day I do think the government needs to step in, in situations like these, and protect people from themselves.

I have worked at wildlife and exotic animal rescues for a number of years. Having seen the damage done to exotics sold in the pet trade, I no longer believe most of these animals should be kept as pets. People rarely consider what they will do when the cute baby monkey grow up and is unmanageable. What happens to the little snake that can grow quickly up to 10+ feet or the monitor or iguana that are not nice when they reach their adult size? The answer is that there are very few options for these unwanted pets. Zoos rarely want them, sanctuaries and exotic rescues are few and usually full. Here in Florida, many exotics are released and thrive in the warm climate causing a new set of problems.

I know that there are many good and caring owners of exotic animal, however I unfortunately see more of the negative side. Usually it takes a horrific incident like this most recent mauling to bring up the topic of wild animal's suitability as pets. So sad!

Cat, he could easily have killed her and then he could have turned on his owner and killed her AND then gone on a wild rapage looking for more victims.  Yes, how little damage he did.

Not sure what all would be on my "outlaw" list but I am sure it would include primates, poisonous snakes, boas, gators and crocks, quite a few aquatics.  Hmmm, now that I think about it, my list would be quite long.  Thinking it has to do with my two war wounds; one from an injured cat and one wicked scar from my childhood bunny (geez those back legs are powerful) that I startled from behind.  Knowing the under 20 pound fluffies can do such damage makes one a bit more concerned for the larger and/or more dangerous critters.

Good piece. I presume you aren't referring to chimpanzees as monkeys.  I agree that chimps are way too much for most people to handle.  They are very high-strung, unbelievably strong for their size and ultra-sensitive to both their surroundings and body language.  Add high intelligence, curiosity and an opposable thumb and you're just asking for it.

I have no idea why anyone would want one as a housemate, unless they lived in an area where they were indigenous and adopted an orphan.  Even still, like most wild creatures, once they mature they are not pets any longer.  Dogs work out so well as pets because they never reach full maturity in the sense that a full complement of survival instincts come to the fore.  If you want a wildish animal, get a cat , rabbit or  hamster would be my advice.

I'm shocked to learn that there aren't regulations against this practice and trust me, I'm no fan of regulations.

"My only surprise was how little damage he actually did."

How little damage? We still don't know if the woman is going to LIVE yet. The victim has now lost both hands, is blind, and is going to need extensive facial reconstructive surgery. Most of her scalp has been destroyed. The first responders on the scene could not identify the victim's gender and also called the 911 dispatcher to warn the other personnel to prepare themselves emotionally for what they were about to see.

The victim underwent an eight-hour surgery the other day to attempt to save her vision (which failed). She may need a facial transplant if she does survive, which is still not guaranteed. She is being kept in a drug-induced coma. Short of killing her, I don't know how much MORE damage the chimp could've done, honestly.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,497984,00.html
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jvlkKth37Fp__GL6KYdl2b1s6dBgD96H2DS80

When I first began working with exotics (including chimps and orangutans) there was little known about the effects of anesthesia and other drugs and medications. Today this has changed but it is still a risk and uncertainties exist.

At the time (late 70s and early 80s) we had a veterinarian that came down from Los Angeles (bad red hair--can't think of his name) who experimented with dosages on a variety of the exotics because where I worked was the biggest private exotic animal supplier to the movie and television industry in the United States.

I suspect that wild animals have a different reaction partially because of their different flight and fight reactions when the adrenaline kicks in as the drug begins to work.

Lack of regulation and ignorance about just how dangerous these animals are is the problem--along with the private breeding of chimps in this country.

It used to be that the baby chimps were torn from the arms of their dead mothers by poachers. Poaching still exists but there are national sources for these pets...not just chimps but lions, tigers, and other wild critters.

The big problem is that the image of chimps help by many people are that they are docile, humanlike creatures and that these incidents are exceptions.

Even after the horrible chimp attacks people will forget the Animal Haven chimp attack and the Travis the chimp incident.

I shook my head when I read the article that stated, "Unlike Nash, Davis had extensive experience with chimpanzees."

This is BS--they had one chimp living with them. That does not extensive experience with chimpanzees.

Clearly Herold wanted him to calm down and didn't know how to do so as indicated by at least one previous incident.

I doubt it was the Xanax or any other lame excuse for his behavior--he was being an adult male chimp and was agitated...and being aggressive and destructive is part of that normal chimp behavior.

zandperl: I do find that there is a difference in which species we choose to adopt as "domesticatable." Though the line is way fuzzy, it all depends on the species' access to conspecifics (if this is a true issue for the species), long-term comfort and relative degree of harm done to humans as a result of their captivity. IMO, the latter issue is minor compared to the welfare issues. Stupid humans can eat their desserts, but for our wild species it's  lifetime of harm at stake. 

Tara, I've had killer bunnies before, in fact I have one right now (a female) who could do major damage if you tried to pick her up. So I basically don't. I guess my post was a bit too brief to do justice to the issue. Bulls are not predatory, but many of them are provoked, and will even kill, if you enter their territory. Same with some beef cows who've just given birth.
But those behaviours are explained, and they are defensive. Attacks usually have an explanation, at least from an ethological point of view (or the attacking animal's point of view). And most attacks by non-predatory animals are defensive, territorial and/or sexually related.
In this case, I reserve my judgement on the explanation about "challenging females", especially in light of what we've been told of his past or recent behaviour. It seems like a very sudden escalation. But that brings me to the question: was there something specific that made her regularly administrate Xanax in his tea, if that's in fact what she had been doing?

I live in CT too and today they were reporting that Travis' mother was also shot due to an outburst...here is a local link with links to all of the stories that are running here locally....http://www.wfsb.com/130456/page.html

I'm curious where to draw the line.  Should we outlaw all non-domesticated species - from corn snakes to cockatoos?  Only the ones that often harbor zoonotic diseases?  Only the ones large enough to do damage to humans?  (But hm, just about every pet can do harm to humans if backed into a corner.)  Only certain species that we decide have "violent natures", such as monkeys and tigers?  (But then who gets to decide, or do we just wait till enough people have been attacked?) 

I remember that previous blog & comments, Dr. K! I was amazed at how many chimp/monkey-owners were out there!

I saw it on the late news the day it happened. The report I saw said that the chimp had been agitated earlier in the day, so she decided on the Xanax. It wasn't clear whether this had been vet prescribed in the past or supposing it was her personal prescription.

As soon as I heard that, I went "ape"! Crazy, crazy, having seen the effects of some particular drugs on my own dogs! One time, I was holding mine "pre-anesthetic" and instead of calmly going into a relaxed state went into a raving "lion". I've seen unexpected effects to Torbutol too. A friend commented that some of these drugs "LOWER" bite inhibition and that makes sense too; alond with a paradoxical effect.

Personally, I believe that there is no place for monkeys/chimps/primates other than their natural habitat. Certainly not as pets, actors, zoos, or experimentation labs.
Barbara A. Albright/New Hampshire

Cheshire: Agreed. I'm with the AVMA. I'm all for outlawing primate-keeping, wholesale. IMO there's no excuse for primate pet-keeping--too dangerous, too cruel and too environmentally damaging.

And then there was the chimp whose "birthday" celebration was marred by his attack on his former owner's testicles--apparently a common male-on-male strategy during mating wars. Not pretty--a violent sort of scrotal ablation, I'm given to understand.

An opportunity may be lost here.  The laws that have stalled about outlawing chimps may finally get passed, but in my opinion that would be missing the chance to outlaw private "pet" ownership of other wild animals like wild cats.  In college, a guy showed up in the drive thru of the Arbys I worked at with a mountain lion in the car with him.  He owned more big cats as well.  He was forced to move outside of city limits, but that was the extent of it.  There are some animals that are not pets, period end of.  It's like playing a slow game of russian roulette.  At some point, the animal is going to behave like the animal it is and the people around it may pay the price.

and for anyone that hasn't ran across the story yet, there was an attack at a chimp sanctuary in California in 2005.  the victim has similar sounding injuries to the woman in CT. 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/02/22/2009-02-22_man_who_lost_face_in_05_mauling_knows_he.html

The chimps size seems to have increased over the days of reporting, he started out over 20 pounds lighter. It looks a bit like a perfect storm of species, free housing, health/psyc condition, handling and pharmaceuticals. Any two of those would be dangerous.

Okay, so my keyboard has issues and some of my comment got missed. The last sentence should read:

"and because many of them (and other wildlife kept as "pets") are endangered in the wild, there are ethical concerns associated with owning them that just aren't found with domestic animals."

Also, I wasn't trying to equate pitbulls with more dangerous animals like chimps. I only pointed them out because of some specific comments in the post Dr. Khuly linked. With or without exotics as pets, the stupid pitbull legislation lives on, unfortunately.

Brebis, it's a little silly to think that "non-predatory" animals don't "fly off the handle." I had a scar for years from a rabbit who decided that he didn't want me reaching into HIS cage because it belonged to HIM. I'm not sure how much more herbivorous you can get than a cute little bunny.

To make this more relevant - animals act like animals. Chimpanzees are not domesticated and, without any sort of guidance or normal social structure, it shouldn't be surprising that they can start to react in strange or dangerous ways to the confusing world around them. Dr. Khuly, I support your post here and your last one. As someone who has had some experience with non-human primates, I agree that they are not good pets. Most wild animals aren't. I think the primate = pitbull argument (as in "First they take our monkeys, then they take pitbulls, then come the lhasa-poos, kittens, and goldfish!") is a ridiculous straw man. NHPs are not domesticated, they are not easily provided for by *most* pet owners, and because many of them (and other wildlife kept as "pets") ethical concerns associated with owning them that just arne't found with domestic animals.

Another vote for you. It's beyond me why anyone would think of such animals as suitable, let alone desirable, pets. But given that some people are just that crazy/foolish/ignorant/irresponsible, then the practice should be outlawed. It would be one thing if the "owner" was the only one at risk, but that is never the case. Anyone in the vicintity is at risk because of the inherent unpredictability of these animals coupled with their great strenght. Nobody should have to wonder if they will someday be the mutulated victim in the news. There's something very strange going on with someone who wants a chimp or other primate, or any big cat, etc. for a "pet." It just shouldn't be legal to have one.

I have never understood the appeal of any monkey or ape as a bff, so to speak. A friend of mine is a zookeeper and the poop-flinging alone would be a no-brainer to keeping in your home, no matter how separate the quarters. Add to that that even the smallest are faster than most dogs at biting, scratching, ripping hair, and spitting, and those issues only increase with size. Even the oh-so-gentle-seeming orangs are stronger than many professional wrestlers, and the only thing I think of is "Uh, NO."

After having been bitten on the cheek by a medium-sized, only slightly irked iguana (and preventing that same iguana several years later from leaping onto a nice red-haired woman - he started making the sexual head bob, so I knew in time - with bad thoughts in mind), and they have pretty small teeth, the idea that a creature with canines like a chimp has would be a good pet is crazy to me.

What, Dr Patty:  you mean you have readers who think owning a chimp for a "pet" is a GOOD idea???

Human stupidity knows no bounds

As Dr Jane Goodall's website notes: "reality bites"

http://www.janegoodall.org/chimp_central/conservation/issues/as_pets.asp

Rabies has officially been ruled out & I remember a local TV station reporting that the Xanax was indeed the owner's supply.

People in Stamford expressed surprise at the attack because Travis often accompanied his owner in the vehicle so townspeople seemed quite well acquainted with the chimp & never found him to be anything other than friendly.

brebis noire: I've also read (in the Fox News article I referenced) that chimps at Travis's stage of maturity will begin to challenge females in his society. Primates who do not receive normal social cues (and how could he, in the absence of other chimps?) are unlikely to prove reliable pets. An understatement.

The chimp owner was later showing off a cup with the "undissolved" Xanax in the bottom, claiming the Chimp didn't actually ingest it.  WHATEVER! and who cares if he did or didn't because he's a 200 pound (equivalent of 600 pounds of human) molly coddled three year old.  Of course he's a potential hazard.  My only surprise was how little damage he actually did.  Keep standing your ground and position on this one PLEASE.  I'm all for caring for primates and other wild animals but "in homes" is most definitely NOT the way.

PS: Thanks also for that inherrent disputation of "kids don't get sugar highs" too!  I don't know who the alleged unbiased observers are in those studies but they certainly aren't mothers.

Thanks Beth. I hadn't heard about this, and in fact I had been trying to think of some possible reasons why a chimp (or any non-predator animal, for that matter) would fly off the handle like that without obvious provocation, and the only things I was coming up with were sexual (hormonal) "rage" (I'm not familiar with primates, but thought it might be possible), or a brain tumour or other brain disorder (e.g. rabies), or extreme metabolic disturbance. I didn't even think of drugs.

Yeah, I just realized i'd omitted the Xanax detail where I thought I'd included it. Oops! Bad blogger! (And I've amended my post--thanks!)

According to the report I read, he seemed a little agitated so she gave him a Xanax. It also sounds as if the Xanax was from the woman's stash--not the chimp's. That's a federal crime, btw. The DEA has laws that specifically prohibit this kind of medical me-tooism. 

brebis noire:  According to the news reports I heard, the woman had given the chimp a Xanax tablet a few hours before the attack.  I got the impression that the chimp had been on it long term (in which case I didn't understand why they thought it could have caused the attack), but maybe that was just wishful thinking on my part. 

Anyway, I never did understand why people think keeping these big primates is a good idea.  They may have the intelligence level of a three-year old child, but I wouldn't want to get anywhere near a 200 pound three-year old either.

I'm a bit confused here - are you hypothesizing some kind of tranquilizer was used on this particular chimp, or has it been reported somewhere? I've been thinking for a week about what to write on this story, and haven't gotten any further than "keeping primates, breeding primates, and having primates as pets is so many different kinds of wrong". Of course, there are primate refuges out there that seem to work just fine, until there's an incident, I guess.
I agree re acepromazine, by the way - I hate it when people ask me for drugs to calm their animals during thunderstorms, e.g. Even when I explain the unpredictable effects, they still want something. Why they can't offer non-chemical comfort to their animals is beyond me. (Thanks for letting me rant on that.)

Also here to agree with you.  Wild animals are not suitable for the average person to keep as pets.   This was a tragedy for the animal and for the woman attacked, and I'm sure it won't be the last one as long as people think it's cute to own a chimp or a lion or some other unsuitable animal.

Living here in CT I can tell you that however much you may have heard about Travis's rampage, you haven't heard all that's been reported by CT radio & TV stations as well as the local newspapers.

Once the statement from Sandra Herold hit the press, all H--- broke loose again & next thing we knew the owner was retracting her statement & naysaying that she'd slipped Travis a Xanax in his tea.

The end result of this may be that she's sued for her chimp's doings & the state of CT might also face legal action for allowing an ape over 40lb to be kept as a pet.

Granted the law went into effect as a result of Travis's rampage in 2003 through the streets of downtown Stamford, CT where he lived but the state may be deemed remiss in not insisting Mrs. Herold abide by the new law.

However you look at this situation it was horrific.

I'm not here to bite the messenger. It has been a horrific story and seems the Xanax part of it has not been talked about much, and that it was not a veterinary prescribed prescription but something this woman took upon herself to administer. At least that is my understanding of what I have read. Add to that, the visitor having a new hairdo, arriving in a car not familiar and holding up a stuffed animal in front of her. Another sad incident, that could have been prevented, as you said, if non-professionals who have no business housing such animals in their homes were unable to do so.