No OSHA citation in fatal bear-mauling
February 8, 2011 by Fred HosierPosted in: Bizarre Accident of the Week, Fatality, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, OSHA news, Who Got Fined and Why?
PDF OSHA won’t cite the owner of a bear that killed another man at his wild animal compound last year.
Reason: Investigators weren’t able to determine if the man who was killed was an employee of the bear’s owner.
On Aug. 19, 2010, Brent Kandra was feeding Iroquois, a 400 lb. bear at Sam Mazzola’s compound in Columbia Township, OH. The bear attacked Kandra, who died in a hospital about six hours later from sharp and blunt force trauma to his body.
Mazzola admits that at one time, Kandra was his employee, but that on Aug. 19 Kandra was visiting him and his animals as just a friend.
Iroquois was euthanized at the request of Kendra’s family.
OSHA says there were problems on Mazzola’s property despite the fact that it didn’t issue any citations.
A letter OSHA sent to Mazzola stated, “Direct or free contact with dangerous animals, such as bears, is a recognized hazard that is likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees and others.”
OSHA recommended Mazzola prohibit free contact with dangerous and exotic animals and instead use holding areas when caregivers feed the animals, clean their cages or perform other activities within the animals’ living quarters.
Mazzola reportedly owns tigers, a lion, black bears, wolves, skunks, raccoons and foxes.
Local prosecutors are still investigating.
SafetyNewsAlert.com delivers the latest Safety news once a week to the inboxes of over 270,000 Safety professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to SafetyNewsAlert!
Tags: bear mauling, exotic animals, killed by a bear, wild animal compound
Loading ...
February 8th, 2011 at 10:43 am
I think this is interesting; OSHA cited and fined SeaWorld $75,000 for the February 24th 2010 death of an animal trainer working with a killer whale, citing that SeaWorld knew that trainers were exposed to inherent hazards while working with dangerous animals. In this case they did not. Both OSHA offices recognized that contact with dangerous animals can be hazardous. Granted the man was not deemed an employee at the time. OSHA has cited and fined companies in the past for exposing non workers to hazards. I guess this goes to show the inconsistency of the OSHA regions.
I do not see much difference between being killed by a whale or a bear. Dead is dead.
If people willingly decide to put themselves in the position to be killed by dangerous animals that is their bad decision. The man in this article was familiar with this bear and took his chances. The same goes for the whale trainer. I do not think that SeaWorld should have been cited or fined. I am sure that the application for a trainer clearly stated “KILLER WHALE” not the fluffy whale. The name should have tipped her off to a possible problem.
February 10th, 2011 at 5:05 pm
The article states that the reason why they were not cited is because they couldn’t determine that he was an employee at that time. OSHA cannot cite the owner because it does not have jurisdiction to protect non-workers.
I would bet the family has a good case if they choose to file a lawsuit (which is why the owner probably agreed to euthanize the animal).