There is a great fallacy in the way we think of which animals are dangerous and ones that are not. Then again there is a great fallacy in the way we have been observing animals in order to come to those conclusions. One website mentioned the most dangerous animals based on their ferocity but I think that having a formidable presence is not all that makes up a killing machine.

Case in point about the website picturing the great white shark as being the best killing machine probably because it has no predators and possesses an imposing set of razor sharp teeth. No chance for a box jelly fish to compete with this you would think but if one bases dangerous on how many victims are killed over a period of time the answer is not this shark. Recent evidence has shown that a softer looking jellyfish causes many more deaths a year than this fish does and the type of death is even as horrific. The boxes jellyfish found off reefs near Australia packs more venom per specialized stinger cells than other aquatic forms of life do and enough to paralyze prey or send a human into shock so that he never reaches shore; he drowns because of the neurotoxin. One would have thought of the Portuguese Man of War but that form is docile compared to it box shaped cousin.

Years ago the hyena was thought to be a carrion eater, never attacking prey. It is only recently in the past 35 years that we have come to conclude it is better to observe these nocturnal animals are active. A lone leopard would probably fear these animals because they hunt in groups and know very well how to circle their prey just as wild dogs would do. There sharp teeth have earned them the reputation as being just as deadly especially when they act in concert with one attacking at the front and others attacking at the hind haunches that would cripple the feline.

Interspecies conflicts are very different from how we normally view them. Conflicts between a buffalo and a lioness, which has taken a calf, would show how the buffalo was able to get redemption. We would have thought that the lioness would have been more successful protecting its catch but with an enraged mother on its tale that is not always the case. They are strong and able to hold up to either trampling the other beast or skewering it on it formidable horns. Normally the lioness isn’t after the adult water buffalo anyway because of their stamina and weight. A weaker relative has always figured as more of a catch.

A crocodile could defend itself just by intimidating its surrounding lion pride by holding its mouth agape, hissing and snapping its tale. Normally neither would seek confrontation if in the wild; lions don’t like water and are probably aware that they would have less ability at defending themselves aquatically than crocodiles. Nile crocodiles have been known to quite successful in their battles against cats, zebras, and buffalo crossing their domain. Bull elephants might hold better than a crocodile because of their massive size and ability to crush crocodiles even in the water.

Elephants have been known to shoo off a lion pride, especially when they have their herds to protect. If water holes are scarce it may leave the species no choice but to tolerate one another in a desperate attempt at drinking. A night battle between the two has shown that if alone the elephant may end up as a victim rather than victor. Normally the pachyderms travel in groups and would defend themselves very well against a lion pride but if there is a straggler than the lion’s keen vision and group power is definitely an asset.