[QUOTE=Excalibre]
I just find that so incomprehensible.
[/QUOTE]
Why? How is that any different from reading “The Fountainhead” and becoming interested in architecture (which happened to a friend of mine), having a really cool physics teacher and wanting to do that (another friend), or discovering a subject which one really loves (which happened to me).
:rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Blake]
Irwin’s position is no different from a famous and influential doctor who opposes any and all use of condoms. You would presumably argue that such a person is merely a “vocal oponent” of condoms and is not responsible for causing deaths. I argue that such a person will very likely lead to the deaths of numerous persons and will continue to do so for generations.
That is because an influential person who opposes what is probably the only universally applicable and provable means of preventing deaths is very likely to cause deaths. I didn’t think that was really so hard to understand.
At least I note that you have accepted that Irwin talked a lot of ignorant nonsense and mis-educated a lot of people. He was certainly no ally in the fight against ignorance.
The really scary part is that I have seen less than 1/2 hour of Irwin’s work in my lifetime, yet in that half hour I must have heard half a dozen erroneous statements. He quite obviously just said whatever nonsense came into his head without regard for facts. The fact that any random list of Irwin quotes contains several such ignorant statements only confirms that.
Of course all that means that if Irwin did any good in popularising the natural world then it was necessarily counterbalanced by the amount of misinformation he spread. Like I said, a scoreless draw. He promoted as much ignorance as he ever fought.
[/QUOTE]
I think you’ve got a totally wrong perspective on this.
I remember watching Marty Stouffer’s Wild America every week on PBS. I couldn’t recite a single fact I learned from the show (there are probably a few in my brain somewhere), but I do remember cool footage, some exciting and dramatic scenes, and Marty’s tone and attitude.
Any tidbits that may or may not be questionable are irrelevant; the seven to twelve year olds who spend a few years watching The Crocodile Hunter religiously will not become transmitters of bad science. They will be animal lovers, and nature lovers, and maybe more engaged in their biology and earth science courses.
He never fought ignorance, he spread his fascination and passion for animals; wildlife documentaries are fonts of accurate knowledge second, and promoters of awe and love of nature first and foremost.
That was Steve Irwin’s goal, and he achieved it. If folks want to look for quantifiable metrics for the ‘truth vs. inaccuracies’ he spread, have a field day, but I think you miss the entire point of his program.
[QUOTE=severus]
I don’t exactly know what kind of work you do, Colibri, but I’m sure it’s very valuable on a scientific level, much more than anything Steve Irwin has done in his life. But Irwin served a different purpose. He had a love for animals that he worked hard to transmit to other people. And he had quite a lot of success at that. Not complete success, of course: I guess the people mocking him, that are alluded to in the other thread, are people with some kind of fear of nature who will always think him an idiot for going so close to ugly or dangerous animals. But if idiot he was, at least he was a useful idiot.
[/QUOTE]
I am a professional ornithologist and tropical biologist, and work extensively in the conservation of tropical forests and other habitats. I spent three years working with the New Zealand Wildlife Service, and have headed the ornithology team on large-scale biodiversity inventories in Panama, Peru, and Gabon.
My herpeotological colleagues on these surveys regularly have handled or collected some very dangerous animals, including Bushmasters, cobras, and crocodiles. I personally know someone who lost an arm to a Nile Croc (mentioned by Cecil here), and another who lost a leg to a Bushmaster. I know several others who have been bitten by crocs and snakes. (None of these were professional herpetologists, though.) These animals have to be treated with the utmost respect - something that Irwin didn’t do.
As I said in my second post in my thread, I don’t deny that Irwin had some positive effects. However, as Blake notes, he had some negative effects as well. Other hosts of nature shows, such as David Attenborough, Jaques Costeau, and even Marlin Perkins had the same kind of positive effects while still showing much more respect for the facts and for the animals they dealt with.
[QUOTE=kambucta]
Blake, given that ‘sustainable harvesting’ of wildlife resources is very much a debatable issue, and with the verdict/s still up there (apart from your European Red Deer situation) I don’t really think your claims that Irwin was spouting shit hold very much water, actually. He might well have been, but only future studies and research will decide that, not you and your sanctimonious opinion.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with Blake that this is not really a debatable issue, and a matter of fact rather than opinion. Sustainable harvest of wildlife can unequivocally be a positive tool for conservation. While it can be debated whether sustainable harvest is appropriate for a particular species, or whether a particular level of harvest is sustainable, it is clear that controlled hunting can have a positive effect on some species, as in Blake’s European examples above, and in the case of Ducks Unlimited in the US.
I am not familiar with Irwin’s position on the matter, but if his position was that sustainable harvest should never be permitted, then I would question his effectiveness as a conservationist.
[QUOTE=Blake]
<shyly raises hand>
I know three people who enrolled in forensic science degrees solely because of the success of CSI and associated ripoffs.
And there are apparently many more. I’ve read in severalplaces that forensic science courses across the English speaking world have been massively oversubscibed for the last few years.
[/QUOTE]
Before his health declined, Jimmy Doohan used to just show up at companies and ask for tours, which he always got. Seems the engineering staff all found him to be a big inspiration and were more than happy to show their idol around.
[QUOTE=severus]
I’m sure someone called zoogirl will recognize that helping children break a fear of animals that they might have is a good thing.
[/QUOTE]
Lovely thought full of flowers and rainbows, except the animals Erwin was most famous for molesting are the ones you are SUPPOSED to be afraid of. Slinging about a taipan by its tail and dancing to keep away from its fangs, as he was doing the first time I saw him, is really fucking stupid. So is carrying his baby and hopping around a muddy bank while taunting a crocodile. He made a career of abusing and terrifying wild animals that should be left alone. And, regardless of your opinion of his antics, his on-screen manner was not “slightly annoying.” It was EXTREMELY annoying. Hot wife, though.
One thing I remember from Marty Stouffer’s “Wild America” was that he filmed the animals from blinds, working hard to not intrude on their lives. He captured real behavior, not just anger and fear.
All in all, I am simply surprised this is a Big Deal. I say this as a non-US-living, non TV-owning, old person.
I suspect that many many people on this board, and all over the internet grew up watching SI on TV and felt close to him. I really did not expect that.
There is a reason that he was not killed by an agressive animal like a snake, gator and hippo but instead a docile creature like a stingray- a lot of precautions are taken when dealing with the vicious animals. My guess is that no precaution was taken with the stingray because it would be like being attacked by a bunny rabbit- unthinkable at the time.
Glad this opened up because I didn’t want to shit in the other thread.
Yes, it is sad that a man died so young leaving behind a wife and two small children. And yes, he did what he could for conservation but. . . Steve Irwin spent a great deal of time antagonizing, irritating and provoking wild animals for the benefit of TV cameras-- going as far as teasing a crocodile with his infant son before throwing a dead chicken at it (the croc, not the infant son).
So excuse me if I find his death at the sting of a mostly benign stingray ironic and kind of comical. Ya know what else I found ironic and kind of comical? When Roy got his face ripped off by a tiger. Because I’m just that mean.
And if I get electricuted while surfing the 'net during a thunderstorm, feel free to laugh your fool heads off.
That might happen.
I find the posts amounting to “He had it coming” a tad strange, given the circumstances of his death. Imagine there was a guy who liked to walk a tightrope between skyscrapers on windy days without a net. One day he trips on the uncluttered carpeted floor in the ground level of his own house and lethally breaks his own neck. Crowds jeer “He had it coming!” Well, no, he didn’t. It’s a freak accident that could have happened to anyone, and is completely independent of his line of work. If he fell off the tightrope, sure. But that’s not what happened. What happened to Steve Irwin is probably many times more unlikely than a highly trained athelete tripping on level ground and killing himself. Again, a very freakish accident. That he might get a nasty flesh wound and a painful sting maybe wouldn’t have been so utterly weird. But a perfect shot to the heart and near-instant death? Beyond one-in-a-billion.
I dunno. If I’ve learned anything from “My Name is Earl” it’s that Karma’s a bitch who will use whatever means she wants to make her point and she’s got a nasty sense of humor.
Remember what happened to the first guy to survive going over Niagara Falls in a barrell? Slipped on a banana peel, bit his tongue, and died of gangrene.
[QUOTE=Blake]
Two simple scenarios:
You are a goat farmer in Zimbabwe. Leopards kill your goats. Hunting leopards is illegal… but only if you get caught and there are no police or wildlife officers within 100 km of you. You know of three leopards on your land. How many leopards will you kill?
You are a goat farmer in Zimbabwe. Leopards kill your goats. Hunting leopards is legal via a licensed quota. You know of three leopards on your land. You can accept US$5000 to guide rich American tourists to kill one of the leopards on your land. If you leave the other two leopards they will breed and next year you can collect another $5000. How many leopards will you kill?
Quite clearly sustainable management has saved the lives of two individual leopards who otherwise would have been shot on sight.
[/QUOTE]
You assume that people will be smart enough to realize that there’s more profit in keeping the other two alive. Would I be crazy to suggest that the hunter kills all three, buys better guns, hires a couple of guys, pays off an official or two and kills past the licensed quota?
Not saying your way isn’t realistic, however I think we need to be honest and admit that substainable management will automatically mean those two leopards will be left alive to breed.
Should be…
[QUOTE=holmes]
You assume that people will be smart enough to realize that there’s more profit in keeping the other two alive. Would I be crazy to suggest that the hunter kills all three, buys better guns, hires a couple of guys, pays off an official or two and kills past the licensed quota?
Not saying your way isn’t realistic, however I think we need to be honest and admit that substainable management doesn’t automatically mean those two leopards will be left alive to breed.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Blake]
Two simple scenarios:
You are a goat farmer in Zimbabwe. Leopards kill your goats. Hunting leopards is illegal… but only if you get caught and there are no police or wildlife officers within 100 km of you. You know of three leopards on your land. How many leopards will you kill?
You are a goat farmer in Zimbabwe. Leopards kill your goats. Hunting leopards is legal via a licensed quota. You know of three leopards on your land. You can accept US$5000 to guide rich American tourists to kill one of the leopards on your land. If you leave the other two leopards they will breed and next year you can collect another $5000. How many leopards will you kill?
[/QUOTE]
The answer in both cases is “three,” since leopards are really bad at miding propery lines, and your neighbors are going to take as many as he can.
[QUOTE=dropzone]
Slinging about a taipan by its tail and dancing to keep away from its fangs, as he was doing the first time I saw him, is really fucking stupid. So is carrying his baby and hopping around a muddy bank while taunting a crocodile. He made a career of abusing and terrifying wild animals that should be left alone.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Biggirl]
Steve Irwin spent a great deal of time antagonizing, irritating and provoking wild animals for the benefit of TV cameras-- going as far as teasing a crocodile with his infant son before throwing a dead chicken at it (the croc, not the infant son).
[/QUOTE]
Y’know what? Say what you will about Mr. Irwin, but such comments are both unnecessary and inaccurate.
He was NOT " carrying his baby and hopping around a muddy bank while taunting a crocodile." He was feeding the croc, not taunting it, and he wasn’t just hopping around. I’m not saying he was without blame, but let’s not exaggerate the nature of his offense.
He most certainly was NOT “teasing a crocodile with his infant son.” How do such rumors get started anyway?
[QUOTE=dropzone]
I dunno. If I’ve learned anything from “My Name is Earl” it’s that Karma’s a bitch who will use whatever means she wants to make her point and she’s got a nasty sense of humor.
[/QUOTE]
Karma shmarma. Weird shit happens, it’s not part of some “plan”. Please.
[QUOTE=JThunder]
He most certainly was NOT “teasing a crocodile with his infant son.” How do such rumors get started anyway?
[/QUOTE]
well one piece of footage I saw this am had him holding his infant (3 month?) old son by the arms, so that he dangled, with his feet just about touching the ground, ‘walking/running’ away from the croc who was a few feet away.
Pretty much like I would ‘bounce’ a feather on the end of a stick a few feet away from my kitty to taunt/tease the kitty. Of course, in that scenario, the whole point is to let the kitty get the feather.
I remember that footage – I think Mr. Irwin was having a “My Dick’s Bigger” moment, showing off for his son. Not that it was a good idea, actually I think it was a profoundly BAD idea, but I don’t really think he meant to offer his son as an alligator snack.
I didn’t say that he did. But he did “dangle” something the size of croc food pretty damn close to said croc.
[QUOTE=Wee Bairn]
My guess is that no precaution was taken with the stingray because it would be like being attacked by a bunny rabbit- unthinkable at the time.
[/QUOTE]
What if the bunny rabbit had a razor-sharp, highly poisonous barb sticking out of its ass, still unthinkable?