I’m only posting here to challenge you. Irwin taunted the croc with a chicken, not his son. The croc was fixated on the chiken pure and simple, and Irwin delivered. I saw the video. You might have a problem with the croc having to stress a little for some food, but that’s nature isn’t it ? Unless you are a middle or upper class human being or a well cared for domesticated animal.
The following scene where Irwin “walked” his son around the edge of the croc pool might be construed as taunting, but I didn’t see the croc anywhere near the child.
I’m reminded of how parents view risks to their children. For example, if a North American parent has their toddler aboard their bicycle they are bad parents for not having their kid wear a helmet. That would make the vast majority of Dutch parents bad. Its all about perceived risk and I would suggest that Dutch parents know that for them the risk is extremely minimal. They know their environment. Irwin knew his.
And if I had claimed that Stever Irwin was without blame, you would have a point. I made no such claim, though; in fact, I specifically said, “I’m not saying he was without blame…”
It still doesn’t mean that he was using his infant son to tease the croc. As fessie said, it was a profoundly bad idea, but that doesn’t mean that he was using his little baby boy to tease the croc. Let’s not exaggerate the nature of his offense.
Look up the video. Croc’ man is holding the chicken in his right hand over the croc’s head. The child is in his left hand. The croc was within 6 feet of the child. What are the odds of him falling down? What are the odds the croc would go for the child and not the chicken? I don’t know, but it isn’t something worth putting to the test.
As the stingray accident proves, strange, seemingly improbable things do happen.
however, his actions (as described by me, above) do, indeed fit the description of “teasing the croc” (ie, dangling a bit of food sized something in full view of said croc and dancing around w/it). It’s precisely the same sort of actions we cat owners do to ‘tease/taunt’ our cats. It’s also precisely the same sort of action (dangling food sized stuff) he did later on in the same video sequence to get the croc to rear up towards the food.
it’s the same fucking thing. I don’t believe that he was thinking at the time (Period, actually, but I’ll go on) “oh, I’ll use Bob to taunt this croc”, but his actions indeed fit well in the description of “taunting/teasing” the animal.
it is precisely as bad as fessie said, w/o the “intent” perhaps, but so the fuck what.
One of the news reports (or was it Wikipedia?) I read said that the camera angle made the crocodile look closer than it was, and that the crocodile was also staked down, so it couldn’t lunge far. Still a stupid idea IMO to take his kid in the pen with him. All the same, he did a lot of good as far as conservation efforts.
When I am driving in traffic I take every precaution I can think of to insure my safety. I avoid heavily trafficked areas. I check my mirrors every 20 seconds or so. I do not use a cell phone. I look far ahead so as to anticipate problem situations. Driving is serious business and I would never compromise my safety for the sake of a video.
I found it humorously ironic that you would cite, as an example of how well Irwin knew his environment, the incident that got him killed. To repeat, he may well have known his environment, but unless his intention was to die, he did not know it well enough.
Severus, in post 13, said that I’d commented that Steve Irwin might have had a negative influence in children and that I should recognize that helping them break their fear of animals is a good thing. No, what I think I said, or meant to say, is that his handling of animals was dangerous and unproffessional. That was the “kind of thing” I was referring to. I’m all for helping children see that animals are not automatically bad and to be feared. Heck, it’s what I do every day. OTOH, it’s also part of my job to teach kids to treat animals carefully and with gentless and respect. I also emphasize that exotics are not meant to be pets and that any animal can retaliate if misshandled. So, don’t misshandle your animals!
[iB]Blake** in post 15 clipped my comment and in effect mis-quoted me. I did not say “Because of Steve Irwin just maybe there will be animals like the Saltwater Crocodile for our grandchildren to see etc.” I said that because of Steve Irwin’s influence a lot of kids will go on to work with animals and in related fileds. It’ll be the coming generations that will do the work that will save animals like the croc’s. I’m perfectly willing to give Steve credit for raising interest but of course I don’t think he single-handedly saved anything.
For anyone who’s wondering, I work at a small private zoo where I look after the mammals and do on-site tours and off-site presentations. I’ve been there for six years and I’ve had an interest in animals all my life. I’m also rather too old to have been influenced by Steve Irwin but I remember watching every National Geographic special that came on and of course I read Gerald Durrell and Farley Mowat and Joy Adamson and every other animal related thing I could get my hands on.
I do have some idea about handling animals. As a matter of fact, we have several rattlesnakes, Horned Vipers and a couple of aligators at work. My boss is the only one that works directly with them and he ALWAYS uses every precaution available. He wears heavy gloves, uses the snake hooks to manipulate the animals and wears boots. He also clears the area before taking anything out of it’s cage. Those are just the simple, basic rules that are part of the responsibility of keeping these animals. Unfortunately, Steve Irwin did not always follow those rules and to my way of thinking that made him dangerous. I joke that if I went to Kamloops and heard a rattler go off, I’m so used to hearing it that I’d just say “Aw, shaddup, Shake!” and keep going. I’m afraid that kids watching the show might think “Hey, Steve picked up that rattler and nothing happened - you just grab it behind the head, right?” Familliarity breeding contempt and all.
Well there is one precaution you failed to think of. Wear your seartbelt !!! You are not invincible ! Even with all your other precautions, you could still get in an accident. By the way it is safer to take the bus.
I did not cite that incident as an example. Find something else to amuse yourself. I’m referring to his whole life. That is the reason why so many people are shocked by this trajedy.
Depends what he meant by “innocuous.” Stingrays are dangerous largely because they happen to be equipped with a stinger big enough to kill a person; it doesn’t take a very deep penetrating wound to cause a fatal injury to a human being. It’s entirely possible the ray struck Irwin inadvertently.
But while stingrays are certainly physically able to kill a person, in terms of their behaviour they’re remarkably passive. In frequent contact with humans they’ve been known to become tame. Perhaps that is what the previous poster meant.
I do find it remarkable ironic that he survived so many encounters with some relatively nasty creatures and got killed by one of the friendliest animals in the sea. You never know, huh?
Ya got me. I do wear my seatbelt. I failed to mention it, but I actually feel weird if I am not wearing one.
OK. Scratch the ‘example’ remark. Let’s examine this one.
Are Dutch children thicker in the skull than North American kids? Do they generally win an asphalt/head interface? Is perceived risk somehow different from actual risk?
Risk assesment should involve involve, at the minimum, two elements. How likely is the event? What are the consequences of the event?
The consequences of a fall from a bicycle are severe. When a bike crashes the rotational force is transferred to the body, with the most force at the extremities. The head can hit the ground at a speed much greater than the bike was travelling.
What is the downside to wearing a helmet?
What is the downside to not wearing a helmet?
Low risk, high consequence activities should be avoided.
I can’t remember anything Irwin did, that wasn’t quite a bit like The Croc Botherer. I mean, I’m sure he must have done things that weren’t like that, but I just can’t remember them.
This may be exactly why many people in the zoology field disapproved of his style. You can “love” animals and nature without anthropomorphizing them, getting too close and taunting them in the wild. I would guess that most animal scientists had mixed feelings about the guy. He was passionate about conservation and brought that passion to the popular media. Whenever I watched his show, though, I always wished that he could keep his enthusiasm, informative style but could just stop needing to touch and wrestle with everything.
Exactly. I spent over 20 years working for the “world’s largest scientific and educationial non-profit organization”* and I met real conservationists. Jane Goodall, Birute Galdikas-Brindamour, Dian Fossey, Sylvia Earle, Eugenie Clarke, and others. None of them took the attitude of exploitation that Irwin did. he love animals, but was no conservationist, just a TV star.
*that is from a Trivial Pursit question, as bet I remember it. It translates to the National Geographic Society.