retina said:

You're right. I shouldn't have just said he was "nuts".

He was a troubled man with many issues, but he believed very strongly in his cause and felt he had to do anything and everything he could for it, including endanger his life and eventually lose his life.

JustErin said:

In those cases it was relocate the animals the best and safest he could to at least give them a chance, or do nothing and let them be killed.

Sure he may have been controversial, but I am positive he did 100 times more good than negative. Not only raising money, but education and awareness also.

And I am pretty sure your 10 to 1 ratio is not correct (either way).

Unbelievable! Steve Irwin gets killed by a stingray, so some people in Australia make it their personal mission to go out and slaughter stingrays, as a way of "getting even" with them. People can be so damn dumb sometimes. I have seen stingrays while vacationing in Florida, and it both saddens and angers me that people are doing this to them. Let's hope the offenders are caught and are rightfully punished.

JustErin said:

The Jane Goodall Institute, this is only one respected wild life experts works and it works it is certainly not a death sentence more like attempting to preserve the animals that man seem to enjoy killing.
The Jane Goodall Institute
http://www.janegoodall.org/
http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/...?oid=74058

Education is key. I think that was Irwin's main goal in life regarding wildlife. If people didn't like his methods, well that's their problem, but I think they are REALLY overlooking the fact that he was seen by millions around the world, and he was raising awareness and appreciation for animals. If kids grow up not knowing about or caring about animals and their habitats, then we are seriously in for a grim future IMO.

Anyway, I've said most of what I wanted to say on this subject already in the other Steve Irwin thread.
[Edited 9/12/06 12:18pm]

minneapolisgenius said:

Agreed...when I see my 8 year old daughter who is deathly afraid of spiders, sliding one onto a piece of paper to "relocate" it outside of the house rather than kill it (like she used to do before) because she had seen Steve Irwin do something similar with Crocs and Snakes, I think he has had a positive and educational effect on many people.

Sowhat said:

That is so sweet that your daughter does that.

Sowhat said:

It does.

The spider story is cute too though. I always do that as well.

My mom and I walk on a path back in the woods near here. Every fall, we get wooly bears that I sometimes see on the path. Whenever I see one, I pick it up and transport it to the side of the road, so that it doesn't get stepped on or ridden over by someone on a bike. My mom laughs at me for doing it, but I feel bad for those poor little things.

psychodelicide said:

Thanks...it very much surprised me the first time I saw here do it because up until that point, she would scream bloody murder at the sight of the smallest spider .

Sowhat said:

JustErin said:

katt said:

I had a quick look at those links and those are not relocation programs, those are rescue, rehab and then the animals are kept in sanctuaries or released in very, very controlled situations.

It is not a trap and relocation program, but maybe I didn't look hard enough. If that's the case perhaps you can show me where I missed it.

Trapping an animal and then simply dumping it elsewhere is indeed a death sentence. The animal is placed into an unfamiliar territory, a territory that is already occupied with it's competition (often times it's already over crowded due to human encroachment). It becomes disoriantated, has no food, no shelter and it often either starves or is killed by predators or other territorrial animals.

The only time relocation works is if it is very controlled, the animal is monitored and helped in regards to food and shelter for an extended period of time. Such is the case when rehabbing and then releasing orphaned animals.

But taking an adult animal and bringing it out of it's territory to bring it "to the wild" is not the answer to human/wildlife conflict. Education in understanding that humans are encroaching on THEIR habitat, and that we must live alongside (but also respect) wildlife is the only solution.

Like I said before, Irwin's heart was in the right place, and he did do some good work...it was his tactics and his blatant exploitation of these animals that got so many people upset.

Ask any kid what they know about the Crocodile Hunter and they all say, "He wrestled crocs".

Anyway...

I feel very sorry for Steve Irwin's family who are grieving their loss.

I feel very sorry for the sting rays (and many other animals) that are being slaughtered because of anger or fear and ignorance.

IrresistibleB1tch said:

IrresistibleB1tch said:

http://fooddownunder.com/...q=stingray


[Edited 9/12/06 15:51pm]

This seems like something people from Alabama would do Man, that's silly.

AnckSuNamun said:

"GODDAMN BLACK STINGRAYS....KILL EM ALL"

Fury said:

You need to stop

Just refer to my signature.

Ok..here's the latest about those dead stingrays.
The location of where they were found is Harvey Bay. Nowhere even close to where Steve was killed.
The second thing is that the locals there said that the Stingrays had been lying on the beach even before Steve was killed. So they have no conection to Steve what so ever.
I don't know how they died, but it's just a reporter trying to conect the two for a good story.

Justin1972UK said:

I'm sorry, but I just find most of things you say on this site inciteful and idiotic. I think you need to get out more.

I don't need a response. You'll probably only spout abuse. It seems like that's the type of person you are.

mrdespues said:

Yes, I'm the type of person whom will respond when people call me "inciteful" or "idiotic" - so that obviously makes me abusive... Perhaps you meant to type "insightful" and "idiosyncratic".

So anybody whom dares to comment upon Steve Irwin's credentials as an animal lover is "inciteful" and "idiotic"? You can add Germaine Greer to your list of inciteful idiots then. It seems I'm in good company...

http://www.guardian.co.uk...24,00.html

'That sort of self-delusion is what it takes to be a real Aussie larrikin'

Germaine Greer
Tuesday September 5, 2006
The Guardian

The world mourns. World-famous wildlife warrior Steve Irwin has died a hero, doing the thing he loved, filming a sequence for a new TV series. He was supposed to have been making a new documentary to have been called Ocean's Deadliest, but, when filming was held up by bad weather, he decided to "go off and shoot a few segments" for his eight-year-old daughter's upcoming TV series, "just stuff on the reef and little animals". His manager John Stainton "just said fine, anything that would keep him moving and keep his adrenaline going". Evidently it's Stainton's job to keep Irwin pumped larger than life, shouting "Crikey!" and punching the air.

Irwin was the real Crocodile Dundee, a great Australian, an ambassador for wildlife, a global phenomenon, a superhuman generator of merchandise, books, interactive video-games and action figures. The only creatures he couldn't dominate were parrots. A parrot once did its best to rip his nose off his face. Parrots are a lot smarter than crocodiles.

What seems to have happened on Batt Reef is that Irwin and a cameraman went off in a little dinghy to see what they could find. What they found were stingrays. You can just imagine Irwin yelling: "Just look at these beauties! Crikey! With those barbs a stingray can kill a horse!" (Yes, Steve, but a stingray doesn't want to kill a horse. It eats crustaceans, for God's sake.) All Australian children know about stingrays. We are now being told that only three people have ever been killed by Australian stingrays. One of them must have been the chap who bought it 60 years ago in Brighton Baths where my school used to go on swimming days. Port Philip Bay was famous for stingrays, which are fine as long as you can see them, but they do what most Dasyatidae do, which is bury themselves in the sand or mud with only their eyes sticking out. What you don't want to do with a stingray is stand on it. The lashing response of the tail is automatic; the barb is coated with a bacterial slime as deadly as rotten oyster toxin.

As a Melbourne boy, Irwin should have had a healthy respect for stingrays, which are actually commoner, and bigger, in southern waters than they are near Port Douglas, where he was killed. The film-makers maintain that the ray that took Irwin out was a "bull ray", or Dasyatis brevicaudata, but this is not usually found as far north as Port Douglas. Marine biologist Dr Meredith Peach has been quoted as saying, "It's really quite unusual for divers to be stung unless they are grappling with the animal and, knowing Steve Irwin, perhaps that may have been the case." Not much sympathy there then.

The only time Irwin ever seemed less than entirely lovable to his fans (as distinct from zoologists) was when he went into the Australia Zoo crocodile enclosure with his month-old baby son in one hand and a dead chicken in the other. For a second you didn't know which one he meant to feed to the crocodile. If the crocodile had been less depressed it might have made the decision for him. As the catatonic beast obediently downed its tiny snack, Irwin walked his baby on the grass, not something that paediatricians recommend for rubbery baby legs even when there isn't a stir-crazy carnivore a few feet away. The adoring world was momentarily appalled. They called it child abuse. The whole spectacle was revolting. The crocodile would rather have been anywhere else and the chicken had had a grim life too, but that's entertainment at Australia Zoo.

Irwin's response to the sudden outburst of criticism was bizarre. He believed that he had the crocodile under control. But he could have fallen over, suggested an interviewer. He admitted that was possible, but only if a meteor had hit the earth and caused an earthquake of 6.6 on the Richter scale. That sort of self-delusion is what it takes to be a "real Aussie larrikin".

What Irwin never seemed to understand was that animals need space. The one lesson any conservationist must labour to drive home is that habitat loss is the principal cause of species loss. There was no habitat, no matter how fragile or finely balanced, that Irwin hesitated to barge into, trumpeting his wonder and amazement to the skies. There was not an animal he was not prepared to manhandle. Every creature he brandished at the camera was in distress. Every snake badgered by Irwin was at a huge disadvantage, with only a single possible reaction to its terrifying situation, which was to strike. Easy enough to avoid, if you know what's coming. Even my cat knew that much. Those of us who live with snakes, as I do with no fewer than 12 front-fanged venomous snake species in my bit of Queensland rainforest, know that they will get out of our way if we leave them a choice. Some snakes are described as aggressive, but, if you're a snake, unprovoked aggression doesn't make sense. Snakes on a plane only want to get off. But Irwin was an entertainer, a 21st-century version of a lion-tamer, with crocodiles instead of lions.

In 2004, Irwin was accused of illegally encroaching on the space of penguins, seals and humpback whales in Antarctica, where he was filming a documentary called Ice Breaker. An investigation by the Australian Environmental Department resulted in no action being taken, which is not surprising seeing that John Howard, the prime minister, made sure that Irwin was one of the guests invited to a "gala barbecue" for George Bush a few months before. Howard is now Irwin's chief mourner, which is only fair, seeing that Irwin announced that Howard is the greatest leader the world has ever seen.

The animal world has finally taken its revenge on Irwin, but probably not before a whole generation of kids in shorts seven sizes too small has learned to shout in the ears of animals with hearing 10 times more acute than theirs, determined to become millionaire animal-loving zoo-owners in their turn.

Justin1972UK said:

I surely did not. You've posted many a facetious, arrogant remark before is why I said that.




Yes I can and I do. I didn't read the article, because I am not a fan of Greer either, though I consider myself feminist in the sense that I believe in equal rights.

Seriously, don't bother responding again, I'm just not fond of the crap you come up with, which you obviously seem to think is so intelligent - especially since the Irwin thread.

.
[Edited 9/13/06 3:28am]

mrdespues said:

Quelle surprise! I've previously posted remarks which you have considered to be faceitious or arrogant. It's a discussion forum and if people didn't have dissenting opinions, there'd be nothing to discuss.

mrdespues said:

Germaine Greer may be a lot of things but she is definitely not an idiot.

mrdespues said:

I'll respond in whatever way I see fit. If you don't wish me to respond again, don't write assumptions about me. I haven't publically judged you (or anybody else on this site for that matter) in the way that you have judged me. However, I will have no qualms over judging somebody whom chooses to live in the public eye, such as Steve Irwin.

Justin1972UK said:[quote]

mrdespues said:

Those statements are fair, except I disagree with the one about choosing to live in the public eye. It doesn't always happen that it is a meditated choice; and though it may be an assumption on my part, it seems you suffer a little from the old tall poppy syndrome, as we call it here in Oz. It's probably known as the same elsewhere, too. But just remember, if you cut down all the poppies, all you will have left are weeds.

I am sorry for passing judgment, I really try not to do that, but if you choose to post in the public eye such dispassionate remarks about a famous person (still just a person) you've never met, then I kind of have few qualms about judging you just the same.

You have to understand that in Australia, whether you were a rabid fan or not, it was kind of like the whole country lost their best mate. Greer has always been someone who stood for some important issues, but in my opinion also likes to make issues out of nothing much at all. A lot of journalists do.

That is all.



.
[Edited 9/13/06 5:12am]

althom said:

i love when truth comes out during / after people go off running their opinions

Mach said:

too right!!! thank you Allistair for that...

Mach said:

Thanks for that update. Althom, I was not aware of the latest facts. I obviously believed the original story before all of the facts were revealed, as I'm sure others did.