I agree with Terry and some of the previous comments. Steve Irwin played a dual role. He grabbed his audiences attention and then he educated them about wildlife and conservation. He was a very hands on, energetic and unorthodox conservationist. Make no mistake about it he only wanted the best for the animals that he sought to protect.
As a kid growing up in the suburbs my first exposure to true wildlife and conservation was by watching Marty Stouffer on Wild America and Jacques Cousteau. If it were not for their efforts I probably would not have the same appreciation for wildlife and conservation. In my opinion this is a role that Steve Irwin and Jeff Corwin and many of the young conservationists play in the lives of the children of today. Steve taught a generation of young people to love and appreciate the monster of nature. As previously pointed out Steve also put his money and fame to great use. He has a legacy that will continue to contribute to the world of wildlife conservation for many years to come. Sharif Branham ----Original Message Follows---- From: "Terry.McTigue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "Terry.McTigue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: critical essay on the antics of Irwin and Treadwell Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:07:41 -0400 There are quite a few of us out here whose first exposure to the natural sciences beyond our own neighborhood was through kid friendly nature shows such as Wild Kingdom. I used to love Jim Fowler and Marlin Perkins and would insist my family sit quietly through the show each week. Episodes of Jacques Cousteau's show were equally adored. I dreamed of becoming a biologist in large part because of what I saw on those shows each week. There are kids now who will be drawn into natural science careers because of Steve Irwin, just as Fowler and Cousteau attracted me. I think it's inappropriate to compare Irwin to Timothy Treadwell. If that documentary is accurate, Treadwell was suffering from addiction and chose to "let the bears cure him" rather than seeking treatment. He seemed to be on a steady course of increasing emotional problems. Steve Irwin gave no indication of any of this, instead managing a zoo and a media empire in addition to his extensive conservation work. Terry James J. Roper wrote: > William, > > I agree with you! I thought Steve was fantastic! I know that when I > was a kid I liked Jim in Wild Kingdom and so on, and he was only less > funny, but just as daring. I think we need more people like Steve > around to get kids psyched about nature - better than tatoos and body > piercing. > > I live in southern Brazil now, and have worked in Venezuela, Costa Rica > and Panama (and a little in Peru). I know that when I have captured > animals to show to my students, they learned a heck of a lot more than > just watching them at a distance. And, the animals very rarely suffered > for it. I think Steve always emphasized that what he was doing was for > the animals. > > Cheers, > > Jim > > William R. Porter said the following on 26/9/2006 12:27: > >> Quite frankly, I found the Jonkel essay quoted below to be an >> over-the-top, egotistical rant. Please, everyone, lighten up. >> Treadwell may have been a nutcase, but Steve Irwin was a children's >> entertainer, and performed a very valuable function. The ignorance >> about and level of fear of normal wildlife in our mostly urban >> environs is incredible. People whacking opossums over the head with >> shovels thinking that they're giant rats, mothers shrieking and >> calling the cops (and newspapers) at the glimpse of coyotes (notorious >> devourers of children), snake phobia, ad nauseum ad infinitum. Steve >> Irwin's 'antics' showed kids (and many ignorant adults) that wildlife >> was not to be feared and mindlessly obliterated on sight. This message >> is best presented to certain audiences, perhaps the ones that need it >> most, just as Irwin presented it. We can all sit in our ivory towers >> and hold up the best wildlife documentaries as the models, and >> proclaim all other pedagogical techniques as tacky, but that ignores >> most of the potential audience. Though not a fan of Irwin, I never saw >> any animal abuse or killings, but rather respect and awe, just the >> things you want to inculcate in children. Sure, he was a showman, and >> the success he had is perhaps the source of some jealousy on the part >> of less successful educators. >> >> William R. Porter >> >> >>> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 22:55:49 +0000 >>> From: stan moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Subject: critical essay on the antics of Irwin and Treadwell >>> >>> Folks -- the following essay was published on >>> http://www.counterpunch.org >>> >>> I tend to agree with Dr. Jonkel about Steve Irwin and the late >>> Timothy Treadwell. Both of these men were entertainers who used >>> wildlife as their props to attract an audience and whose antics I >>> believe were never in the best interest of the wyldlife they so >>> claimed to love. This does not mean that science and education >>> cannot be co-mingled, but there are lines of ethics that should not >>> be crossed and I believe that jumping on crocodiles for entertaining >>> television footage or invading the comfort zones of large bears for >>> the same reason cross those lines. Paradoxically, these sort of >>> human behaviors tend to get corrected by the targets of the behaviors >>> when those wildlife have had enough. >>> >>> Stan Moore San Geronimo, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> here is the essay I spoke of: >>> >>> >>> September 25, 2006 >>> >>> "People of the Croc Hunter Ilk are Worse Than the Most Bloodthirsty >>> Slob Hunter" >>> Save a Grizzly, Visit a Library >>> By Dr. CHARLES JONKEL >>> >>> The mass media, wildlife film industry, wildlife filmmakers, >>> Hollywood celebrities and wildlife agencies need a good dressing >>> down. The proliferation of "el cheapo," entertainment-oriented >>> wildlife films causes drastic impacts on wildlife species worldwide. >>> As humans become ever more oriented to human creations, totally urban >>> lifestyles, glitz and glitter, personalities, high-speed everything, >>> oddball "moments," self-centered blogs, instant wealth at anything's >>> expense, frivolous religion and politics, and endless/meaningless >>> drivel and marketing, wild animals suffer. >>> >>> So the Croc Hunter was done in by a stingray and Timothy Treadwell by >>> a brown bear. In both cases they earned their own demise, fooling >>> with nature, doing goofy things with large and formidable animals >>> better left alone. >>> >>> Steve Irwin's stupid behaviors with animals teasing them, getting >>> too close, goading them into attacks not only teaches bad value and >>> interactions relative to wildlife, but will be copied by thousands of >>> other airheads for decades to come and has set ever lower standards >>> for the media-an industry which constantly exploits wildlife with >>> quick-and-dirty films, film clips, and wildlife "news" focused on the >>> trivial. >>> >>> For 29 years I have rallied against such wildlife pornography. I >>> created the International Wildlife Film Festival to set high >>> standards and to promote the production of high-quality wildlife >>> films. Even before IWFF, I recognized that bears (in particular) were >>> vulnerable to excessive and dramatized reporting and human interest. >>> I started early on (the early 1960s) to teach not exploiting bear >>> "charisma" for profit and gain, or to enhance one's ego. I have >>> always used bears as a medium to teach and communicate about science >>> and nature, but in ways not detrimental to the bears. >>> >>> Likewise, for decades I have been trying to encourage wildlife >>> agencies, wildlife researchers, managers, law enforcement people, and >>> university-level wildlife departments to deal with extensive wildlife >>> exploitation within the mass media, the wildlife film industry, and >>> wildlife film marketing. Professionals, well aware of the terrible >>> impacts on wildlife by market hunters early in the 1960s, have >>> steadfastly remained in denial about wildlife in the wildlife film >>> marketplace. Even today, almost no wildlife management, research, or >>> law enforcement is practiced on, focused on, or taught about the >>> enormous, deleterious effects of bad wildlife filmmaking, >>> distribution, marketing or screening. >>> >>> I often note that hunters, fishermen and trappers are constantly >>> controlled, regulated, held to high sportsman standards and pursued >>> for violations. The typical hunter has a wad of papers about 200 >>> pages long in his or her pocket in order to "stay legal," to guide on >>> bag limits, seasons, hunting times, sex and age, closed or open >>> areas, care of the meat, caliber of the rifle or type of shot used, >>> etc. In the meantime, those same agencies encourage and aid countless >>> filmmakers, camera crews, photographers, editors, writers, and >>> whatever to go out and do whatever they want, when they want and >>> where they want. Staff biologists are not encouraged to monitor, >>> evaluate and speak out on, or control, wildlife productions. The >>> content is basically considered entertainment for in the evening, not >>> a wildlife professional's responsibility. Treadwell, for example, was >>> allowed to do many things illegal for others to do. >>> >>> Worse, perhaps, the needed standards, ethical evaluations, impacts on >>> wildlife and actions needed are not included in wildlife textbooks or >>> classrooms. The whole matter is studiously ignored, as not important >>> in the profession of wildlife biology, despite the 29 years that IWFF >>> and the Great Bear Foundation have called for action. "Poachers with >>> a camera" still mostly write their own rules. People like Irwin and >>> Treadwell still do what they damn well please with animals-countless >>> actions that a hunter would be fined and jailed for. Star-struck is >>> for kids, not wildlife professionals. Filmmaking should not be an >>> allowable way to exploit wildlife for money and fame. The National >>> Geographic Society and the Discovery Channel and all of their >>> defenders should hang their heads in shame for promoting stupid TV >>> actions over sound wildlife biology. >>> >>> So why does this problem go on forever? People steal the charisma of >>> the animals to boost their own ego and status, which translates into >>> money. It is always the money. So far as I care, wildlife will be >>> considerably better off without Treadwell and Irwin. Where are the >>> other voices of the people who should object? Why should the balance >>> always be stacked for the sensational, the glitz? >>> >>> Charles Jonkel is president of the Missoula-based Great Bear Foundation >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> > >
