Thoughts on Steve Irwin
There's a lot in the news this morning about the death of Steve Irwin, killed by a stingray which evidently stabbed him in self-defence. I extend my condolences to his family - they must be going through hell.
But there are people who love wildlife, and then there are people who love interacting with wildlife. Irwin stood firmly in the latter camp and I am frankly horrified that he is being called an "environmentalist".
Our planet's wild places are dying a death of a thousand cuts. Some injuries are obvious - we all know, or should know, what highways, climate change and mining can do.
There are other, more intractable problems. People who think it's cool to walk up to wild bears, causing the bear to become habituated and eventually shot as a safety risk. People who ignore wildlife safety regulations, because, after all, they must know far more than the wardens who spend their whole lives alongside those animals. People who toss donuts from their car for a passing wolf. People who scare wild goats into the path of oncoming cars. People who call out to wild bison, wanting them to lift their heads nicely for a photo, and end up being gored or worse.
Wilderness is not a game. Animals are not toys. It is not funny, smart or macho to bully and encroach upon wildlife. In fact it looks downright weak compared to the actions of real men (and women) who courageously rescue victims of fires and sea storms. There are those who think it doesn't matter if they endanger their lives interfering with wildlife, but whether they die or not, the animal is almost certain to be harmed. Other, innocent people may be injured too. The little boy on Fraser Island who was killed by dingoes, fed by others, is but one example.
It is absolutely impossible for an individual person to judge that it's safe to break the rules. In 2004 I monitored tourists in a national park in Canada. Two thirds went closer to large wildlife than Parks Canada permits them to do. Sure, there was no malice - they all thought that they were having innocent fun. They came, disturbed the animals and left. I stayed all day, watching the wildlife being harassed from one side of the valley to another. It wasn't a pleasant experience.
That's the end product of the behaviour that Irwin, deliberately or not, encouraged. It is completely unacceptable. Disrespect has no place in the wild. The best maxim for wildlife watching is, "If the animal changes its behaviour, you're too close." The natural thrill of seeing a grizzly bear powerfully strolling up an avalanche slope or mighty bull elk roaring at dawn is more than enough.
But there are people who love wildlife, and then there are people who love interacting with wildlife. Irwin stood firmly in the latter camp and I am frankly horrified that he is being called an "environmentalist".
Our planet's wild places are dying a death of a thousand cuts. Some injuries are obvious - we all know, or should know, what highways, climate change and mining can do.
There are other, more intractable problems. People who think it's cool to walk up to wild bears, causing the bear to become habituated and eventually shot as a safety risk. People who ignore wildlife safety regulations, because, after all, they must know far more than the wardens who spend their whole lives alongside those animals. People who toss donuts from their car for a passing wolf. People who scare wild goats into the path of oncoming cars. People who call out to wild bison, wanting them to lift their heads nicely for a photo, and end up being gored or worse.
Wilderness is not a game. Animals are not toys. It is not funny, smart or macho to bully and encroach upon wildlife. In fact it looks downright weak compared to the actions of real men (and women) who courageously rescue victims of fires and sea storms. There are those who think it doesn't matter if they endanger their lives interfering with wildlife, but whether they die or not, the animal is almost certain to be harmed. Other, innocent people may be injured too. The little boy on Fraser Island who was killed by dingoes, fed by others, is but one example.
It is absolutely impossible for an individual person to judge that it's safe to break the rules. In 2004 I monitored tourists in a national park in Canada. Two thirds went closer to large wildlife than Parks Canada permits them to do. Sure, there was no malice - they all thought that they were having innocent fun. They came, disturbed the animals and left. I stayed all day, watching the wildlife being harassed from one side of the valley to another. It wasn't a pleasant experience.
That's the end product of the behaviour that Irwin, deliberately or not, encouraged. It is completely unacceptable. Disrespect has no place in the wild. The best maxim for wildlife watching is, "If the animal changes its behaviour, you're too close." The natural thrill of seeing a grizzly bear powerfully strolling up an avalanche slope or mighty bull elk roaring at dawn is more than enough.
posted by TheSittingFox @ 10:34 AM
1 comments
1 Comments:
All so true. Thanks for saying this. Amid all the grief over Irwin, and I do feel for his family and co-workers, it seems almost sacreligious to criticize his approach, but the type of intrusiveness he practiced takes its toll on wildlife and sets a very poor example for aspiring naturalists. There are other, more suitable ways of bringing attention to their beauty and their plight.
Post a Comment
<< Home