Australia Zoo in Trouble » Australia Zoo

26-03-2008

Him and his girlfriend went camping in bear territory whilst the bears were stocking up on food for hibernation... safe to say he didn't last long. When authorities turned up, they shot two of the bears who were near the campsite and found some of the couple's remains in the bear's stomachs. If I remember rightly, very little remains were found...

An audio tape of the last moments exists, but it is in the hands of Treadwell's best friend who has refused to release it to the press.

26-03-2008

oh now, CZjimmy (would that stand for chester zoo by any chance) your description didn't make it sound even remotely exciting!

grant, treadwell spent every summer for years in teh alaskan wilderness so-called "protecting" the bears (he failed to realise that they already were protected in a NP!).

essentially he founded a group called "grizzly people" and camped, illegally and unarmed, and tried to habituate the bears to his presence (again, does more harm than good) all whilst filming himself in documentary style.

he DID spend the rest of his time educating the public about bears, however his passion is somewhat, at least in my opinion, motivated by more selfish reasons. he simply enjoys being around them and thats obvious from his bizarre behavior on film.

in any event the film is a collage of his bizarre solo-on camera activities and monologues, good narration from the director and interviews with treadwells family, few friends and the people involved in the discovery of his ultimate demise (coroners, his pilot etc..)

and obviously there is the gruesome appeal of the fact that he was eventually eaten on camera! (though the lens cap stayed on and the audio is never played in the film).

"grizzly man" - its a must see...

26-03-2008

Right patrick, I'd only heard the tale of his death, so thanks for that other info! And 'CZ' does stand for Chester zoo

26-03-2008

Was he a bona fide researcher or just a bear groupie?

26-03-2008

bear groupie. seriously imagine steve irwin being camp. thats timothy treadwell.

26-03-2008

Yeah, it's riveting stuff all right.

The liberties he takes with wild, suspicious bears on camera makes your hair stand on end to watch. Particularly as you know right from the start that he didn't get away with it. (You don't want to watch but you can't look away.)

So this documentary is not well known in U.K.?

26-03-2008

we kinda killed the "australia zoo in trouble" thread...

30-03-2008

LOL, my jaw hurt while watching that movie from all the cringing..! The director/narrator was great with his stereotypical Euro accent (like something out of the Simpsons)... From watching the movie its apparent (pretty early on when they tell his history) that the guy is as mad as a box full of monkeys... And the fact that he was allowed to do what he did, especially for as long as he did is mind boggling, why did anyone stop him..? It makes you say to yourself only in America..!

The bottom line is he was man with some serious problems and what he was doing had nothing to with protection and even less to do with conservation, all and all a pretty wasted life...

conservation not exploitation
31-03-2008

zoos are now rapidly becomming centers of conservation. Australia Zoo used to be just that, but when commercial success gets in the way of what truly matters, then the message begins to get blurred. Their focus is becomming more and more to entertain guests and become theme park like, that I fear the animals will become an afterthought.

What is the problem?
02-04-2008

What is the problem here? I think the earliest posts claiming tall poppy syndrome had it right!

In an interview Steve and Terri explained that they made an agreement early to take a salary from the success of the Crocodile Hunter monolith, and pour all profits back into the business - the focus of which, is conservation.

The zoo grew from maybe a hectare to what it is today. Global awareness about conservation grew. Whoever was at the helm (does it really matter?) saw the benefit of commericialising the experience - because "people only want to save the things that they love" (as Steve put it - paraphrased) - and how can they learn to love wildlife unless they experience it? The modern (Western) world is plugged in to digital media and lives in an "I want it now" fast lane. The Irwins delivered to that and have implemented numerous conservation programs, lobbied for protection of habitat, rehabilitated countless thousand native animals, built a state-of-the-art veterinary hospital and run an ambulance service for injured wildlife.

What are you people on about? Australia Zoo made a mistake - they broke the law (are not exempt from the consequences) - the real proof that they are successful in their primary goals however, is that the media pounced on it and flaunted it to the world. Has anyone questioned the media? Why do you think the media will run an article with the terms "koala" and "Australia Zoo broke the law"? Because they're spinning money out of it! But you'll sit here and take an enterprising family that has contributed an enormous effort towards conservation and say "tut tut... those nasty immigrant money-hogs... what a bad example!"

Unbelievable.

Have you ever sat down and thought about how you could finance the sort of projects this zoo/family/staff has acheived? Tall Poppy Syndrome lives on.

02-04-2008

@youcantry: You make a lot of sense and I tend to agree with you, however there is a difference between tall poppy syndrome and constructive skepticism... Just because their family has achieved a lot doesn't mean we don't have the right to wonder if under the pressure she has (losing her husband and the pressure owning such an expensive assest creates) that she may vulnerable to people who are seeing dollar signs instead of conservation when they look at the zoo...

I personally don't like the idea of Terri Irwin saying the word "disneyland" in a press release about Australia Zoo... It just my opinion...

02-04-2008

@NZ Jeremy - yours sounds like politely placed concern, but earlier posts in this thread were less complimentary. It seemed to me that there was an emotion of resentment (amongst other posts in this thread) that an organisation that stood for the good of conservation should now be seen as "commercial". I personally don't see how otherwise any conservation organisation is going to be effective, except to be commercial - and it's that "resentment" (of the "success" of others?) that reminds me the poppy axe is about.

Regardless of what any of us thinks - someone should really find out what percentages of profit are channelled back into conservation. Are people re-acting to a genuine decline in conservation support by that organisation? Or something else?

02-04-2008

I found Steve Irwin's show not to my taste but I admired the heck out of him... Australia Zoo percentage wise had, and has, little to do with his conservation work (I believe his family spent a large amount of the money made from "Hunter" on land for protection, I think its something amazing like 36,000 acres of land worldwide) but the zoo is the focus point...

I've been there twice the first time it was basically a reptile park with a few other species, the second time it was like a mall and stadium surrounded by a zoo, I like you don't see anything wrong with this, as you said they have to pay the bills and construction costs somehow but what I do think would be sad is if it became a mall and a stadium surrounded by a zoo, surrounded by a theme park... I guess it all depends on whether she meant it..? Whether it will happen..? And what Disneyland was she referring to..? Wild animal kingdom which looks like a good zoo that happens to be owned by Disney or Disneyland as in space mountain, pirates of the carribean Disneyland..?

If its the latter I think its appropriate to question whether the pressure of her situation has changed her morales to some degree, I don't think thats tall poppy syndrome, do you..?

clarity
02-04-2008

No - now we're having a civil discussion.

TPS was first mentioned with regards to the way the media chose to highlight that particular zoo's lack of compliance for the release of rehabilitated wildlife. I guess - mentioning the zoo is a money spinner for the media, but there is a choice on whether to highlight its good points or bad.

ptig came in with "The law requires permission from state government for release into another area. Simply all Australia Zoo had to do is request with explanation. How hard can that be. Do not defend doing the wrong thing as the "tall poppy syndrome". They are screwing up a lot recently."

I don't think anyone was defending the zoo's breach of law and passing it off as TPS; rather, that the media should capitalise on the breach of law - this was being perceived as TPS.

Following this, I reached "the over the top commercialisation of Australia Zoo by Terri c.s. that has obviously produced a rift with good old Bob. Terri was the financial mastermind, whilst Steve was the conservation buddy (now that he is gone and she is at the helm alone it shows - so no anti-US bias, it has to do with policy and direction). This entire selling the zoo business is exemplary for Terri's attitude/"vision"." ... "Oncemore, this is Terri's attitude/"vision" at play here".

This was followed by Jay quoting "Comments like 'What can you expect of a bloody yank, marry your way in then and then think of only the money." "Shrill harpy voiced yankie woman" "Money grubbing Yank" etc. Maybe it's just the circles I mix in but Terri was always the least popular. He may have been embarressing but 'but at least he was a true Aussie - and he had a heart of gold and really cared about the bush and stuff""

Re-reading the thread I think I misinterpreted these 2 posts. I took it that these were jelle and Jay's stances and read subsequent discussion in that light.

My apologies. It seems the contributors to this thread aren't themselves cutting down poppies - even when they acknowledge they disagree with aspects of the zoo's management.



Returning to your concern: "what I do think would be sad is if it became a mall and a stadium surrounded by a zoo, surrounded by a theme park" - and Liecoboy's shared sentiment: "Their focus is becomming more and more to entertain guests and become theme park like, that I fear the animals will become an afterthought."

Imo I guess it still comes back to whether the zoo's stated goals are being met. If the goals are to promote conservation ("conservation through exciting education" comes to mind) - then we'd need to ask the question: are they capitalising on the accommodation/theme park drawcard and educating visitors about conservation? Is this education - and any other project - leading to real conservation benefits? And is the stadium, surrounded by a zoo, surrounded by a theme park, really also surrounded by solid conservation plans and projects?

We can't know at this point, but on the available evidence that has been the driving force behind the entire effort to date. Noting Terri's business sensibility doesn't negate the conservation work she was doing long before she put foot in Australia, which also stands in favour of suggesting the conservation goals will remain central.

Again, this is all opinion (mine in this case).

Lastly, the breach of laws regarding koala release was, unfortunately, tarnishing. I say "unfortunately" not to excuse the lapse, but because really - every person and organisation makes mistakes from time to time (and may or may not rightfully suffer the consequences). I don't think this mistake is indicative of a total collapse of the conservation vision however.

(Sorry for being long-winded)

02-04-2008

Thanks for that. I certainly don't agree with the comments about Terri but was merely quoting what a lot of people I know who live on the coast thought of her.
My stance is - on a personal level I don't really like the Australia Zoo as it is too circusy for my taste. I never really liked the Irwins as I thought they were way over the top. However I had a great deal of admiration for what they did/do. They put there money where their mouth is and do a lot of really great work. I hope that they continue to dos so and understand the commercial imperitives that are needed to do so. I guess as they aquire more and more exotics I will be visiting the place more often.