Saw this on my AOL window this morning :o :(:

"Steve Irwin, the Australian television personality and environmentalist known as the Crocodile Hunter, has been killed by a stingray barb during a diving expedition, media reports said.

Irwin, 44, was filming an underwater documentary on the Great Barrier Reef in north-eastern Queensland state when the accident occurred, Sydney's The Daily Telegraph newspaper reported on its website.

The paper and other Australian media reporting the death cited police or state government sources.

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation said Irwin was diving near Low Isles near the resort town of Port Douglas, about 1,260 miles north of Brisbane when the incident happened.

A helicopter carrying paramedics flew to the island, but he died from a stingray barb to the heart, ABC reported on its website.

have your say
Leave your tributes
Irwin is famous for his enthusiasm for wildlife and his catchcry "Crikey!" in his television program, Crocodile Hunter, which was first broadcast in Australia in 1992 and has been broadcast around the world on the Discovery channel.

He rode his image into a feature film, and developed the Australia Zoo as a tourist attraction.

The public image was dented in 2004 when Irwin triggered an uproar by holding his baby in one arm while feeding large crocodiles inside a zoo pen. Irwin claimed at the time there was no danger to his son, and authorities declined to charge Irwin with violating safety regulations.

Later that year, he was accused of getting too close to penguins, a seal and humpback whales in Antarctica while making a documentary. Irwin denied any wrongdoing, and an Australian Environment Department investigation recommended no action be taken against him.

He is survived by his American wife Terri, from Oregon, who he married in 1992, their daughter Bindi Sue, eight, and son Bob, who will turn three in December."

That's sad :cry:

I can't believe it really he seemed immortal. O well I suppose the law of averages finally caught up with him :(

Can't help but think it would've been more fitting if he'd been swallowed by a giant crocodile or something though...

I know, I just said on heyupp that it is ironic that with all his shenanigans with crocs, it was a relatively harmless stingray that did for him :(

I thought it was a joke at first when i read it on Yahoo, but obviously not :o :(

Just shows how dangerous it is to be messing about with dangerous creatures. I mean he loved to do it, but the consequences have proved fatal.......

definitely.

However the stingray's usually regarded as generally harmless to humans, that's what is so ironic. :(

It was the first thing I saw when AOL loaded :(

What is a Stingray barb then? Does it just mean sting/shock? Because I should imagine a 'barb' to the heart would finish off most people :(

The barb is supposed to be a maximum 20 inches big. And it's covered in poisonous venom. They are usually regarded as harmless as they only use the barb when they feel threatened.

However they think it might just have been the shock that did for Steve :(

Apparently it wasnt the venom that killed him( thats usually able to be treated) the fact is the barb stabbed him in the chest, so it was just like being stabbed, with the venom being irrelevant in this case.

that's virtually what I saw. :(

He was only 44, with a wife and two young children. What a waste of life, but I suppose he always knew of possible consequences in what he did

Omg I didn't realise Stingrays could do that, they're nasty :angry:

I'll be wary of them from now on :unsure:

Do you reckon Steve did something to annoy the Stingray, otherwise why would it stab him?

Also, right in his heart, how unlucky :(

they only attack when threatened, mind I can't imagine he'd be stupid enough to annoy it, it probably just crept up on him, felt a bit impulsive :(

...well the report also said, that it could have attacked out of fear. Really cant see the great Steve doing anything to provoke it. Just extremely unluky that it peirced his heart. :(

yeah, or it could have been just pure mental. Wild animals are very unpredictable of course.

I suppose if there's one silver lining then that is he died doing what he loves doing.

Atleast he died doing what he loves :cry:

..and they are now saying he died immediately. God I feel so sad for his family and the children that he clearly adored. What a great father to have. :hug:

Hearing all this doesn't make me forget people that we don't 'know' like the soldiers killed in the plane crash at the weekend or the people who died in the recent bombings in Turkey thats tragic too..... Its just, when something like this happens to people 'known' world wide who bring fun and enjoyment to peoples lives and his conservation of wildlife etc, well it makes it feel, just a little, that you have lost someone you know. :(

I know it is awful but I laughed my head off when I read that! roflmao Sorry, I dont; mean to disprespect the dead and I feel sad for his family. :(

My view is that he often put himself in very risky situations so he therefpre took more risk than most, so he was in fact flirting with death and danger on a regular basis, so he actually gave himself more chance of a dangerous death than most do. You liv eby the sword, you di eby it is one expression that springs to mind.

Being totally objective and a wildlife lover, I watched his programmes and I actually thought hi sappraoch was sensationalist to the last and rathe rdire in that it was often disrepsectful of the wildlife involved. He went into a rattlesnake nest and provoked them with sticks. That is no way to treat an innocent bunch of snakes is it? He upset them and they went of rhim and he is lucky that one of them did not kill him really. I often felt his appraoch was beign overly macho and confrontational which si nto the way to respect wildlife and get others involved. i am sur ehe did a lot of good work, but I can onyl bas emy opinion on what I see. I may sound harsh, but I never liked him when he was alive. I woudl nto wish him dead though, and I guess a stingray was hardly as dnagerous as he woudl have liked. My friend was lashed by one recently in Florida and all he got was a sore leg :) In some ways, I feel that nature may have taken revenge fo rall the times he tried to poke innocent animals up their arse with sticks. roflmao Sorry. I am not gloating, as I say I woudl nto wish anyone dead. He is just one person whose work I detested when he was alive. And putting your own child and pregant wife at risk like he did is just ridiculous. There's a world of difference between getting close to nature and respecting it and forcing yourself in it's face and exploiting it. rant over, but as I say I always thought this, and RIP Steve Irwin.

Venom? Was he on KoC at the time? roflmao Sorry.

roflmao I can definitely see where you're coming from SB!

However I loved the guy, he brought a new dimension to the way wildlife shows could be done that's for sure! :D

Granted they probably weren't the best quality-wise, but his thinking was to open the subject to an audience that wouldn't usualy give two hoots I suppose.

The horrible irony of it all is that, after years of literally putting his life on the line (He could never get life insurance!), he ended up being killed by an animal that is generally regarded as pretty harmless.

We won't forget you Steve, our :pray: are with you :)

Definitely. :(

It's emerged this morning that he can't have died immediately on impact, because there is footage of him pulling the barb out of his chest :blink:

I see where you are coming from. Believe me I am nto a snob, he did get peopel interested who might not be otherwise but it was hsi lack of respect of rth eanminals that go tme most, plus the sensationalism of everythign had to be dangerous. If oyu ask me, his attitude was dangerous! look how mad people went when Jacko hung his kid out of a hotel window, so they should be going as mad if he take shis kid aorund crocodiles - in fact more so.

I think that people do exagerate danger form animlas in some ways, but him fliritn gwith death every week may well have made people too blase about animals. Him bragging off abotu all the venom his body has taken hardly helsp to make peopel afraid of the danger sof the wild does it? Nature is a magnificent force but it must be respected and it can be cruel I am afraid. He spurned a whole genre of awful programmes were people went around tryignt o find dangerous animals and wind them up. Soem were really bad. Di dyou see that Britsh guy Mark ? and his Amazingly Dangerous Animlas or whatever it was claled? George used to call the Mark? and his Mildly Threatening Reptiles cos they never looked that dangerous really! roflmao If you want to see somethign funny, there is an epiesode of South Park where they take th emickey out of Steve Irwin with a cameo of him and he says somethign like "now I am just going to annoy this little fella by shoving a sharp stick up his anus, but he won't mind. " I think it eats him! roflmao

David Attenborough might be old adn stuffy and out of touch with reality, but he so know shis stuff and he really delights in watchign widllife and educating us without feeling the need to prod it with sharp objects. :D That's what i watch, and I also love Bill Oddie cos he is honest, refreshign, enthusiastic and respects eveything. He realises that nature is cruel and that animals that get a bad name are only eekign out a living and I like that attitude. :) I did see an excellent Aussie show though where they went around the bush and tried to find really dangeorus snakes, but no sticks were used to prod the poor things.

Hey SB, David Attenbrough is one of those names that just has 'legend' written all over it when you say it. He is brilliant. He has a huge building at Leicester Uni named after him too! :D

No doubt about it. Steve Irwin's aim was to bring wildlife to a wider audience, and there's no doubt, especially in Australia, that he achieved that spectacularly! I know what you're saying SB, he perhaps did cheapen the concept of wildlife, and his baby stunt was insensitive to say the least, but he was still a really funny guy! :D


I don't rank his baby stunt as anything like what Jacko did. For one thing Steve was most certainly in control of everything there, whereas Jacko could quite easily have dropped his baby, especially with his mental instability. Also Steve was a caring family man, god knows what Jacko is like, I dread to think with some of the things that have come out about him, and the fact he keeps his childrens faces covered all the time :angry:

Jack keeps his childrens; faces covered? :o How wierd. It's an aside from Steve, but now we mention Jacko I never knwo what to make of him. I really dont; knwo if he is guilty of what they said or not, bu the defintitely seems ot have plie dmonors wit alcohol and been rather irrespeonsible to say the least, so I was expectign him to get charged with something. Good lawyer eh? :rolleyes: Well, it's wierd for me cos I grew u with the Jacksons musically as it were. When we were 5 we had their picture on our wall with the Osmonds. :D He always seemed so sweet did Michael and such a talent. If he has abused kids then I will not defend that :angry: What I can say though is that he is well screwed up and it is obvious that hsi upbringign is to blame for that. He never was allowed to have a normal childhood, hence beign a big child now. Many child stars end up screwed up in some way don't they - Tatum O'Neil (Mac's ex wife did loads of drugs etc), Judy Garland (drugs, anorexia, psychological problems, diva mentality) Drew Barrymore (drugs). Liza Minelli, Garland's daughter, was also thrown straigth into show biz and look at the problems she had had. They say that Jacko's father was abusive and a control freak so I sympathise with that. However, Jacko with all his money and access to help should surely have been able to find helpt? I don't know what to think really, it is all so bizarre. I think he might have become so far removed from reality that he doesn't know where he is and no one is in a position to force help on him with him beign so powerful and all.

It's all very sad, as I say must be abotu my age and a star who I sort of grew up alognside if you like as he was always around. Wasnt; the greatest fan of his music, but I did have all the early Motown stuff and I like Off the Wall and all that. Another one is Gary Glitter - as a kid we had all his records and used to dress up in lurex and stuff! My mum was saying how disgusted she feels now we knwo what he really is, adn she use dot go out and buy his records for us! :o Strange how people can turn out, but it feel sworse when you grew up wit their music.

Didn't have time to answer you at length SB :rolleyes: but wanted to point out I agree that when a celebrity has that much money then unlike the rest of us, they are able to get THE best help available out there, if they want it of course. They have many many less excuses than us to sort themselves out. They hardly have to hold down a 9-5 job they can go off for days, weeks and months even. I say on this occasion no smoke without fire. And the 'yes' people who crowd around people like Jacko, are partly to blame aswell, pandering to his needs and weird pathetic ways. I remember that time when he failed to turn up at a deadline give for a court appearance, and eventually appeared hours later in his bed clothes hobbling along the street. His 'yes' people should have been advising him to get his 'arse into gear' and stop being so pathetic. Don't think we heard about him being taken ill during a sell out tour and how exhausting must they be.

Steve Irwin - I listened to a phone is and debate on Jeremy Vine about this. Opinions were mixed. That Aussie commedian Jonno ? was saying that he did make wildlife and conservation more popular (despite disagreement on his approach) wihch has led to increased awareness in Aus so there is some useful legacy. He was very popluar in the USA too. A guy who made nature programmes said he apprecaited this, but did not like the way that he detracted from the wildlife on his show by making them the side issue and himself the star - he said wildlife should be the star, and presenters take a back seat like Attenborough. I agree with that myself. Some guy who works in a zoo and in conservation said he prefered not to see animals provoked, and less showmanship in dealing with them but he respected that he ha dbrought things in some way to an audience that might otherwise not take interest. He did however say that Steve's stunts were VERY dangeorus and could make others too blase of dangerous animals. Someone else said that in flriting with danger so much, he was an accident waiting to happen and we should not be surprised abotu him beign killed by an animal. On the subject of his actual death, some said that stingrays don't normally kill in this way so it was a freak accident onyl ever havign happened 3 times in Aus. So it was not realyl dicign with danger. on the other hadn someone said that maybe th estignray attacked cos it was frightened or provoked? So quite interesting all in all. :)

Well true. Thats' the issue. His yes people aren't necessarily the best people to have around him for impartial and useful advice. You'd think there woudl be SOMEONE who would tell him straight, but we just don't know do we. I mean if someone goes against him, maybe they just get sacked? You'd think his good friends and family might help, but who knwos what is going on there?

That is interesting SB, conflicting opinions of him.

I would say, I don't believe he intended to be a bigger star than the animals appearing with him. I think he has such an outgoing fun lively personality with such passion and excitement during his work, which was very engaging to most of the viewers. That exuberance could be miscontrued as trying to be the bigger star at the time, but I just don't see it myself.

His larger than life character etc is what has provoked such shock at his death and genuine sadness when you talk to some people about it. Not many tv stars draw that sort of reaction, from around the world. These larger than life characters, always leave the bigger gaping whole in peoples lives when they depart.

Only the good die young, seems apt to me in this case. :(

Yes he certainly had a huge personality. I didn't hate the bloke, but I did not approve of his methods. We need to ask the animals what they thought, and I can't see them praising him for jumping on their backs or shoving stocks up their asses! roflmao Sorry but every time I hear hsi name I just think of that!

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, SB, but I think you're being extremely disrespectful and inaccurate. I have watched many of his programs and never saw him shove a stick up an animal's ass. Just because a parody of him on South Park showed that, doesn't make it true. :rolleyes: And he generally didn't jump on an animal's back, either, unless it was a croc or alligator that he was trying to capture and relocate to either a more suitable environment or one where it wouldn't be killed by people who didn't want it there. And in doing so, he tended to explain the methods he used in order to minimize the stress to the animal.

I agree, to an extent, that sometimes he did pester animals, but I didn't think it ever seemed to be just for the fun of pestering them. It was usually in an attempt to catch them, so that he could give his audience a closer look. Fair enough to criticise his approach, but you don't have to make it into an exaggerated caricature.

(Now my rant is over.)

That's a good point Nick. The problem is that a certain extent the Steve Irwin persona was a caricature. What a lot of us remember of him is influenced from programmes like South Park and 2D TV.

Hopefully a few of his programmes will aired following his death and we will have a chance to remember him for what he did best and judge according to the facts. Afterall I can't think of any programmes here in the U.K that have had Steve on them for a few years now so perhaps we have just forgotten and need to be reminded.

I think you're right, Mo. I remember one interview with him and his wife, and she was asked what living with him was like off-camera. She pretty much said that he's like that all the time; always full of energy and excitement. I don't think he was trying to upstage the animals, either. He just had that kind of personality.

I think the news hit a lot of people hard, because they have gotten to know not only him, but also his wife and children, through his shows, and you know they must really be grieving now.

I remember him saying on a chat show, that what you see on screen is what you get back home.

Wish I could have had some of his exuberance on a monday morning for the day ahead.

What you said earlier about relocating crocs etc, didn't he also choose his approach, because otherwise you had to TRY and sedate them, which was something he also preferred not to do.

My fave prog of his, was one that was aired about 4 years ago, which was titled something like, Worlds dealiest snakes' and he went to their natural habitat to find them and show us these often beautiful creatures - think he had a top 10 list of the most dangerous. He chatted about their appearance, life span, venom!! etc..some were very tiny and some not so tiny! In fact I think one of the deadliest was rather a tiny little thing.

I recall many of us at work were chatting about the show the next day because it had been such an intersting insight on snakes, and we couldn't recall seeing anything like that before on that scale.

Well you are entitled to your opinion. Of course there is exaggeration in parodies, but some of the stuff that has been shown on the TV made me feel strongly that the animals were being very much pestered. At the end of the day, a person's approach to the very thing they are enthusiatic about needs to be looked at very closely. A lot of people do feel that he upstaged the animals and was sensationalist. and didn't always show respect to the animal. I am sure he did not do this every time but if you watch the brilliant David Attenborough you won't see him do anything disrespectful to an animal whatsoever. I am a HUGE fan of wildlife and watch a lot of shows. I am very much into conservation also. Whilst I am sure Steve did some excellent work, as a wildlife fan being expeosed to his shows made me feel critical, uncomfortable and sometimes annoyed. I am not the only one judging by the BBC show I heard and what some of my friends think. Sorry if you found it disrespectful but I found some of his stunts rather disrespectful. :( I am sure he has done much good work in spite of this and that is to be commended of course. But I did not enjoy watching him on TV, and I can only say what I think based on what I saw there. And I do strongly feel that he failed to respect the risks when he involved his child and (I think preganant?) wife in some of his stunts. Of course the risk would not be as huge as most of us might think, but there still was a reasonable risk and I think people were right to criticise this I really do. Sorry. :(

Well, I do think you're disresptectful, when you repeatedly talk about him poking at animals with sharp objects or shoving sticks up their anus. The latter is just having a go at him about something that I'm sure you know was not true. The former is more just a misrepresentation. I don't know if it's the same show or not, but I've seen him use a stick on a nest of snakes before, to separate one snake out to get a better look at it. I can understand being against that approach, as it clearly was annoying to the snakes. But I doubt you ever say him actually "poking" the critters with a sharp stick. What I saw was more like sliding a stick under the snakes belly to slide it out a little from the rest of the group.

I've watched a lot of his work and was somewhat of a fan, and I believe he had a lot of respect for the animals he encountered. It's OK if you disagree, but at least be honest and don't yammer on about him shoving sticks up animals' . . . . I probably would have a laugh about it, if I saw that parody of him on South Park, but I'm smart enough to know the difference between that and reality.

Hey, I do know the difference :( Fair enough. Maybe I have over stated the joke about the sticks, etc. Sorry if that offended you, and I never actually meant seriously that he actually did that. You sound like you have watched a lot more of his shows than I have, so I won't be arguing about what you say about those snakes there. I have seen a few things though that made me feel uncomfortable though as I say, when he was on TV over here a while back, and it really did put me off him. There are so many wildlife shows to watch that I stuck to my preferred hosts which are mainly on the BBC. :)

REFEREE! :)