Steve Irwin was just out albying albi mangels, and to greater profit.
His death is sad but consistent with the risks he took. In all probability he would have wrestled the last River Dolphin for the camera as well.

And as for the NT Crocodiles, his position was pure self interest. It was OK for him to tease them with food for the camera, OK for him to keep them in a Zoo and wrestle them for the punters, but not OK for someone else to market them to a high value adding niche group such as hunters under strict quota.

And this, considering that he had no objection to eating beef from farmed animals, makes him first and foremost, a self serving Hypocrite.

So spare us all this moronic "Saint Steve of the Croc Bog" [deleted for obscenity] and get a life. What next, Elton John does another rewrite of Candle in the Wind? Beattie offers state funeral? Baaarrrfff.

In regards to comments made by Perseus on Tuesday 5th September 2006 10:26pm. Do you have any idea how pathetic your comments were? Steve Irwin is not a hypocrite - in any sense of the word. He never teased animals for the sake of the camera. You have obviously never gone to his Zoo, if you had, you would see how the animals there receive the best care, the facilities are more than adequate. People around the world have stated that it is one of the best Zoo's in the world. Show-boat behaviour is what people in the modern day and age get off on. We take pleasure at laughing at people's misfortune. If your comments had any weight of truth in them, think about your comments next time you laugh at an animal on the funniest video show. so would that make those people hypocrites as well. you get a life and shame on you for slandering a great name just one day after his death. his wife hadn't even had a chance to view his body or say farewell and here you sit with those damaging words, insensitive.

Well said daka.

Here, here dakadaka,

Not to mention that most of his profit that Perseus mentions went back into conservation.

His unique and colourful personality helped make people sit-up and pay attention to the issue of wildlife conservation - unlike some of the more lifeless (and more qualified) characters who, as passionate as they are, just don't grab anyone's attention or provoke any interest in the topic.

I think some of the right-wing lunatics who mock Steve Irwin are just jealous that they have the charisma of a cardboard cut-out compared to him...empty vessels full of nothing but air.

Why is there a push to prevent the release of the final film footage?
He didn't actually die in the water so the film footage is only of a mishap. Is there something on that film that may put his death in a different light?

If he wasn't molesting the Ray then the footage would hardly need censoring. But given his past record, and the fact that his stated purpose in going there was to film "dangerous" sea creatures, it is highly unlikely that his own actions played no part in the Ray's response.

It is the norm for the coroner to investigate the circumstances of any death and there is a clear public interest in this case. Yet, we have a move by those close to Irwin to justify the removal and/or destruction of evidence. And this may be a criminal offence.

Actually Perseus, apparently he did die in the water. John Stainton saw the footage, and said that Steve was alive just long enough to pull the barb out of his chest.
The footage was of his death, and the idea of releasing that for public viewing is pretty distasteful. I certainly hope they don't. How would the family feel?