# Terri Irwin pushes ahead with LA Zoo site



## News Bot (Jun 6, 2010)

*Published On:* 06-Jun-10 04:02 AM
*Source:* By Glenis Green via NEWS.com.au

AUSTRALIA Zoo, the wildlife park owned by the family of late Crocodile Hunter Steve Irwin, is pushing ahead with a AU$300 million (US$250 million) plan to replicate the Australian tourist attraction in the gambling mecca of Las Vegas.

*Go to Original Article*


----------



## Earthling (Jun 6, 2010)

Its good to see Terri is able to give the Conservation message to more and more people.

Steve took Bob's plans and made it bigger.
Terri is now taking Steve's plans and making it bigger.

Educate, educate, educate.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 6, 2010)

Ha, ha, ha, educate the gamblers - viva Las Vegas! Nothing to do with the millions to be made. It's called "expansion of the empire". .... but, good luck to them.


----------



## aussie-albino (Jun 6, 2010)

Yeah, While she leads the mining companies charge on the Wenlock basin


----------



## clouded_mind (Jun 6, 2010)

Earthling said:


> Its good to see Terri is able to give the Conservation message to more and more people.
> 
> Steve took Bob's plans and made it bigger.
> Terri is now taking Steve's plans and making it bigger.
> ...


 
What conservation message? The zoo holds more food stands & collectable shops then it does animals. Only message I see in that is "cash up".

No, Terri took the plans and made the entire family & the zoo and everything they stand for nothing more then laughing stock.




Waterrat said:


> Ha, ha, ha, educate the gamblers - viva Las Vegas! Nothing to do with the millions to be made. It's called "expansion of the empire". .... but, good luck to them.


 
Exactly. More like thats where the big dollars are. Why daddy gambles his thousands away mummy can take her share & the kidlets to the zoo. 

If it was about education it wouldn't be put in a desert surrounded by nothing but casinos. You would have far more attendees elsewhere in a built up location, so is she trying to educate the public? or simply market the high rollers?

It has nothing to do with how many members attend and learn something but it will have everything to do with top dollar pricing you can bet your backside on that. Wait till you see the cost of admission, food & beverages. Terri has chosen to have less attendees for a higher price rate and the casinos would be only to happy to oblidge if it is going to bring in extra tourism (garuntee there will be tickets such as - spend $250 at Bojangles and get free admission to the zoo etc).


----------



## Sel (Jun 6, 2010)

Apparently its what Steve wanted to do, so Terri is following his plan i guess... i dont like the idea of it being "Las Vegas" themed tho.. its a Zoo !


----------



## Jonno from ERD (Jun 6, 2010)

Yep, this is not a new idea, it has been around since well before Steve died. 

At the end of the day, real conservation efforts need money. A viable business plan is the best way of achieving this. Whilst I don't agree with everything the zoo does (wasting money on rehabbing common species for example), they are definitely at the forefront of promoting a somewhat progressive conservation message compared to any other zoo.


----------



## morgs202 (Jun 6, 2010)

Jonno from ERD said:


> Yep, this is not a new idea, it has been around since well before Steve died.
> 
> At the end of the day, real conservation efforts need money. A viable business plan is the best way of achieving this. Whilst I don't agree with everything the zoo does (wasting money on rehabbing common species for example), they are definitely at the forefront of promoting a somewhat progressive conservation message compared to any other zoo.


 
Exactly! How can people not see this? Researching and protecting wildlife can't exactly be paid for with good will and happy thoughts! Of course this will bring in millions, and I reckon it'll be well spent!


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 6, 2010)

Jonno from ERD said:


> At the end of the day, real conservation efforts need money. A viable business plan is the best way of achieving this. Whilst I don't agree with everything the zoo does (wasting money on rehabbing common species for example), they are definitely at the forefront of promoting a somewhat progressive conservation message compared to any other zoo.


 

Jonno, I agree with you but I am yet to see the conservation efforts (without finacial rewards) and the results. Zoo animal shows are nothing new, every establishemnt does it in one form or another.


----------



## morgs202 (Jun 6, 2010)

I do know they are putting in a huge effort up north to try to do something about the ghost nets...


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 6, 2010)

I know. I also know other things.


----------



## AUSHERP (Jun 6, 2010)

they buy thousands of acres all over the country and leave them as is for wildlife reserves, i guess the media doesnt like to talk about this cause its not controversial......


----------



## syeph8 (Jun 6, 2010)

Waterrat said:


> I know. I also know other things.


 
Capital of equatorial guinea? 

I do agree that a lot of this money that has been going into conservation seems to have dissappeared or been used to make more money. would like to see exactly how much of the money we put into DSE actually gets spent on sustainability and the environment, and how much goes into debt collecting (liscence fees) and useless beaurocracy. In all honesty i would prefer they payed a visit to me once every few months just to check that im keeping all my animals properly rather than ignoring me completely unless my cheque is a day late. 
I acknowledge that steve did a lot for the environment and of all the money he made, he put a very large portion back into the environment (and his own organisations, which were environmentally focused). although he has left big shoes to fill, i havn't seen the same dedication out of Australia Zoo since his passing. 
There is also a lot to be said about their earning potential as well. i dont think they would be making as much money without steve, i know the rest are trying their hand at the showbiz game, but they just dont have that presence that the yanks loved so much. Maybe this is the reason for poor performance since then. Either way, it is interesting that they have saved up 300,000,000 and are spending it on making more money.. i wonder if they will continue to spend their profits on making more profits, or if they will combine revenues for conservation efforts. only time will tell!


----------



## aussie-albino (Jun 6, 2010)

I'm wondering how Terri can be said to have any environmental conscience when she is supporting the attack of the mining companies on the Wenlock River Basin and the Steve Irwin environmental Park there. Bauxite mining and conservation hand in hand ? not likely.

cheers 
Scott


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 6, 2010)

I thought she was trying to block the mining. ???

On another note, when they bought the property, Terri said in a press release that _they're going to leave all the cattle there because they are part of the Cape York ecology_. Bang! Straight through the foot.


----------



## aussie-albino (Jun 6, 2010)

The Wenlock River has been declared a Wild River under the Wild Rivers Legislation as of Friday. The mining companies are trying to have that decision reversed. Terri's public position may have changed on it with the weight of public opinion, but in the beginning she was right in the centre of the mining company camps, even in the media trying to add weight to their arguments.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 6, 2010)

Scotty, I don't want to argue with you but she was always against the mining there. I don't think she cares about public opinion too much, it was obvious that the proposed mining would damage the springs, etc., etc.. She was the strongest voice against it, she even rounded up few celebs, e.g. Russell Crow to join the fight against Cape Aluminia (I think that's what they're called). I am not taking sides but that's the truth.
The irony is, the Irwins did it all in the name of conservation but in the end, if it wasn't for the State Gov. declaring the Wenlock a Wild River, there was no other way of stopping the mining company and the place would be ruined. So, who takes the credits and long-lasting conservation can be?


----------



## aussie-albino (Jun 6, 2010)

No Worries Waterrat I don't want argue either the Wenlock is a declared Wild River now and both of us agree that is the best, cheers mate.

Scott


----------



## junglepython2 (Jun 6, 2010)

syeph8 said:


> Either way, it is interesting that they have saved up 300,000,000 and are spending it on making more money..



The article states she is looking for investors so I doubt they have saved up 300mil for the project....


----------



## longirostris (Jun 6, 2010)

Some how or another I do not think education or conservation are the main motives behind very many of the activities currently being undertaken or planned by the current owners of Australia Zoo.


----------



## cris (Jun 6, 2010)

Earthling said:


> Educate, educate, educate.


 
I dont think Terri Irwin is qualified to educate once, definately not three times. That said if you throw enough money at looking like you are into conservation you will achieve some good, but their conservation message seems to be little beyond marketing. The worst part is that their bleeding heart ignorant approach actually misguides or deters those who are interested in real conservation. I think they need to endanger some more infants for publicity, maybe they could get Michael Jackson to dangle a annaconda out a window, while its wrapped around a baby above a pit of crocs, while the baby is holding a inland taipan.

Scotty, i thought she was against the mining because it was interfering with their cattle station (aka conservation land to the public lol)? Maybe you are getting mixed up with the support for the failed Mary River dam that would likely threaten the survival of a number of unique species.


----------



## morgs202 (Jun 6, 2010)

As far as I'm aware they have always been against cape alumina....


----------



## Jonno from ERD (Jun 7, 2010)

Just to clarify, I definitely find a lot of the things they do very cringe worthy. I was in Big W a few months ago and spotted some "Australia Zoo" branded tents. Treading the fine line between profitability and integrity must be a hard task, but that's quite obviously on the wrong side of the line!


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 7, 2010)

Jonno from ERD said:


> Just to clarify, I definitely find a lot of the things they do very cringe worthy. I was in Big W a few months ago and spotted some "Australia Zoo" branded tents. Treading the fine line between profitability and integrity must be a hard task, but that's quite obviously on the wrong side of the line!


 

and did you hear little Bindlie's advertising voice all over the store (Big W)? Maybe they should relocate to US altogether, more money to be made there. After all, that's what it's all about.


----------



## REPTILIAN-KMAN (Jun 7, 2010)

i was friends with the irwins- steve and his family terri, bindi i even went up there several times to help him out and and stayed up there at beewah for a while, but after the death of my mate i feel terri's intrests have changed from the irwins as i knew them, Bob was the keystone of the family and now he is an outsider, the park was the foundation of their life and now childrens entertainment is, the parkk is run so different than when steve was there as a family, i didnt work for money but for love i lived in sydney so short stays only but i became a family member as steve once said my father was at the park the day he died and i was only one of a few to know but his death did quickly spread around the park its not something the park could hide as the faces on the staff said it all as the news spread, i used to support the irwins but feel that steves intrests are no longer terris and the park is a tool to generate massive incomes for the family i believe this was also the worry of bob irwin .

RIP STEVE i miss you today like yesterday !


----------



## Kristy_07 (Jun 7, 2010)

The Wenlock River issue not as straight forward as that. I'm not sure of the figures exactly, but it was the Irwin's notoriety, not their money, that contributed to the cause. It was other independently funded environmental NGOs that did the vast majority of the legwork. But you can't deny that tagging Steve's name onto a fundraising spiel often made the job a whole lot easier for the public to get involved in 

In terms of leaving the cattle up there, again, a multifaceted issue. Until the focus for Nth Qld's economy changes from mining to eco-tourism entirely, to take all the cattle away from that area would leave a lot of people without jobs, including many Aboriginal communities. While cattle still have a major environmental impact, between them and the proposed mining practices for up north, the cattle are the lesser of two evils. You can't change the planet all at once, but there are lots of good things being put into place for up north as we speak.

The Wenlock River has just been declared under the Wild Rivers Act - no more major development on the river, more chance of natural area being turned into Aboriginal-managed national park area, and a much better chance of seeing Cape York World Heritage listed in the near future.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 7, 2010)

It's really good to hear from someone with first hand experience, unbiased and honest point of view. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 7, 2010)

Kristy_07 said:


> In terms of leaving the cattle up there, again, a multifaceted issue. Until the focus for Nth Qld's economy changes from mining to eco-tourism entirely, to take all the cattle away from that area would leave a lot of people without jobs, including many Aboriginal communities.


 
Kristy, this is the only bit some of us see differently. The number of families living and running cattle on the Cape can be counted on one hand (sort of speak) and the number of people they employ is the same. The Aboriginal cattle stations are not doing well, some have closed down but political correctness doesn't allow for any such publicity. I dare to say, if the government gave a million dollars to each of the cattle station owners, let them stay on or move away if they wish, it wouldn't be such costly exercise after all. Shoot all the cattle, declare the whole Peninsula a wilderness, inaccessible to industry and mining - there aren't too many places like that left. That's just my opinion.


----------



## Kristy_07 (Jun 7, 2010)

REPTILIAN-KMAN said:


> i was friends with the irwins- steve and his family terri, bindi i even went up there several times to help him out and and stayed up there at beewah for a while, but after the death of my mate i feel terri's intrests have changed from the irwins as i knew them, Bob was the keystone of the family and now he is an outsider, the park was the foundation of their life and now childrens entertainment is, the parkk is run so different than when steve was there as a family, i didnt work for money but for love i lived in sydney so short stays only but i became a family member as steve once said my father was at the park the day he died and i was only one of a few to know but his death did quickly spread around the park its not something the park could hide as the faces on the staff said it all as the news spread, i used to support the irwins but feel that steves intrests are no longer terris and the park is a tool to generate massive incomes for the family i believe this was also the worry of bob irwin .
> 
> RIP STEVE i miss you today like yesterday !



It's funny how opinions can differ so greatly. Growing up on the coast, I had many friends who were close friends with Steve's family through school and the surf circles, and I worked at Oz zoo for awhile. 

I think it's unfair to say Terri is the one whose interests have changed, and have changed the park. Behind the scenes, many of the park's poor management decisions were made before Steve died. I saw things in that park (and heard of many more even after I had quit) that the Irwin's should not be proud of. 

I think they walk a fine line between conservation and big-buck stagecraft.


----------



## Kristy_07 (Jun 7, 2010)

Waterrat said:


> Kristy, this is the only bit some of us see differently. The number of families living and running cattle on the Cape can be counted on one hand (sort of speak) and the number of people they employ is the same. The Aboriginal cattle stations are not doing well, some have closed down but political correctness doesn't allow for any such publicity. I dare to say, if the government gave a million dollars to each of the cattle station owners, let them stay on or move away if they wish, it wouldn't be such costly exercise after all. Shoot all the cattle, declare the whole Peninsula a wilderness, inaccessible to industry and mining - there aren't too many places like that left. That's just my opinion.



I agree with you, Michael, and your plan sounds good... in theory  But the government won't just turn over Cape York in one hit to the environmentalists and declare it a wilderness area. Not yet, anyway  And a million each wouldn't even begin to cover the cost of the stations, land value, livestock value, feed... no where close. In my opinion, it's a pipe-dream to think the government will just pay out the industries and save the environment.

So, while I agree with you about the failure of the cattle stations, I still believe that it would be better to keep the cattle stations and axe the mining practices first, and then phase out the cattle into World Heritage listing instead


----------



## FAY (Jun 7, 2010)

I don't have an opinion one way or the other as I will never know all the facts.
One thing I would like to know is 'how come any successful venture always seems to come down in some peoples minds as a money grabbing venture???
And if it is, why is it any business of ours??
If you do not agree with what they do, then don't add anything to it...it is easy really.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 7, 2010)

Kristy_07 said:


> I agree with you, Michael, and your plan sounds good... in theory  But the government won't just turn over Cape York in one hit to the environmentalists and declare it a wilderness area. Not yet, anyway  And a million each wouldn't even begin to cover the cost of the stations, land value, livestock value, feed... no where close. In my opinion, it's a pipe-dream to think the government will just pay out the industries and save the environment.
> 
> So, while I agree with you about the failure of the cattle stations, I still believe that it would be better to keep the cattle stations and axe the mining practices first, and then phase out the cattle into World Heritage listing instead



Of course it's dream. The Aboriginal issue is huge and it will always stay in way of conservation (as we know it). Last thing I wish is for the Cape York to be handed over to the Aboriginies - it would simply end up being another Arnhem land - locked up to non-Abos, permits, royalties, bull....


----------



## caustichumor (Jun 7, 2010)

I don't see much of a problem with an "Australian Zoo" themed park in Las Vegas? I can only imagine with Terri at the helm, that it would be a subtlty themed, quaint little out of the way place where exhausted gamblers could rest their heels and revel in the desolote ambience of the Aussie Bush.....;-)


----------



## Kristy_07 (Jun 7, 2010)

Waterrat said:


> Of course it's dream. The Aboriginal issue is huge and it will always stay in way of conservation (as we know it). Last thing I wish is for the Cape York to be handed over to the Aboriginies - it would simply end up being another Arnhem land - locked up to non-Abos, permits, royalties, bull....


 
Don't lose hope, Michael!!!  All the work I was doing last year was pushing towards some big environmental goals for Australia. So far, the Wenlock is protected, the Murray River red gums in NSW are protected, and the CEOs of Gunns ltd. have stepped down  Big things happen all the time, because people WANT to see the beautiful places of Oz protected. And when people get involved, this can happen!! 

The conservation plans for Cape York that I was made aware of last year did not include turning it into another Arnhem land, but involving the communities up there in the process of finding, and then managing, the balance between protection and tourism for everybody. In my opinion, the Wenlock is a great start!

And bringing it back on track, Fay's right. The Irwin family-name made a huge contribution to this environmental win because of its fame. But if you don't agree with where they spend their money or the management practices, you could always support a good NGO that are working just as hard towards conservation, and not making a profit to boot


----------



## longirostris (Jun 7, 2010)

Kristy_07 said:


> It's funny how opinions can differ so greatly. Growing up on the coast, I had many friends who were close friends with Steve's family through school and the surf circles, and I worked at Oz zoo for awhile.
> 
> I think it's unfair to say Terri is the one whose interests have changed, and have changed the park. Behind the scenes, many of the park's poor management decisions were made before Steve died. I saw things in that park (and heard of many more even after I had quit) that the Irwin's should not be proud of.
> 
> I think they walk a fine line between conservation and big-buck stagecraft.



I think they wave walked this fine line for many many years now and quite frankly have well and truly stepped over it in the last few years. 

I can only hope that the Australian Government does not allow the export of our Native wildlife for the purposes of stocking the proposed zoo in Las Vegas.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 7, 2010)

:lol: Kristy, you have done it - I am born-again optimist now.:lol:

Actually, I was "almost involved" in helping their campaign but unfortunately, the Oz Zoo is an impenetrable fortress. Six months ago, the Reptiles Australia Magazine editor tried to contact them no less than 3 times with the suggestion that I would do a photo shoot at their CY property with the angle on reptiles. I was prepared to drive up in my own vehicle at my cost, do the shoot, write the story. The magazine guaranteed it will be published, so they didn't think I was trying to got there just for bit of a good time. No answer, no acknowledgement, no nothing. Bit disappointing.


----------



## Kristy_07 (Jun 7, 2010)

Waterrat said:


> :lol: Kristy, you have done it - I am born-again optimist now.:lol:



It's my small contribution to the environment


----------



## SuburbanMe (Jun 7, 2010)

ahh after reading this it seems that people have the same underlying mistrust for Terri as i do. 

She may be a good hearted person, a great mother, and a "devoted" conservationist, but there are just too many things that "FEEL" off about her. I was watching foxtel a little while back, and collision course (croc hunter movie) was on. The way she was "acting" in that film is just like the way she talks to the cameras when she's interviewed - VERY FAKE. I'm just waiting for her to announce that she's knickin' off back to the states, taking the kids, the money, and a heap of our animals. 

She has nice hair & eyes (i don't know - trying to find something positive to say???) but even with that said - I still feel like jumping in the shower and having a good scrub (due to her making me feel dirty) after seeing her on TV - and don't even get me started on Bindi and the exploitation there.


----------



## Bushfire (Jun 7, 2010)

I personally wouldn't care what Terri does, she is her own person who shouldn't be held to the ideas and values of steve. If she wants to make money outside the 'conservation' area, go back to the US, taking kids money etc, and start up another zoo good on her. I think it would be hard living in someone's shadow all the time.

I'm sure if she wanted to move animals from here to the US zoo the Australian Gov would allow it.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 7, 2010)

She won't be living in Steve's shadow all the time. Bindi and Bob are being groomed to step into daddy's shoes and beyond. Time will tell how important "conservation" in Australia is important to her.
But hey, good luck to them all. After all, Steve would have been nobody and their empire wouldn't exist without her business savvy.


----------



## Kristy_07 (Jun 7, 2010)

Waterrat said:


> But hey, good luck to them all. After all, Steve would have been nobody and their empire wouldn't exist without her business savvy.


 
This is true. Steve was a total boofhead.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 7, 2010)

Oh christ, don't start that!


----------



## SuburbanMe (Jun 7, 2010)

hehehe - but a lovable boofhead.

I wonder what Little steve (Is his name Bob? i thought that was steves dad) - thinks about the footage of steve and him in the croc enclosure.


----------



## Kristy_07 (Jun 7, 2010)

Waterrat said:


> Oh christ, don't start that!


 
What??


----------

