upcoming documentary on sumatran tigers

Arizona Docent

Well-Known Member
15+ year member
This one looks really interesting. Produced by BBC, it will initially air in the UK and later internationally. (Not that it makes a difference to me since I do not own a television anyway, but maybe they will post it online eventually.)

Tiger Island | Panthera
 
Not sure if this particular programme will be on it, but there is a Global iPlayer (though the full range requires a small paid subscription) - App Store - BBC iPlayer (Global) (iTunes link as it was the only one I could quickly find)
 
No story really. I just find them a colossal waste of time and money.

I suppose that TVs (or is it TV's?) may become obsolete in the wake of TV streamed via the internet straight to your computer. But, TVs themselves have evolved to become an information hub that connect to the internet to surf the web, check mail, play games etc.

You spend time on the internet, and at a computer, and you watch shows on the internet, so maybe your problem isn't really with the physical TV, but with the free-to-air/cable content?
 
Did anyone watch this documentary?

I just saw it, and it reinforces some negative stereotypes:

1. "White is right". The Western 'expert' supposedly knows best when it comes to conservation and must give his stamp of approval for a conservation project to be kosher.

2. "Tigers are man-eaters." The documentary kept repeating that the tigers were 'man-eaters', without pointing out that Indonesia has 240 million people that are encroaching on tiger habitat, inevitably leading to tigers killing prey with no defenses (speed, horns, strength etc).

We donate (not much, as we aren't loaded) to a few wildlife charities regularly, but Panthera will NEVER receive a cent of my money. The 'tiger expert' from Panthera (Alan Rabinowitz) is a complete a-hole (to quote my wife). He clearly is not passionate about tigers. He kept referring to the tigers at "it" rather than "he/she" as many other charismatic wildlife presenters do. He kept referring to the tigers as man-eaters - as though they had a penchant for human flesh. He did not agree with the idea of reintroducing man-eating tigers back into the wild, preferring to keep them in captivity or, and I quote, "putting them to death". He deserves the title of a-hole, if as a supposed conservationist, he can utter the words "put them to death" as an option, when there are a couple hundred Sumatran tigers left.

This Westerner went in with his holier than thou attitude, casting aspersions on a rich Indonesian who was reintroducing problem tigers on to HIS land. I don't have the time to type a full review at the moment, but the documentary was both fascinating (in that it showed a radical native trying something different) and in poor taste (in that it portrayed tigers as something to be feared and hated). It is definitely worth watching, and I am curious to hear your opinions.
 
If you are outside the UK you can't watch it directly. You can connect indirectly via a proxy which usually charges a monthly fee, or I found this article which suggests a way of diong it for free, maybe someone outside the UK can verify if this method works

The best way to watch BBC iplayer in USA for free?

Based on the description, it appears to be an illegal/unethical site to get around the BBC restrictions. I will just wait and hope it eventually shows up on Hulu (a legitimate/legal free tv site).
 
Darn - now I REALLY want to see it.

I hope that you do get to see it soon. I felt that the documentary could have been a case-study of this rich guy's initiative to reintroduce tigers to his private property, rather than a camera crew following a Western joker.
 
We donate (not much, as we aren't loaded) to a few wildlife charities regularly, but Panthera will NEVER receive a cent of my money. The 'tiger expert' from Panthera (Alan Rabinowitz) is a complete a-hole (to quote my wife). He clearly is not passionate about tigers. He kept referring to the tigers at "it" rather than "he/she" as many other charismatic wildlife presenters do. He kept referring to the tigers as man-eaters - as though they had a penchant for human flesh. He did not agree with the idea of reintroducing man-eating tigers back into the wild, preferring to keep them in captivity or, and I quote, "putting them to death". He deserves the title of a-hole, if as a supposed conservationist, he can utter the words "put them to death" as an option, when there are a couple hundred Sumatran tigers left.

You forget that Alan Rabinowitz has been one of the most successful conservationists of the late 20th/early 21st century. His work with jaguars, tigers, Asiatic and clouded leopards has lead to protected areas, including a tiger reserve in Myanmar that is the size of the country of Belgium! His organization, Panthera, is one of the few non-profits that look to new conservation techniques, such as corridor systems that will connect protected areas and allow gene flow for those endangered species. They also have scholarship programs to help educate budding biologists and to give much needed funds to scientists in the field. How could one not be passionate about what they do if they have done all that he has done? Furthermore, how can you determine from an hour long documentary the content of that conservation giant's character? You might think he's an a-hole but he's done more for the preservation of endangered species than just about any other person alive today. (Honestly, who cares about the pronoun he uses to describe the tigers??? At the end of the day, they are just animals). Panthera in the past has always tried to negotiate with the local people and rightly so, as people will always be of more importance than animals (even if they are only in the hundreds:(). Releasing proven killers back into the wild will cause some grief among the locals. Would you want to raise a family in an area where you know there are tigers that have had the taste of human flesh??? I most certainly wouldn't and I am sure the locals wouldn't either. If you knew anything of Rabinowitz's background you wouldn't be so quick to condemn; go ahead and check out some of the interviews on his page on the Panthera website and repeat what you said.
 
We donate (not much, as we aren't loaded) to a few wildlife charities regularly, but Panthera will NEVER receive a cent of my money. The 'tiger expert' from Panthera (Alan Rabinowitz) is a complete a-hole (to quote my wife). He clearly is not passionate about tigers. He kept referring to the tigers at "it" rather than "he/she" as many other charismatic wildlife presenters do. He kept referring to the tigers as man-eaters - as though they had a penchant for human flesh. He did not agree with the idea of reintroducing man-eating tigers back into the wild, preferring to keep them in captivity or, and I quote, "putting them to death". He deserves the title of a-hole, if as a supposed conservationist, he can utter the words "put them to death" as an option, when there are a couple hundred Sumatran tigers left.

You forget that Alan Rabinowitz has been one of the most successful conservationists of the late 20th/early 21st century. His work with jaguars, tigers, Asiatic and clouded leopards has lead to protected areas, including a tiger reserve in Myanmar that is the size of the country of Belgium! His organization, Panthera, is one of the few non-profits that look to new conservation techniques, such as corridor systems that will connect protected areas and allow gene flow for those endangered species. They also have scholarship programs to help educate budding biologists and to give much needed funds to scientists in the field. How could one not be passionate about what they do if they have done all that he has done? Furthermore, how can you determine from an hour long documentary the content of that conservation giant's character? You might think he's an a-hole but he's done more for the preservation of endangered species than just about any other person alive today. (Honestly, who cares about the pronoun he uses to describe the tigers??? At the end of the day, they are just animals). Panthera in the past has always tried to negotiate with the local people and rightly so, as people will always be of more importance than animals (even if they are only in the hundreds:(). Releasing proven killers back into the wild will cause some grief among the locals. Would you want to raise a family in an area where you know there are tigers that have had the taste of human flesh??? I most certainly wouldn't and I am sure the locals wouldn't either. If you knew anything of Rabinowitz's background you wouldn't be so quick to condemn; go ahead and check out some of the interviews on his page on the Panthera website and repeat what you said.

I'll leave that one there then. Genesis 1:26.

Watch the documentary.
 
I haven't seen this documentary but I agree with nanoboy's personal assessment of Alan Rabinowitz from reading his 2001 book "Beyond the Last Village: A Journey of Discovery in Asia’s Forbidden Wilderness" about a conservation expedition he undertook in Burma. The man has done a lot for conservation but he is thoroughly unlikeable as a person (judging from his own writings).
 
Isn't Rabinowitz one of the only people in history to make Stephen Colbert cry on camera?
 
I have not seen the show, but I have read four books by A R (which is perhaps all of them). Funny someone else finds him dislikeable after reading his own work, as I have the opposite experience. One thing that is particularly striking about his books - all of them - is that he is painfully and brutally honest about his own shortcomings. I mean he reveals things that most people would never publicly admit (such as after a failure in a study in Thailand - when he was still single - he went to the city to find comfort in the arms of a prostitute). His last book reveals the marital problems brought on by his strenuous schedule, as well as his reactions to finding he has cancer. It takes a lot of humility (more than most of us have) to be that open to complete strangers about your problems, so I have a hard time accepting the accusation (if I am reading this thread correctly) that he is a pompous know-it-all.

Of course he is not perfect and in this particular case he may or may not be wrong (I cannot say without seeing the show), but he seems human enough that I would not write him off based on one television special. Anyone familiar with his lifetime of work knows he certainly has the credentials when it comes to cats.
 
I'll leave that one there then. Genesis 1:26.

Watch the documentary.

Being from the US I haven't yet had a chance to see the documentary, but if you mean to tell me that you think that the Indonesian government or any other country's government containing dangerous predators will put the interests over the likes of the people, you are just utterly wrong. I do not think man should have dominion over the beasts and very little of the content included in the book of Genesis do I agree with. I just think that being realistic with the interests of both the animals and people in mind is the only successful path to conservation in the long run.

I agree completely with Arizona Docent and I don't see what makes the man unlikable. He's one of my heroes in the conservation field and I have read all four of his books and seen not this documentary, but one on jaguar corridors and surveying tigers in Bhutan. He is very humble and hard-working; I find it incredible he is still fighting to help save tigers and other big cats as he was diagnosed with CLL, otherwise known as chronic lymphatic leukemia over a decade ago.
 
Isn't Rabinowitz one of the only people in history to make Stephen Colbert cry on camera?

I think he is the only one. I like how he left his uber-conservative character behind when he was talking to Rabinowitz. His story is one of the saddest I have ever heard.
 
I just happened to see this programme as it was repeated in the UK the other evening. I had not seen it before.

One thing I did notice was that the Tigers that had been released in the private reserve were only supposed Maneaters. I don't think any of them were proven, at least it did not say so or emphasise that with proof. They had come from areas were a Maneater was active and had been 'rounded up' ( their words) in the process, so maybe there is no guarantee they were the actual Maneater in each case. They could all have been quite innocent Tigers. Maybe they were which is why there were no attacks on Villagers after their release in the reserve. Real Maneaters rarely change their habits...

At the end they rather glossed over exactly how/why the Tigress was brought back into captivity(injured footpad- was that the real reason?) and I didn't like seeing her ( or any Tigers for that matter) trying to rear her cubs in a bare sterile cage with no privacy. Surely Rabinowitz would not have advocated that move if he had any influence?

Rabinowitz did not come across as particularly charismatic, I'll agree, but he has obviously done a lot of good work for Big Cats.
 
Back
Top