Ken Harbart
New member
Oddly enough, I had considered this to be a dead topic, but since there was a reply directed specifically towards me, I'll entertain it one more time.
Well, I knew from the getgo that my opinion of certain aspects of Bob Clark's ethics wouldn't be a popular one. After all, I had the audacity to criticize an icon of the industry- a person whom apparently many feel is infallible. Thomas Jefferson summarized it best when he said, "Money, not morality, is the principle commerce of civilized nations."
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Many people replied with praise about both subjects, his service and his animals, and though you(Ken) also said he would be satisfied with a purchase from Bob clark,it seems that you couldn't resist putting him down as well...</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>I'm sorry, but I felt that the ethics of selling Nile crocs to 15 year old children, et al., and creating a scene when told that he wouldn't be allowed to break the law at the Arlington expo bore some relevance. After all, when people make an inquiry, they usually want to know both the good and bad.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> personally do NOT think that it was necessary to lash out this way. You could have said that you didn't like the fact that he sold nile crocs and left it at that, but you went a bit further and started a p*ssing match, by incinuating that Bob(unlike the barkers) doesn't care who he sells to or doesn't care about the animals he sells."</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
To begin with, the Barkers were mentioned because it was posted (along with some other misinformation about them), that Bob was superior to them in all aspects.
As for this being a pissing match, nothing could be farther from the truth. Were it such a contest, I would have been responding in kind to the various ad hominem that was thrown out there. On the contrary, this thread has remained quite amicable on both sides of the issue. It had the potential to degenerate to the level of some other threads which are rather impolite.
The questions that I postulated earlier in this thread still stand. Namely, how many of these crocs do you think actually survive to maturity, and where the next introduced crocs will surface.
Most people in the private sector simply do not understand what becomes of these animals after they're no longer managable. I've lost count, as I know Kelli's husband Steve most surely has, of how many times people who bought crocs without any forethought called zoos, trying to donate/sell them. Generally speaking, they're turned away, and about a week later the croc turns up in some local waterway. Here in Detroit, Bell Isle is a pretty popular spot for releasing crocodilians.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Every one is entitled to their opinion, and mine is that if you don't "mean" to attack somebody's ethics, then learn how to phrase it as such. </td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
I have no regrets about the way my reply was phrased, nor do I make any apologies for my opinion of Bob Clark's ethics.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And stop bellyaching over something that "one person" can't hold the blame for. It is the responsibility of all, breeders, owners, parents, herp society's, and our communities to make sure that previously mentioned incidents do not occur.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Indeed there is a collective responsibility, but that does not negate individual responsibility. "One person" is responsible for their own actions or inactions.
Cheers,
Ken
Well, I knew from the getgo that my opinion of certain aspects of Bob Clark's ethics wouldn't be a popular one. After all, I had the audacity to criticize an icon of the industry- a person whom apparently many feel is infallible. Thomas Jefferson summarized it best when he said, "Money, not morality, is the principle commerce of civilized nations."
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Many people replied with praise about both subjects, his service and his animals, and though you(Ken) also said he would be satisfied with a purchase from Bob clark,it seems that you couldn't resist putting him down as well...</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>I'm sorry, but I felt that the ethics of selling Nile crocs to 15 year old children, et al., and creating a scene when told that he wouldn't be allowed to break the law at the Arlington expo bore some relevance. After all, when people make an inquiry, they usually want to know both the good and bad.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> personally do NOT think that it was necessary to lash out this way. You could have said that you didn't like the fact that he sold nile crocs and left it at that, but you went a bit further and started a p*ssing match, by incinuating that Bob(unlike the barkers) doesn't care who he sells to or doesn't care about the animals he sells."</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
To begin with, the Barkers were mentioned because it was posted (along with some other misinformation about them), that Bob was superior to them in all aspects.
As for this being a pissing match, nothing could be farther from the truth. Were it such a contest, I would have been responding in kind to the various ad hominem that was thrown out there. On the contrary, this thread has remained quite amicable on both sides of the issue. It had the potential to degenerate to the level of some other threads which are rather impolite.
The questions that I postulated earlier in this thread still stand. Namely, how many of these crocs do you think actually survive to maturity, and where the next introduced crocs will surface.
Most people in the private sector simply do not understand what becomes of these animals after they're no longer managable. I've lost count, as I know Kelli's husband Steve most surely has, of how many times people who bought crocs without any forethought called zoos, trying to donate/sell them. Generally speaking, they're turned away, and about a week later the croc turns up in some local waterway. Here in Detroit, Bell Isle is a pretty popular spot for releasing crocodilians.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Every one is entitled to their opinion, and mine is that if you don't "mean" to attack somebody's ethics, then learn how to phrase it as such. </td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
I have no regrets about the way my reply was phrased, nor do I make any apologies for my opinion of Bob Clark's ethics.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And stop bellyaching over something that "one person" can't hold the blame for. It is the responsibility of all, breeders, owners, parents, herp society's, and our communities to make sure that previously mentioned incidents do not occur.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Indeed there is a collective responsibility, but that does not negate individual responsibility. "One person" is responsible for their own actions or inactions.
Cheers,
Ken