On preservation of endangered species.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Yesterday, Mutual of Omaha's ''Wild Kingdom'', presented a documentary about Singalila National Preserve's red panda, or ''fire cat'' and the efforts of Indian wildlife preservation agencies to protect the species. I was taken by the dedication of these people, how committed they are to the restoring of the species. This led me to think about the conservation methods used in different countries around the world to ensure the continued existence of endemic species.

Spain does it at Picos de Europa Forest Reserve with the ''urogallo''' and the ''oso cantábrico''. What I want to know or discuss with NSG is the ways, for those who are interested, you think we can help, around the globe, with the preservation of endangered species. Which species endemic to your area are endangered? En fin, how do you think we can help with the preservation of the natural world, be it endangered or not?



http://redpandanetwork.org
For those interested in the red panda.

[Minnas]

The link is broken and... this is ridiculous. A red panda? That looks like a psychedelic cat!

[Call to power]

in Britain we allow the black panther to maul whatever it pleases

being English theres not very many cool stuff I can save apart from kicking the shit out of some Grey squirrel skinheads keeping the ginger down

[Saiwania]

Species go endangered and later extinct all the time. (sometimes beyond our control) So I say let nature take it's course and if a species is durable enough it will survive, and if not, then oh well. At least we can make replicas to put in museums. Nature should never get in the way of progress unless preserving said natural wonder has more benefits than getting rid of it.

[Fartsniffage]

in Britain we allow the black panther to maul whatever it pleases

being English theres not very many cool stuff I can save apart from kicking the shit out of some Grey squirrel skinheads keeping the ginger down

Have you seen the black squirrels yet? They're the size of cats.

[Muravyets]

Species go endangered and later extinct all the time. (sometimes beyond our control) So I say let nature take it's course and if a species is durable enough it will survive, and if not, then oh well. At least we can make replicas to put in museums. Nature should never get in the way of progress unless preserving said natural wonder has more benefits than getting rid of it.

Wow, that's actually amazingly uninformed and short-sighted, but thank you for encapsulating the whole attitude problem that drives loss of bio-diversity. It's good to know what we are talking about.

[Hawkryl]

Species go endangered and later extinct all the time. (sometimes beyond our control) So I say let nature take it's course and if a species is durable enough it will survive, and if not, then oh well. At least we can make replicas to put in museums. Nature should never get in the way of progress unless preserving said natural wonder has more benefits than getting rid of it.

But think about the pandas!!

[Hawkryl]

in Britain we allow the black panther to maul whatever it pleases

being English theres not very many cool stuff I can save apart from kicking the shit out of some Grey squirrel skinheads keeping the ginger down

Have you seen the black squirrels yet? They're the size of cats.

Scared the crap out of me the first time i saw one, was frigin huge.

[DrunkenDove]

Species go endangered and later extinct all the time. (sometimes beyond our control) So I say let nature take it's course and if a species is durable enough it will survive, and if not, then oh well. At least we can make replicas to put in museums. Nature should never get in the way of progress unless preserving said natural wonder has more benefits than getting rid of it.

So basically, we should let animals go extinct, unless we don't want to? Ok.

[Playing In The Water]

Species go endangered and later extinct all the time. (sometimes beyond our control) So I say let nature take it's course and if a species is durable enough it will survive, and if not, then oh well. At least we can make replicas to put in museums. Nature should never get in the way of progress unless preserving said natural wonder has more benefits than getting rid of it.

Sometimes beyond our control, yes; this isn't to say that we're not the primary cause of that extinction, though. Just because we can't control ourselves and our development doesn't mean that we should let hundreds of species fall by the wayside, in my opinion.

As for ways to keep animals around? Well, realistically, make them viable; use them for income. National parks, nature experiences, safaris, whale watching...all create jobs centred on having healthy, wild animals around, and lots of them. If the animals can make money, they are generally in a much better position to survive humanity.

For those that can't generate their own income...well, the best bet would be to have their habitat - at least partially - declared a nature reserve or some such thing, even though that sort of definition, and what it entails, varies considerably from country to country. What you can do in some reserves, you can't do in others. Not to mention enforcement of the laws surrounding these sanctuaries is difficult, particularly in lesser-developed countries where people are more desperate to make a living, no matter what they have to do to the environment around them.

[Iansisle]

Species go endangered and later extinct all the time. (sometimes beyond our control) So I say let nature take it's course and if a species is durable enough it will survive, and if not, then oh well. At least we can make replicas to put in museums. Nature should never get in the way of progress unless preserving said natural wonder has more benefits than getting rid of it.

With an opinion as subtle and nuanced as that, you'd make a great Captain Planet villain.

[Muravyets]

In the US, we've got lots of species that are having problems due to human environmental impact. Not just the famous polar bears who are getting all the press -- we also have various bird, insect, fish, amphibian, and especially plant, species that are struggling.

I'm a big supporter of the US's national parks system for the preservation of species that (a) are important to bio-diversity in North America and (b) are icons of our region. To me, the national parks system is one of the best examples of the US doing something right, and I vehemently oppose any efforts to chip away the parks by allowing industry and development into them.

I am also a supporter of captive breeding programs. Regardless of efforts to stop habitat loss, many important species are certainly going to lose so much space that their populations will be unable to support themselves before environmental efforts will have any effect. Captive breeding will at least ensure that the species do not disappear from the planet, in case their environments do recover sufficiently to reintroduce them. I believe this is particularly important for large predators and, possibly, for pollinating insects. It has worked remarkably well with wolves in North America.

Finally, I also support efforts to educate the public and to encourage people to "politicize" their consumer habits in order to put an end to such gross abuses as the trade in endangered animal parts and the over-fishing of sharks for "finning."

[United Russian State]

Species go endangered and later extinct all the time. (sometimes beyond our control) So I say let nature take it's course and if a species is durable enough it will survive, and if not, then oh well. At least we can make replicas to put in museums. Nature should never get in the way of progress unless preserving said natural wonder has more benefits than getting rid of it.

Agreed, thank you for having some sense.

[Aelosia]

All efforts should be made to preserve endangered species.

The Red Pandas are extraordinarily cute. Actually, I found them cuter than their big black and white counterparts.

http://www.lagransabana.com/ext.htm

And the link goes because they are too many in my country. The most endangered are the Arrau Turtle, the Jaguar, The Frontino Bear, (a complete cutie), the Andean Condor, the Manatí, (another complete cutie, they are SOOO cute), The giant ant eating bear, teo species of caymans, and like 100 species of birds.

[The Norse Hordes]

Species go endangered and later extinct all the time. (sometimes beyond our control) So I say let nature take it's course and if a species is durable enough it will survive, and if not, then oh well. At least we can make replicas to put in museums. Nature should never get in the way of progress unless preserving said natural wonder has more benefits than getting rid of it.

Agreed, thank you for having some sense.

I encourage anyone with these views to actually learn something about ecosystems and the damage the loss of one species can do to said ecosystems.

[JuNii]

Here in Hawaii, we have a ton of endangered species of both plants and animal types. one of the ways we protect them is by being very anal as to what plants and animals are both brought in and taken out of the islands.

[North Suran]

Species go endangered and later extinct all the time. (sometimes beyond our control) So I say let nature take it's course and if a species is durable enough it will survive, and if not, then oh well. At least we can make replicas to put in museums. Nature should never get in the way of progress unless preserving said natural wonder has more benefits than getting rid of it.

Agreed, thank you for having some sense.

A set of 'principles' that allow you to blithely close your ears and screw your eyes shut to the gradual extinction of animal species under the convienent belief that it is all "natural and out of our control" is not sense; it's a self-serving fallacy.

[Have a Fun Day]

I think that we had ought to protect as many species and plants and life as we can and I think it's a disgusting and SAD tendencie of human s to destroy life both other animals and our own and just ravage our land with pollution and crime and war and uggghhh it just makes me really mad well maybe not mad but just very very sad inside, and sad for everyone in the world adn the future generations are are going to have to inherit this world that we totally messed up because we wanted to drive those cars everywhere, and wage those wars everywhere, and eat all of those whales and octopi nevermind that they won't live for another twenty years if they keep doing that and then it's lost FOREVER and forever is a very long time my friends, and once something has gone into the forever, it's never coming back, those who have lost loved ones know what I mean what I mean by THAT and as for the people protecting species, well



I applaude there efforts!!!

[Zembrill]

What I want to know or discuss with NSG is the ways, for those who are interested, you think we can help, around the globe, with the preservation of endangered species.

Without even taking the rest of your post into consideration, the number one way to do this is to hold charges against South Korea and Japan for going against the Geneva Convention and literally raping the ocean of all life. The Pacific Bluefin Tuna for example is endangered specifically because of unrestricted Japanese fishing.

They're bastards and need to be stopped. From an environmental standpoint, that is.

EDIT: also we can all follow in China's example with how they protect their river dolphin and panda populations. They don't do it the best but at least they do it.

[The Norse Hordes]

What I want to know or discuss with NSG is the ways, for those who are interested, you think we can help, around the globe, with the preservation of endangered species.

Without even taking the rest of your post into consideration, the number one way to do this is to hold charges against South Korea and Japan for going against the Geneva Convention and literally raping the ocean of all life. The Pacific Bluefin Tuna for example is endangered specifically because of unrestricted Japanese fishing.

They're bastards and need to be stopped. From an environmental standpoint, that is.

While I agree with the sentiments of your post, I suspect the bolded is an error on your part. The GC does not cover animal life.

[Zembrill]

You may be right, I'll do some research and check my sources in a bit (I'm not at home right now).

[Hoyteca]

Species go endangered and later extinct all the time. (sometimes beyond our control) So I say let nature take it's course and if a species is durable enough it will survive, and if not, then oh well. At least we can make replicas to put in museums. Nature should never get in the way of progress unless preserving said natural wonder has more benefits than getting rid of it.

The problem is, right now, the human race is the most common cause of extinction. Our species' population is quickly approaching 7 billion. We're not exactly the smallest, most environmentally friendly species in the world. Something's got to give, whether it be our soil can no longer handle our GM super crops (those minerals have to come from somewhere) or someone accidentally sits on the big red button.

Very few, if any, ecosystems can handle us and we kinda depend on them. For example, wetlands. Stinky, malaria-infested wetlands. Well, they make pretty effective flood-control and they don't cost us anything. River floodings? They leave setiments, which act like free fertalizers. Fertalizers that won't pollute our drinking waters with your average fertalizer's disease and toxins. Grasslands and forests? Believe it or not, they hold dirt down. The Great Dustbowl? That happened because the farmers were idiots and the topsoil got blown away. Lots of it. Enough of it to make Los Angeles look clean and pollution-free.

Our ecosystems, which we depend on, depend on a complex system of things killing other things. Remove a vital component, like a certain plant or predator or whatever and the whole system begins to fall apart. Sure, we could spend billions keeping the environment from going toxic and killing us all or we can fix our mistakes, leave it alone after that, and have it not kill us . and it will be pretty much free.

[Playing In The Water]

In the US, we've got lots of species that are having problems due to human environmental impact. Not just the famous polar bears who are getting all the press -- we also have various bird, insect, fish, amphibian, and especially plant, species that are struggling.

I'm a big supporter of the US's national parks system for the preservation of species that (a) are important to bio-diversity in North America and (b) are icons of our region. To me, the national parks system is one of the best examples of the US doing something right, and I vehemently oppose any efforts to chip away the parks by allowing industry and development into them.

I am also a supporter of captive breeding programs. Regardless of efforts to stop habitat loss, many important species are certainly going to lose so much space that their populations will be unable to support themselves before environmental efforts will have any effect. Captive breeding will at least ensure that the species do not disappear from the planet, in case their environments do recover sufficiently to reintroduce them. I believe this is particularly important for large predators and, possibly, for pollinating insects. It has worked remarkably well with wolves in North America.

Finally, I also support efforts to educate the public and to encourage people to "politicize" their consumer habits in order to put an end to such gross abuses as the trade in endangered animal parts and the over-fishing of sharks for "finning."

This.

I'm rather fed up with certain cute-and-cuddly animals getting all the air time myself, to be honest. Polar bears may be in some future trouble, yes, but other species are hanging on by a thread right now. It's the small, unnoticed species that we're in greatest danger of losing, and they're the least likely to get public attention; no-one cares about a bland little fish found only in a single pond in Death Valley. Knut, on the other hand, is cute and covered in mud at the moment, so let's all coo at him!

One of the problems I have with the United States' method of preservation is that much of the legislation is dictated by hunters; it's not a good situation to have those in favour of killing wildlife in charge of so much of the preservation of it. Otherwise I an partly agree; the national parks in the States are better than others, even though they're ridiculously small and sparse. (Suggestion; take a look at national parks in mainland America - not Alaska - and then a country like, say, Canada; it's a big difference.)

Anyway, I highlighted that last paragraph - and the last half a sentence or so - for a reason; THAT is the big problem with environmentalism nowadays. General natural education goes so far as to let people know we're 'wrecking the environment'. This is an INCREDIBLY basic description, and it doesn't help a thing. Sure, saying 'save the rainforests' is great and all, but what good is that going to do, specifically, if those rainforests get carved up by highways like the Great Plains of the States have been? It divides territories, migration routes, and habitats; isolated pockets of animals are not viable in the long run. And this is beside the fact that, even with all the problems terrestrial flora and fauna are facing, the water of the planet are likely even worse off. Our oceans are unceremoniously used as both a food supply and a garbage dump, which you would think would make some people question our methods right off that bat. This doesn't seem to be the case. However, things are going to come to a head if we don't tone down our fishing fleets; they are taking more than the oceans can provide, and with a population that never seems to stop growing, we seem to be wanting only more and more from it. Considering that we've wiped out 90% of many shark species by this point - for their fucking FINS, god damnit all - I don't think we have much hope that the oceans will be healthy enough to stabilise themselves so as to meet our rising demands. Apex predators are more important to the ecosystem than people apparently realise, and if we don't give them time to recover, we're going to have fishery collapse after fishery collapse on our hands...aside from the fact that that's already happening, but anyway.

And hah, well, wonderful; I went ranting. I really oughtn't even look at these sorts of threads, they get big block paragraphs out of me that people probably don't want to read anyway.

Here in Hawaii, we have a ton of endangered species of both plants and animal types. one of the ways we protect them is by being very anal as to what plants and animals are both brought in and taken out of the islands.

Little late to be stingy...there are so many foreign plants and animals there already - brought by colonists for whatever reason - that the truly unique native species are about to keel over as is. I cannot tell you how much I regret that; the Hawaiian Islands are a beautiful place, and their indigenous flora and fauna was, in my opinion, almost second to none.

Still, it is better to be late than never, and I've seen first-hand the extensive conservatory work being done there; it's revolutionary, really, and I believe one-of-a-kind in the United States, at least.

[Glorious Freedonia]

Yesterday, Mutual of Omaha's ''Wild Kingdom'', presented a documentary about Singalila National Preserve's red panda, or ''fire cat'' and the efforts of Indian wildlife preservation agencies to protect the species. I was taken by the dedication of these people, how committed they are to the restoring of the species. This led me to think about the conservation methods used in different countries around the world to ensure the continued existence of endemic species.

Spain does it at Picos de Europa Forest Reserve with the ''urogallo''' and the ''oso cantábrico''. What I want to know or discuss with NSG is the ways, for those who are interested, you think we can help, around the globe, with the preservation of endangered species. Which species endemic to your area are endangered? En fin, how do you think we can help with the preservation of the natural world, be it endangered or not?



http://redpandanetwork.org- For those interested in the red panda.

Some species have a lot of problems. However, the one thing that we can do to help or at least not promote further harm is to expand their natural habitat. Buying up farmland or other real estate near wild areas and promoting the expansion of natural habitat gets my full support. I think that this is something that charities should do and some governmental money helps too but usually that money is pretty hard to get due to red tape problems.

I think that governmental help needs to be directed at police (i.e. park rangers) that provide security for wildlife preserves. Let the private sector buy the land and let the government protect it should be the basic model. However, there is not a single wasted tax dollar spent on any type of habitat protection and habitat enhancement for threatened or endangered species.

[Minnas]

What I want to know or discuss with NSG is the ways, for those who are interested, you think we can help, around the globe, with the preservation of endangered species.

Without even taking the rest of your post into consideration, the number one way to do this is to hold charges against South Korea and Japan for going against the Geneva Convention and literally raping the ocean of all life. The Pacific Bluefin Tuna for example is endangered specifically because of unrestricted Japanese fishing.

They're bastards and need to be stopped. From an environmental standpoint, that is.

EDIT: also we can all follow in China's example with how they protect their river dolphin and panda populations. They don't do it the best but at least they do it.

Do read the rest of the OP. This post is so full of fail my head hurts...