Animal extinctions

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

Do more you say? With what resources? Should they be given more money to accomplish that end? From the government? There is a lot of ground to patrol when trying to prevent poaching.

It is easy to say "Animals are nice! They should be saved!" but much harder to do something about it.

I think that more money should be allocated to these organizations, possibly from the government and also that they should make the consequences for poaching at least as harsh as 1st degree murder, and for endangered species maybe worse, because if you think about it, that's exactly what it is, humans are animals as well, some people forget that sometimes.

 

[Mr.Fakeman]

If you really live in Australia (not stereotyping) im sure you would understand conservation laws.

No, it wouldn't matter what species you are protecting. If a government decides that during a certain season a certain animal is endangered, then they would make laws covering that season. If truly under a threat of extinction a government should take full responsibility for the conservation of that species, wether it be national government or local government.

Really I think that if an animal is more than just a threatened species, then all possible measures should be taken to try and keep the species alive. A perfect example is the Black-footed ferret.

Yes, I am aware of the conservation laws and it's purposes.

Can you give an example of what kind of laws a government make covering a season to protect endangered species? (just so I can get an elaboration of your point)

And on your 3rd point, we have a crux here... But on the other hand there were recent attempts to revive a kind artificially, an example would be the Tasmanian Tiger. I couldn't remember if it was a success to clone at least one though...

 

[zrky]

Cloning of a tasmanian tiger was unsuccessful as far as I know. An example of seasonal protection would be duck hunting. Hunting seasons are placed as a way of conservation, for the reason that it doesn't make sense that thousands of people go to hunt ducks when they are at their lowest numbers (their non breeding season). Instead the hunting season for a specific animal is when they are at their highest population (breeding season).

Sometimes I wish the US would be as concerned about wildlife as Australia. The black footed ferret survived only because of a select few that cared. In Australia I can't keep count of how many animals are being saved from the threatened species list. A good example of a recovering species do to government laws is the Dingo. If the Dingo existed here in the US it would have been long dead.

 

[Mr.Fakeman]

Cloning of a tasmanian tiger was unsuccessful as far as I know. An example of seasonal protection would be duck hunting. Hunting seasons are placed as a way of conservation, for the reason that it doesn't make sense that thousands of people go to hunt ducks when they are at their lowest numbers (their non breeding season). Instead the hunting season for a specific animal is when they are at their highest population (breeding season).

Sometimes I wish the US would be as concerned about wildlife as Australia. The black footed ferret survived only because of a select few that cared. In Australia I can't keep count of how many animals are being saved from the threatened species list. A good example of a recovering species do to government laws is the Dingo. If the Dingo existed here in the US it would have been long dead.

I get you point now, so there are times when a type of animal is over-populated. Then people make a hunting season at the appropriate time to balance the population, while other species are being covered by the government and wildlife organisations until, that species are at a fair rate of population?

 

[zrky]

Yes, and if a species has been brought back from the threatened species list, then it will never be aloud to be hunted (if it was previously) by the world conservation laws.

 

[Greenstreet]

Cloning of a tasmanian tiger was unsuccessful as far as I know. An example of seasonal protection would be duck hunting. Hunting seasons are placed as a way of conservation, for the reason that it doesn't make sense that thousands of people go to hunt ducks when they are at their lowest numbers (their non breeding season). Instead the hunting season for a specific animal is when they are at their highest population (breeding season).

Sometimes I wish the US would be as concerned about wildlife as Australia. The black footed ferret survived only because of a select few that cared. In Australia I can't keep count of how many animals are being saved from the threatened species list. A good example of a recovering species do to government laws is the Dingo. If the Dingo existed here in the US it would have been long dead.

I am pretty much in full agreeance here. But unfortunately we aren't perfect either.
Tasmanian Tigers, although extinct for quite some time now, had barely any government protection (although in our defence, back then we didnt have the intelligence or foresight that can be employed now [not that we necessarily use it now anyway])...

But we have a great deal of endangered species, and although it may seem that we are doing something about it on government websites here, or protection agencies, forests are still getting knocked down, just to a lesser extent.

It's kinda funny because I know alot of people who wish the Dingo was extinct

P.S. Random Trivia: Australia is home to the world's rarest insect... wingless stick insect

 

[zrky]

Well, it is true that forests are getting cleared at a lesser extent, but it's a slow start, hopefully in at least 10 years there will be a law past going along the lines of "...with and only with certified government permission can a company cut down forest. [and] only a certain amount per month, and with this, for every three (3) trees cut down two (2) seeds must be planted..." but I doubt that will happen.
I understand that many governments think they are fooling the people by "enforcing" protection laws, but every one knows that there are simple loop holes that the government doesn't care about, and only local governments enforce these laws and if broken THEN they go to the higher courts.

Why would people want the Dingo extinct? it's one of two or three wild dog species left!

I did not know the thing about the stick insect, but Australia also has about 4 out every 5 of my favorite animals, along with two of the three monotremes, all but one marsupial, and the only wing-less bird.

 

[manhunter098]

Replanting forests doesnt really help the environment much. What is needed are older trees instead of newer ones. Older trees get cut down though and newer ones are left to grow and for the most part already we are replanting more trees than we cut down, but its the age of the trees that matters no the quantity.

What we should do is switch to alternatives for our paper and building materials. But of course the government cant risk letting farmers grow hemp, even though it could provide virtually all the raw materials we need with a fraction of the land needed for trees.

 

[zrky]

I do agree with your above post, but the problem business owners have with that, is that older trees are the ones with better quality wood for floors and stuff.

I was wondering, does anyone know of any laws passed by the Chinese government that cold have protected the Yangtze river dolphin? because I find it really sad that it was declared extinct last year.

 

[Greenstreet]

Why would people want the Dingo extinct? it's one of two or three wild dog species left!

Not extinct I guess. It's just that it's a farmers worst nightmare at times...

 

[zrky]

That is basically the exact same problem here. Over in Florida farmers have almost caused the Florida Cougar/Puma to become extinct. The reson is also because they attack the farmers chickens and stuff. So why don't they just protect their livestock better I don't know, but those farmers are way to ignorant of what they are doing.

 

[Greenstreet]

Protecting livestock is difficult as they need a set amount of room to graze/eat whatever livestock do. And no farmer I know has the time nor ability to raise a solid fence that goes several feet into the ground so that digging can't occur either. Once again the humans are putting their own interests over the animals, but in this case I can see their point of view, because in this case, if they don't do something about the pests, they could infact go out of business/lose their home/ and livelihood...

So it's an iffy one at best.

 

[zrky]

I t is very iffy, but one thing I was thinking about is that each year they could set aside the equivalent of $100 US, and put that into improving their security, because the farmers with these problems are the private farmers that have a relatively small piece of land.

 

[knightzy]

you do forget though australia is arid land there was'nt much forest there to start with,so we cant cut it down,the easy soultion is only have you're native animals in the proper habitat,the tassie tigar had several maters in the one zoo but they never mated,why? because it was'nt there native home,they just slowly died in a cage.
they need protection but not captivety importing the non-nativies was the first way to kill the nativies.

 

[zrky]

right, importation, such as that of the Cane Toad and the rabbit, to Australia has killed countless animals, and caused MANY problems. The problem of animals not breeding occurs very often even in fish tanks, if the animal isn't given the proper comfortable environment then they wont breed. I really do hope Tazmanian Tiger cloning works because that was a very elusive animal and it became extinct for a sad reason, same goes for the Yangtze and the Amazon river dolphins.

 

[ElemMasterZeph92]

At a time like this any decision could greatly affect some animal's existence, one way would be to round up one species and move it another habitat like the dingos. But for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction which makes me unsure about this..........

 

[zrky]

It's almost impossible to round up every animal unless their numbers are below 300. The only place you could move them to is a reservation in their own habitat. The reaction to that would be that the place where the animals are taken from would be in lack of the niche that was removed, so in turn either another animal would have to take it's place or the ecosystem goes unchecked. It was a good idea, but this would be the major flaw.

 

[knightzy]

the only way to sovle iy is to get rid of the non-native animals,but that wont happen so i guess we just have to live with it

 

[Greenstreet]

If we get rid of the non native then the problem they were imported to fix will strive again. The only thing you really achieve by having a nation of native animals is exactly that: a nation of native animals. The ecology will not prosper, as old problems will resurface.

But I think we are getting off the topic a bit.

But going back to farmers. I don't think you realise just how in debt alot of farmers are here, at least in QLD where I live. Australia is smack bam in the middle of the biggest drought ever recorded... Most farmers are just aiming at losing less rather than making any sort of profit.

 

[knightzy]

same down here in vic, except we farm different food,but the drought dose cause farmers to go crazy with shooting a bit,because of money loss.

 

[zrky]

I think it's the crop farmers that are having the worst time, but thinking of crops that reminded me of endangered plants. All the deforestation is a huge problem and we always hear about the animals that are becoming extinct and what not, but we never hear about the plants that are becoming extinct. Perfect examples are the orchid that only flowers about once every 100 years and the Rafflesia which is very limited in it's numbers, what do you guys think about those?

 

[DtJ Jungle]

It is hard to see the fauna of Earth to be destroyed, but we can't always be looking out for the good of all species. Humans have to look after themselves first, even if it means wiping out an animal species that could potentially harm them, or clearing forests because there just isn't enough space for others to live. Obviously there can be a lot of rebuttal against animal extinction, and I am not for killing animals for sport. But sometimes we need to look to our basic needs first.

 

[Greenstreet]

On to the flora side of things, I find it almost equally depressing when such a beautiful plant or tree slowly dies out. Because it's generally easier to sustain plantlife rather than the temperental breeding patterns of some animals, maybe that's why its not looked upon with the same weight...

 

[zrky]

That is a good point green, but they can also be more delicate to weather changes, so I think both are big problems.