Choosing the species that we need to conserve is a difficult and almost impossible task, as the Planet Earth episode talked about, we never truly know how important a species is until they are gone. The tiny bugs and critters in our dirt complete important tasks that we may not know about until they are gone. This goes the same for larger species of mammals-- if a species is wiped out, it will disturb the balance of that ecosystem drastically. We must do our best to evaluate the different functions of individual species to assess which species are most important to each ecosystem-- hopefully the idea of hotspots works out (spending money on conserving one species affects and alternately conserves all in an ecosystem). Although the value of a particular species is impossible to determine, the species that has the biggest influence on the ecosystem is most valuable in species conservation to save.
Unfortunately, the species that we tend to conserve are the large, fuzzy, cute mammals because they appeal emotionally to the public and thus gain more support. Wildlife conservation groups also play into this trend because they need financial support and backing, and they realize that they need to appeal to what the public will actually listen to--the sadness of a polar bear drowning from exhaustion in search for food. Consequently, the important bugs and worms and amphibians in our ecosystems, or the plants that are necessary for certain ecosystems to function properly and survive are gone ignored. These are the species that need conserving the most, as they typically have a larger niche than that of the polar bears or panda bears. These are the species that feed and affect many other species of that particular ecosystem by being an important plant or by decomposing the rubbish on the forest floors into fertile soil for more food to grow.
I'm a firm believer in the idea that everything happens for a reason, but at the same time, I know that the rapid and increasing decline in practically all species across the world is much more than just being a natural part of that species evolutionary process--this is because humans have taken over the world, quite literally. There are particular cultures that are born and raised believing that they need to repopulate the world, with these outdated mindsets, we are causing serious problems with overpopulation. Not only have we expanded into and destroyed the greater majority of pristine nature/wilderness to make room for houses or for materials to build houses, but then there are people living in America averaging a carbon footprint of 6.5 earths as a nation--because we can. The decline of species is undoubtedly human induced.
Introduced species always cause problems because they are above the niche of the ecosystem, have no natural predators, and their prey are not adapted to survive against them--I believe that we should eradicate introduced species because they threaten the survival of entire ecosystems. The only reason an introduced species should be conserved is if it has lived in that ecosystem long enough to have established a niche and is not overpowering and threatening the ecosystem's survival; however, I cannot think of any circumstances like this.
Balancing the needs of humans with the needs of wildlife becomes a tricky topic, particularly when dealing with the survival of a starving family versus the survival of a rare and expensive animal/an opportunity for dinner. We must do our best as humans now to be aware to not overpopulate--only replace ourselves when having children. If we have the means, to live as green as we can. To be aware not to bring over foreign species to an area where it will take over and threaten the ecosystems. We all just need to open our eyes and minds to do what we can to work side by side with wildlife.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that there are species that we don't know their value until they are gone. There is no way to know the importance of all the species. I also agree that the species that better the ecosystem are the most important to preserve. Those in turn affect mankind and extend our survival. I never thought about how the publicized endangered species relate to the "cute" animals. Somehow, people need to become more aware of the species that keep the ecosystem alive...education?
ReplyDeleteIt is easy for us in the United States, in a country that is in a stage 4 economy with all the benefits of birth control and healthcare, to criticize the extinction of species based on overpopulation. We need to look at the countries that are in stage 2 development that are poor lower developed countries with lack of food, water, healthcare, and birth control. People with an expected life span half ours do not have the luxury to consider what is best for their ecosystem; they are focused on their next meal. Some of the issues that are in this world are human induced but not by choice, by necessity in order to survive. As those societies move up the economic ladder and become more prosperous, they will be able to concern themselves with things like ecosystems and species.
The United States needs to be the leader in education of the conservation of species to countries that are developing and help them to expand their knowledge on the subject. We need to do what we can because we are already a modern developed country. We can set the example so that when the lower developed countries mature, they will become aware of the responsibilities of preserving the ecosystem.
I agree that the introduced species that are not harmful to ecosystems should continue and the ones that are harmful should be destroyed.
I think that it is a good idea to only replace yourselves to help control overpopulation. Although, the US can only be an advocate for the policy because in reality the US population is only a small fraction of global population. The rest of the world would have to follow our lead.
I agree that the best form of conservation is the hotspot method. We need to realize that we are less trying to save individual species and more trying to save ecosystems. I thought it was really interesting when our professor said that all of the people in the world could be fit somewhat comfortably in the state of Texas. When I think about that fact and compare it to the amount of space that people today take up with all of our different cultures and "necessities" it is really disappointing. I honestly think that people have started to make good progress, maybe even just people in the United States, but that So many people are completely inconsiderate of the environment.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of introduced species is one that I never really considered as a huge problem before. It really is though and it can obviously be very damaging to ecosystems. I think it is important to realize that the best method of conserving species is to minimize our impact as much as "humanly" possible.