Me too, would be a even more fucked up place if it was an “all human and those animals we like to eat” place.
Oh and the last Rainbow Warrior, a real rusting hulk, recently was struck by underwater graffitists (damned if I can find a link though) so even after being sunk it’s “game on” apparently.
Not much we can do to save the Dodo…but through a casual bit of googling for a question here, I now am feeling deeply passionate about the kakapo.
No use in just waving bye bye to endangered species is there?
Absolutely not. But keep in mind how many endangered species there are. Then temper that with how many new species are discovered every year. I’m all for conservation, if it’s done sensibly. But to tie every species into some profit-driven “cause” to guilt-trip humans into writing a check to an organization is what turned me off from “green” groups. Just don’t tell me it’s to save the planet.
If we screw it up bad enough, nature will say, “See ya later”. The enviromental’s are into this to preserve human life. 3 centuries after we’re gone, the 5 species of beetles will evolve into 50 more. Multiply that by every spcies of beetle right now, and you get my point. Life lives, even if it isn’t humans.
And to take that further, I wonder if anyone in Nagasaki or Hiroshima would testify to life finding a way to adapt. Seems that’s the main concern here. A little natural product from Mother Earth being released back to Mom shouldn’t throw off the orbit. If it was made by earth, it can’t be all bad. I mean, it’s organic!
Yeah … just look at Vesuvius! Mount St. Helens! Mudslides! Hurricanes! Typhoons! Earthquakes! Why, just off the top of my head I can name five benefits to having a magnitude 8 earthquake!
Re: Hiroshima and Nagasaki, my understanding was that a few folks affected by that ended up dying in lieu of adapting to it. Ain’t that just the worst luck ever?
Oh Bugger! I agree with you…(it’s not a bugger to agree with you) but what you said makes sense (unfortunately). Your sense considered, I really do think it is a horrible inditement if we don’t do all we can do to save those species we have put in jeopardy.
How can we sit there with hands under arses and not try to save those species? Sure we are probably bound to fail, our success means their failure…but we have to try? (yes that is a question)
Of course we can try. (In some cases we’re obligated to do so.) For instance, take the California Condor, the Bald Eagle and the American Bison. All were on the verge of extinction because of humans. Through conservation, all 3 are well on their way back to healthy populations. I can really get behind that kind of cause.
Where the greens lose me is when they want to hold up building housing because of a mouse. Or a species of beetle. Hell, I’ve even seen multi-million dollar projects halted because of a certain kind of wildflower. I look at these kinds of things and just shake my head knowing that without humans around, there would still be hundreds of extinctions every year. Only to be replaced by new species.
I don’t have a dog in this fight, just thought I’d give a mini-rant on the hipocracy. 
So, what makes the California Condor more special than some mouse sub-species?
There’s condors in South America, too. Species go extinct all the time, you know.
Bit of a devil’s advocate, I know. But you either don’t care, or you want to save them all, IMHO.
Or perhaps should we rephrase it: we’ll only save animals as long as it doesn’t inconvenience us? In which case, my point stands: that means you don’t particularly care, unless it requires zero effort on your part. Then you’re for conservation.
Kind of an easy way out, if you ask me.
I don’t agree with where duffer draws the line, but I think a line can be sensibly drawn, Coldy.
I don’t think there’s much point in attempting to save the spangled blue footed rock frog, or the north eastern red billed cootabilly, but I do think that broad habitat destruction converting vast expanses into monocultures, or entirely wiping out complex ecosystems, is dangerous.
In other words there’s no particular point in saving a species here or there: species come, species go. But us humans are a whole other thing: our ability to wipe out a couple of hundred species in a few years far outstrips natures ability to generate new species. And ultimately I don’t think that reducing this planet to a small number of species is likely to be beneficial. Or at least we don’t know enough about the potential consequences of that to take the risk.
I don’t agree that it is about risk, that devalues the question. Species and biodiversity are an end in themselves.
That said I recognise that some degree of extinction is inevitable. But even accepting this is regrettable. Princhester consider the other countries I know about to an extent, European ones & Hong Kong. Green and well-watered, but man, they are deserts. 3 species of tree, a couple of bush varieties and so forth. 1 or 2 birds and 6 varieties of inexplicably popular native vermin. You really have to experience it to hate it.
So even in urban Brisvegas you can count your biodiverse blessings, but don’t go taking them for granted.
I distrust Greenpeace for the same reason that I deplore anyone with such polarized views (including several members of this board). They are incapable of rationally considering an opinion which diverges at all from their narrow, pre-conceived ideas. The OP highlights the hypocrisy which becomes inevitable from such a bigoted perspective.
Cerowyn I’m primarily a shipping lawyer. I deal with issues like this fairly regularly. The amount of jobsworth paperwork ship staff have to deal with is just mind boggling. To assume this incident shows Greanpeace to be hypocritical you have to assume intent. But it is quite possible (even likely) that what occurred was a minor oversight.
The first thing I do whenever I get new instructions to act in relation to a ship is look up on the available on-line databases its management and other history. When I do that, the first screen that comes up shows whether the ship has had a violation of this sort. In 14 years in this business I can’t think of a single ship that operates internationally that I’ve ever come across that hasn’t had a paperwork violation of one sort or another. Even ships that are very well staffed, well maintained and operated by first class owners.
This incident gets blown out of all proportion because the perp was Greenpeace, but it’s extremely minor and beaurocratic stuff.
And sevastopol, that’s what I said already.
One of the coolest thing about the SDMB is how we genuinely have real experts at hand to provide some answers.
Interesting what a little perspective will do. Thanks, Princhester.
I’m not an environmental scientist, but I do know that some are concerned about the way that species interrelate. We don’t always know what effect the extinction of the dung beetle is going to have on human life.
Not that that’s likely to happen around here…
Small world.
I should add that there is no doubt Greenpeace’s actions are not law abiding (even beyond not having the right paperwork) given that they skipped port under detention. Greenpeace have never been particulary law abiding, I suppose.
And further, if they actually do not have appropriate spill response gear etc and actually do not have proper insurance cover, then “hypocritical” is what they are, no two ways about it.
But they seem only to have been charged with “failing to file”, which is fairly minor red tape.
Real enlightened point of view there, *Duffer!
You wouldn’t happen to be a dittohead, would ya?
I’m sure you’d be just as forgiving of Exxon.
Okay, after reading page 2, I’ll take that back.
:o
How does a mouse or a beetle hold a less important place in the enviroment? Generaly the smaller the creature the more important it’s place is.
Spiders are yucky…without them we would be in trouble, knee deep in bugs. Flies…EWW, but without maggots we would be knee deep in carcases.
Eagles might rid of us of a small furry mammal or two and Bisons are good browsers but how are they more important then any other creature.
That wildflower you object to saving may be the food for the insect, that supports the mouse that feeds the Condor.
We have fucked off so many species, that those hardy enough enough to survive in spite of us deserve a helping hand.
We owe help first to those of our own species. Those who are in trouble, wherever they are.
I’m not a Greenpeace radical. I believe we need to look after people who are suffering first. But if we cannot have compassion for the mice, beetles, condors and kakapo then we have no hope.