To Save A Species.

[kkstrong]

I was watching an episode of 20/20 about the endangered species list.

Basically to sum it up they concluded that the best way to save a species is to make it a profitable market to humans. That is to say, "We have to hunt, eat, and trade endangered animals in order to save them." The theory here is that if you make the market valuable to humans, humans will naturally protect their product. Through protecting their product, the species will be saved. Giving humans an incentive (i.e. profit) naturally protects the product.

Proof in Concept:

Rhino's in Southern Africa. The government allowed land owners to own the Rhino's in order for profit in tourism. The land owners protect their product from poachers, and the Rhino's population has been on the rise. Governments initially tried to ban all poaching of Rhino's, but without a reason to protect the Rhino's it did little good. What has proven to be successful by example is in fact letting the land owners own the rhino in their enclosed areas. Suddenly each landowner had a profit to lose. They did whatever necessary to keep the Rhino's alive (i.e. protecting from poachers, who are not so to say, "playing by the rules.") They don't tolerate poaching because they want to keep their income source alive. It is the same with elephants in Botswana.

Bison in Montana in the early 20th century: Millions once roamed in North America, and in the early 1900's they were almost extinct. No ranchers had an incentive to protect them. People just killed them and sold their hides. Solution: People began to claim Bison, by eating them and selling them. Ranchers closed them in to protect from other trappers encroaching on their product. They are thriving now that they has become a product, and people care for their product. There are now half a million Bison in North America.

Tigers bones in China are thought to have medicinal value for regular aches and pains, and it is the common treatment. International Law has placed bans on owning, hunting, or using Tigers for profit. More than 2000 tigers still live in the wild. Is it just that thousands more have vanished because there are bans? The demand is there from the public in China that can only be satiated by poachers, who are otherwise uncaring of how many Tigers are killed. Would it not just be that farming Tigers would meet the demand?

Does America have anywhere near a shortage of chickens, beef, pork? No. All these species have been protected through the ideals of making a profit. It is all because people have a reason to protect them that they thrive. If we make animals a marketable product, they will be saved. Where you profit from animals, animals thrive.

Is believing that farming (including hunting, eating, and otherwise using) animals and creating a market of it will save them magical thinking, you decide.

[Lenny]

I completely agree with the opening statement, and the entire argument.

Animals thrive when humans find a mass need for them (like food, jewelery or whatever), so I'd say that's a very good way to keep animals alive.
The only problem is some people don't want to eat things like possum, so what market is there for them?

[ska]

I completely agree with the opening statement, and the entire argument.

Animals thrive when humans find a mass need for them (like food, jewelery or whatever), so I'd say that's a very good way to keep animals alive.
The only problem is some people don't want to eat things like possum, so what market is there for them?

Possum Coats. ;)

[SlappyMcGee]

Poaching is such an adorable word for such a serious subject.

[MattKestrel]

Well, I guess once people as a species got over qualms about eating stuff like giraffe meat and toucan fillets it'd be viable. Of course, that also depends on whether these animals actually taste any good. Otherwise, no-one would want to eat them, and the plan falls through.

[T3chno]

Poaching is such an adorable word for such a serious subject.

Yeah, it is.


Oh, and what good comes from platypuses? Nothing, therefore, they should be extinct.

[Atilla]

Oh, and what good comes from platypuses? Nothing, therefore, they should be extinct.

Are you kidding? Platypi are like instant tourism dollars. Also they are generally considered cute, which greatly increases your chances of survival when humans are involved.

[kkstrong]

@Lenny

Are Possums considered endangered? I was only trying to spark debate among how to save a species, not any species in particular though.

[T3chno]

Oh, and what good comes from platypuses? Nothing, therefore, they should be extinct.

Are you kidding? Platypi are like instant tourism dollars. Also they are generally considered cute, which greatly increases your chances of survival when humans are involved.

Wait - people pay to see those things?! :O

[Amadeus]

I think what you said is true, and in our situation its probably the best solution out there. But in a perfect world, it shouldn't have to come to it ya know?

[bobaganuesh_2]

complete bullshit. damn human nature

[Nexx]

It's a good point, but I believe the point of saving an endangered species is to save them in the wild. Saving an endangered species by fencing it in is seems like a rather misplaced notion to me. But then again, trying to stop the poachers without that measure is doomed to fail. *sigh*

[remm]

@Lenny

Are Possums considered endangered? I was only trying to spark debate among how to save a species, not any species in particular though.

In Australia, possums are protected.
In New Zealand, possums are hated and hunted down because they kill native trees (Rata) and birds (impact on almost all).

But how to save a species. Whales. They get hunted because it's profitable, and the Humpback was very nearly extinct before it was protected. So that sort of approach doesn't work in this case.
Actually, whale watching profits off the whales' existence, if there were no whales, there would be no business. Protecting the whales protects the business. So your concept works there.

///Shameless advertising/// :D


There are probably many cases in history where a species was hunted to extinction for profits, so clearly 20/20's way of saving species doesn't work in all cases. Something else is required I guess. . .

[jean-luc]

I think in most cases people are simply too short-sighted for the "make it profitable" method to work. Too many times we've hunted species to, or nearly to, extinction.

[kkstrong]

Sorry to revive this thread from a month and a half ago.. BUT

I have to give a 10 minute *persuasive* speech on this subject for my college oral communications class. Anything you guys say on the pro or negative view on this would really help me out. Please /really/ go as in depth as possible.

Thanks.

Your lovely Valentine,

kkstrong

[otters~1]

kk, I strongly recommend that you read Last Chance To See, by Douglas Adams and Mark Carwardine, if you haven't already. It is a funny but moving book. Also a quick read--you could get it done before your talk and quote from it.

Background info.

[Lenny]

Just quickly, because I was out all day and now I'm meant to already be aleep; I think the only reason that humans would save a species is because they have a vested interest in them. I know that's basically what I said before, but that's pretty much the extent of my idea.
For example, we farm animals for food, breed them for show animals or fur, or cage animals because they are of interest to us. Even if an animal has no purpose other than looking nice we still protect it so we can show it off, and generally exploit it by getting money. If we have no need for something we make no need to save it - it may flourish anyway, however we did not care if that happened.

So yeah, that's all of my opinion really. Vested interests and nothing else.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

Just quickly, because I was out all day and now I'm meant to already be aleep; I think the only reason that humans would save a species is because they have a vested interest in them. I know that's basically what I said before, but that's pretty much the extent of my idea.
For example, we farm animals for food, breed them for show animals or fur, or cage animals because they are of interest to us. Even if an animal has no purpose other than looking nice we still protect it so we can show it off, and generally exploit it by getting money. If we have no need for something we make no need to save it - it may flourish anyway, however we did not care if that happened.

So yeah, that's all of my opinion really. Vested interests and nothing else.

As a disclaimer, I've only just started on my morning coffee.
All I could think of while I read this was pandas in vests. Adorable.

[blue_tetris]

Our livestock animals are thriving so well today because we need their species alive and not extinct. How well do you figure cattle do out in the wild? How about chickens? Not so hot, really. Of course, PETA will tell you we gotta set all our livestock and pets free. Domesticity was the best lives that these animals were ever going to live.

See, us humans, we're a cultured sort of animal. We wait until meat is a ripe old age before we eat it, because we like the taste. Wild cats just want to survive--say hello to a yummy, 8-month-old, wild.... cow? Alright, we'll take it, mreow!

[kkstrong]

I feel this is an important article to put here. Here is where I got the idea for the whole speech. I'm hoping by gathering other evidence through these forums, and my own research that it doesn't become a direct plagarism.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/AmazingAnima ... 068&page=1

[kkstrong]

Wrote a Speech for my class on the topic. Ran 9:33, yes I'm aware there are some grammatical errors and some flow issues, but that was all fixed while I was orating it. I just couldn't be bothered fixing it all post-speech. Also, the MLA isn't right...

There are 2,000 tigers left in the wild. 350,000 bison. 24 billion chickens. Do any of these numbers startle you? They would if I told you that in the year 1900, there were 100,000 tigers. In 1850, there were 75 million bison. In 1800, there were less than 1 million chickens in the world! These figures sure startle me. So what is it exactly that is killing these tigers and saving the bison and chickens? Captivity! Captivity is what saves endangered animals. Endangered Animals are going extinct, despite efforts to save them through international bans. So instead today I propose a different approach to saving the animals! Let’s eat them! Today we will discuss the problems associated with saving endangered animals, then move on to the causes for their endangerment, and finally end with how to save the animals from extinction.

Tigers are going extinct, fast. There were once more than 100,000 of these beautiful creatures, but due to poachers trying to make a quick profit, the number of tigers in the world is diminishing. According to an article published by the Los Angeles Times on July 13th, 2009, tigers in China are killed for their skins, and mostly, to get crushed tiger bone which is made into a paste that's supposed to kill pain. International bans have prohibited the sale of any tiger part, which you would expect to have worked. However, since the ban has been put in place, more than 75% of the tigers have died off in less than 20 years. In fact, the bans have only hurt the tigers overall. The result of these international bans has been that the tiger is worth more on the black market because it is illegal to use. That is not exactly what you might expect from a ban designed to protect the tigers. The international ban on the sale of all products made of endangered animals is not the only reason why the population of wild tigers is declining. The culture of the Chinese people is also big factor in the loss of endangered tigers. According to a segment of BBC News, which aired June 29th, 2009 in the United Kingdom, the tiger has been a Chinese cultural and religious icon for several thousand years. The tiger, in China, is venerated, feared, and revered by the Chinese people. With a 33 year old ban, you can’t change a 5,000 year old culture, and that is just how it is. It is magical thinking to think that you could change a culture overnight, especially one as longstanding as the Chinese is and whose roots are so embedded in the use of tiger. In a nationwide Chinese survey conducted by the Wildlife Conservationist Society in January 2009, 90% of the public in China supports the international ban. However, half of those people who took the survey also said in a later survey they use products that contain tiger anyways. If the bans don’t change anything, and seem to just make the problem worse, then why are the international bans still in place, you ask? Well I am here today asking all of you the same question. The problems of the endangered tiger in China is so deep rooted that the only viable approach to save them is the metaphor, “If you can’t beat em’, join em’.” Now that we have looked at the solutions for saving the tiger in China that have not worked, I will explain my proposed method of saving endangered animals.


To save an endangered species, you have to make that species a profitable enterprise to humans. For this to happen, the international bans which whose intent is to save the endangered tiger, needs to be lifted. According to NPR, broadcasted on November 28th, 2006, Tiger farms exist all over China, legally. However, they are not allowed to sell any tiger parts due to the international bans. These farms exist only because their owners hope the Chinese government will lift the ban on tiger sales. The only way these farmers stay above their profit margin is by making their farms open to viewing for the public. The Chinese government allows and encourages these farms to exist, however due to western influence on international law; the ban has remained intact, at the cost of tiger population. One of the main hopes for the tiger farms is to reduce the need for the tigers biggest threat. According to an article in MeriNews Newspaper, published on October 3rd, 2008, the biggest threat to the endangered tiger in China is poaching. One of the main hopes of the tiger farms in China is to make the need for poaching extinct itself. This can be achieved because with the legalizing of tiger sales, tiger farm products can flood the market with legal tiger products. The main reason that poachers kill animals is for profit, not because they hate animals. By making the poacher’s high profit go away through flooding the market with tiger products, poaching in near eliminated. Thus saving the tigers in the wild who are endangered. Not only is poaching a huge problem for the tigers, but tiger farms are actually good for the tigers. In an interview with Dr. Anonymous, a member of the American Board of Veterinary Practitioners, and a specialist in feline care, conducted July 21, 2009, he states, “…felines are often more healthy after having been boarded in a specialized area than before they were boarded.” Although Dr. Anonymous doesn’t have any direct experience with tiger care, he also stated in the interview, “…most felines as a species behave in similar ways in similar stimuli.” It is his professional opinion that tiger farms, provided put in the care of a qualified and knowledgeable owner, would be better for the tigers with regards to health. As earlier stated, roughly half the people in China have used tiger products, and half have not. The most widely used argument for the people who haven’t used tiger products is legality. If the international ban is lifted, this is no longer a problem, and the crime rate goes down, making law enforcement easier. Now that we have examined the tiger, and my proposed method to save the species, let’s take a look at some other species in which this method has already worked.


This method of saving endangered animals has been a proven method to work before all around the world. Some examples of this method are the Rhino in Africa, and the Bison in North America. According to 20/20 which aired on May 8th, 2009, Bison were once all over North America. The masses suddenly started to use the bison for a main source of food, and in less than 50 years, they were nearly extinct. High in the mountains of Montana, many ranchers raise bison. 65 million of these animals roamed North America in 1800, but just 100 years ago they were almost extinct, with their numbers dwindled to about 1,000. Why? Because no one owned them, no ranchers had an incentive to save them. The Bison are now protected because they began to be farmed. Some ranchers saw the profit in selling bison, and it turned out they were right. Not only has this method worked with Bison in North America, but also with Rhinos in Zimbabwe. According to Voice of America, a Zimbabwean newspaper, Africa is trying to get serious about saving their endangered species. This article was published on July 21, 2008. After years of trying to save the Rhino, the local conservationist groups have declared through proof what has actually worked. What finally worked, they said was letting land owners own them, and make money off of tourism. Suddenly each tribe had money on the line, and incentive to protect their own rhinos on their private land. Those indifferent tribesmen became fierce protecters of it's tribal rhinos. The tribes don't tolerate poaching because they want to keep the animals alive, and their profits at maximum. That is the way to save wildlife. And it's worked. There are now several times more rhinos than there ever were because they live on private lands.


It has become abundantly clear to me that the best and only way to truly save an endangered species is to make them a profitable market. That is to say to use them, publicize them, or even to eat them. This is a serious issue that effects us all. If all these endangered species are heading towards extinction because of the international ban, then the international ban should be lifted. I therefore propose that there should be legislation made allowing the free trade of all endangered animal to all who are qualified. Today we have looked problems surrounding the possible extinctions of some endangered species, a prospective solution, and some examples of the solution in action and working. Without all these endangered animals, not only do we lose vast amounts of knowledge, a huge market, but we also lose these animals, which I hope I can speak for the masses in saying; “nobody wants the extinction of any animal because of humans.”


 


Works Cited

21 July 2009 <http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleash ... -cubs.html >.

21 July 2009 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8124176.stm >.

China's Surveyed Tiger. 21 July 2009 <http://www.wcs.org/search-results.aspx? ... ey%20Tiger >.

Radio - NPR. 22 July 2009 <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... Id=6546127 >.

Tigers under serious threat of extinction. 22 July 2009 <http://www.merinews.com/catFull.jsp?articleID=142438 >.

Interview – Dr. John Abella, Aloha Animal Hospital

TV - To Save a Species. 1. ABC. 22 July 2009 <http://abcnews.go.com/2020/AmazingAnima ... 068&page=1 >.

Newspaper - 22 July 2009 <http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-07-21-voa55.cfm >.

[otters~1]

Ahem. Works cited:


forum.therealn.com

Thanks.