Should Force Be Used To Save Rhinos/Others Near Extinct?

[Love Muffin88]

gummi berri

Love Muffin88

That's what she said

lol

That's what your mom said.

[Love Muffin88]

gummi berri

Love Muffin88

your mom

lol

v****a pudding!

[Love Muffin88]

gummi berri

Love Muffin88

v****a

lol

Damn straight.

[pockybot]

Eveille

marshmallowcreampie

Eveille

Chasing them away rarely works because they come back. Poaching is a literal business. They fund 'vacations' to the reserves for poor Asians, mostly from the SE region I think. Those people can come and legally, whereas already known poachers cannot, it's the same in the art/archaeology markets. So those people get into Africa under legit reasons and they are then handed suitcases with the animal parts to take out since they are less likely to be checked at security.

Markets with this much money at play are rarely simple and they are rarely run from the bottom up, that is the major issue. They are like drug cartels and they are just as hard to track down and take out. Shooting them solves the immediate problem of an animal being killed, but it doesn't really help stop the trade and the flood of would-be killers from coming on in.

I like rhinos too, I like all the popular animals honestly; but more than that, I understand that saving the large ones incidentally saves many, many smaller ones as well. That is why conservation has moved from saving a species to saving its entire habitat/ecosystem.

Pretty much all this. It's hard to get rid of poaching when it's so lucrative. Rhino horns and elephant tusks can make someone a fortune. Several other animal species along with rhinos are also killed because of beliefs that certain parts have medicinal value. (several tiger parts are used in Chinese medicine) In some countries, there are a lot of parrot smugglers because parrots go for a lot of money in the pet trade. Large macaws can run a few thousand dollars each. Animal hides can go for a good amount of money, the rarer the animal, the more money you get. Other species also get smuggled through the pet trade. Poaching is more common in poorer countries because it's one of the more lucrative ways to get money.

The irony of the macaw trade is that at the same time that they are being poached, the forest is being ripped to s**t for gold nuggets since the price spiked since 9/11. Not to mention soy plantations and lumber. Same for the tiger, especially in India with its booming population and in China with its booming industrialization and clear cutting.

That is why economics is ******** up. The rarer something is (fish, tigers, rosewoods...) the more money you can get for it. Until the last one is killed and taken for an absolute fortune and then...then what? Move on to the next thing until it too is gone. And the next, and the next. Ugh I hate economics of scarcity and how they value things like the dollar based on how rare they are.

/rage. scream

Right now China is going to town in Afghanistan. Destroying ancient buddhist monasteries and ancient sites to build all these mineral mines. Its like the US spends trillions to go to war, loses a bunch of soldiers, but its China and Arab corporations that reap all the profits

[black_wing_angel]

Why do we cling to these ideas of "we must prevent the extinction of wild animals!", like toddlers to a teddy bear?

Animals go extinct. Have since the dawn of time. Will until the end of time. ******** it.

[Mortai Gravesend]

Well if it's some stupid reason like an idiotic belief in magic, sure use force.

[Radpops]

It really just depends. If an animal in a particular environment does not adapt properly because of natural forces, then sure, extinction would have happened regardless if we intervened. However, in many cases with animals who are affected by deliberate human destruction, I think we owe it to the creature to ensure it doesn't completely die, as they are usually a vital part of their habitat.
Sigh, and this issue is very complex, as it involves economics, culture, and other human social constructs. And at the end of the day, many people may ask "so what?" if the Chinese panda dies or whatever dies, and I can see from their perspective. It really comes down to how valued that animal is to human society, as the ones with the power to prevent their extinction would see the benefits in preserving them (as I would guess, at least).
And this can apply to other living beings, not just animals.

[pockybot]

Radpops

It really just depends. If an animal in a particular environment does not adapt properly because of natural forces, then sure, extinction would have happened regardless if we intervened. However, in many cases with animals who are affected by deliberate human destruction, I think we owe it to the creature to ensure it doesn't completely die, as they are usually a vital part of their habitat.
Sigh, and this issue is very complex, as it involves economics, culture, and other human social constructs. And at the end of the day, many people may ask "so what?" if the Chinese panda dies or whatever dies, and I can see from their perspective. It really comes down to how valued that animal is to human society, as the ones with the power to prevent their extinction would see the benefits in preserving them (as I would guess, at least).
And this can apply to other living beings, not just animals.

It's a common practice of "pruning", from Alaska to Australia where they'll shoot koalas, wolves, etc if there becomes just too many of them per dense population or become a threat to livestock. So those are examples of animals when for a specific population becoming too ubiquitous in the minds of some.

But imagine if next year the news came out that there is now no more captivity free elephants or rhinos. Sure, like any news it wouldnt change anything. But it is tragic and it's preventable. Just start shooting in the direction of poachers and make it clear their antics aren't wanted.

Already people got p***y and allowed these corporations to literally clear cut and destroy large sections of the Amazon and other lush areas of the world. And in Tanzania, the government is making this massive freeway RIGHT through the Serengeti. Its like wtf, and open season on everything sacred.

I also dont want people thinking Im being racist by picking on poor Africans, as I know its non African corporations behind a lot of this evil going on

[Radpops]

pockybot

Radpops

It really just depends. If an animal in a particular environment does not adapt properly because of natural forces, then sure, extinction would have happened regardless if we intervened. However, in many cases with animals who are affected by deliberate human destruction, I think we owe it to the creature to ensure it doesn't completely die, as they are usually a vital part of their habitat.
Sigh, and this issue is very complex, as it involves economics, culture, and other human social constructs. And at the end of the day, many people may ask "so what?" if the Chinese panda dies or whatever dies, and I can see from their perspective. It really comes down to how valued that animal is to human society, as the ones with the power to prevent their extinction would see the benefits in preserving them (as I would guess, at least).
And this can apply to other living beings, not just animals.

It's a common practice of "pruning", from Alaska to Australia where they'll shoot koalas, wolves, etc if there becomes just too many of them per dense population or become a threat to livestock. So those are examples of animals when for a specific population becoming too ubiquitous in the minds of some.

But imagine if next year the news came out that there is now no more captivity free elephants or rhinos. Sure, like any news it wouldnt change anything. But it is tragic and it's preventable. Just start shooting in the direction of poachers and make it clear their antics aren't wanted.

Already people got p***y and allowed these corporations to literally clear cut and destroy large sections of the Amazon and other lush areas of the world. And in Tanzania, the government is making this massive freeway RIGHT through the Serengeti. Its like wtf, and open season on everything sacred.

I also dont want people thinking Im being racist by picking on poor Africans, as I know its non African corporations behind a lot of this evil going on

And even when the corporations or poachers are not directly killing the animals, they are slowly destroying whole habitats. My heart goes out to the white tigers affected by illegal timbering caused by contractors of Ikea. And in a lot of ways, many people don't stop and think where their stuff comes from.
In situations where supposedly a predator is overwhelming their habitat, such as the harp seal, and people go out and hunt them.. I just have that (probably) irrational feeling of sadness inside because of their perceived worth in my eyes. So this topic can get very emotional when trying to stopping or enabling these actions.

[washu_2004]

There is an easy win-win solution to this problem.

Place the horns of rhinos who have died of natural causes up for sale and use the money to improve the security of the private reserves.

[Wolf Nightshade]

Unfortunately humans place themselves above everything else. The governments would raise hell if a culture was being wiped out. However they would throw money at a species of animal and hope for the best. They simply couldn't warrant risking human lives for that of an animal. I heard in some areas of Africa they have convinced several groups that taking care of these animals will bring longer lasting financial gain. Once they are gone thats it it's over. However taking care of them brings people and allows them to make a profit off of other peoples interests. We here in America have seasons for hunting it keeps the animals healthy and safe from being totally wiped out. People who live on things made from these animals usually breed them.