Should conservationists allow some species to die out?
Hugh Possingham a ecologist and mathematician from the University of Queensland in Australia explains, "some endangered species are far more likely to recover than others, so we should identify those and save as many as we can." The California Condor probably wouldn't make the list.
David Jachowski a wildlife biologist from the University of Missouri gives an opposing view saying, "rare or declining species are typically poorly studied, so the easiest to conserve might not be the most ecologically important."
Both sides agree that a successful recovery program must understand why a species is in trouble in the first place and identify solutions to fix the problem before a species is reintroduced in the wild.
The original Endangered Species Act (ESA fact sheet) was passed in 1973. Is it time for it to be revised? If so, what criteria do you think it should be based on?
See the following links for more information.
http://discover.coverleaf.com/discovermagazine/201103?pg=17#pg17
Discover Magazine
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/
Posts must be a minimum of five sentences.
Please sign your first name and period only!
I think that we should save species that are being threatened such as the one in the article because if we don't try to save them, they might get extinct. I don't agree with David Jachowski because
ReplyDeleteactually I think that the declining creatures are getting more attention, since there are few of them. I think thst Hugh Possingham is right about some endangered species more likely recovering. We must try to save species in danger with less money. We can try to save these animals in many and different ways.
Aditi in period 6 I agree with you because Hugh Possingham is right about some endangered species but we could always try and save them or give them a new environment where they have adaptations.
DeleteI agree some animals we should save others we should see what happens. Animals depend on one and other to survive if its a bird eating a mouse or a bird cleaning off a crocodile of parasites. We need to keep animals alive without them nothing would be pollinated and flowers would die.
DeleteI feel that biologists SHOULD NOT LET SOME SPECIES DIE OUT!!!! Some animals may depend on some organisms for food, shelter, etc. If some were to die out,animals that are dependent on them will die,and organisms dependent on THEM will die, and so on. We should stress the importance of wildlife and therefore conservationist groups could get many donations to fund for shelters, etc.Therefore, we should try our best not to let some organisms die out.
ReplyDeleteP.S. I am not a huge animal lover
Anumitha in period 7 I totally agree with you that some depend on others. Do not let some species die out!
DeleteI guess you have a point with the chain reaction idea
Deletei really agree to with Anumitha period 7 our town doesnt have money to waste on this we should let animals do as they please if its their time to die then LET THEM DIE it is not our fault that they are not adapting to their enviorment
DeleteI agree completely. As soon as one animal dies out more and more could follow. Eventually it could lead up to us. We should save the animals critical to others survival to help keep more species alive. Even though we dont have all the money in the world we should still try.
DeleteI agree with Hugh Possingham. He came up with a good idea to save what are going to live. I think we should spend our money on the animals that have just recently become endangered rather than the ones that are almost extinct. If we spend all of our money, we wont have enough to spend on the future endangered species.We should spend our money on the animals that are more likely to survive.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sarah since if we leave species to die out and not help them survive we might have a world with no birds or maybe even no dogs or cats. but we should spend most of our money on animals that are almost extinct not newly extinct. since if we waste our money on newly extinct animals then almost extinct animals could actually go extinct so it would have a opposite effect. that's why i agree with Sarah
Deletei think you should let them die out they do not have what it needs to survive. just let them do it on their own . maybe let them adapt. but if it is from us peplo hunting them or ruining their environment then we should help them. like a polar bear we can help it because its because of global warming. but if its because of nothing and has an absolutely clean and perfect environment i think there should be no human interference.
ReplyDeleteI think it is a good idea to see if they adapt, but I dont think we should just stay out of it at all. If we dont do anything about it, a lot fo animals will become extinct. We need to focus on the animals that are more likely to survive in the endangered animals.
DeleteI think the wildlife people should save some species, and let some species go. Maybe if we save a species, we might find out it had something useful for a human. Maybe we don't have to do much about the animals who are endangered and who will thrive on their own. Instead, we could invest our money on birds who won't be able to make it on their own and we could save them. Some species we might not be able to save, but we can always try and save another one.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Brooke because if we spend all of our money on the animals that are all extinct, we will have no money for the new endangered species. If we spend money on the ones that are almost extinct, I think it should be on the babies. The babies are more likely to live if we help them adapt.
Deletei agree with brooke period 7 because she is right we could let some species go and we dont have enough money to do it anyway we should put our money to good use.
DeleteI think that they should save the animals that they can. they dont have to save all of them. We aren't the richest country in the world you know
ReplyDelete-Brooke Delaney Period 8
I agree, America just dosent have the funds to support the animals
DeleteI agree with the students who believe that we should in fact save animals that are being harmed because the species may die out if we do not try to save them. But yet all species can not be saved, we can save the ones we can and have the ability to help.
ReplyDeleteI think that they should let them die off, but before they do they should do as much research as they can. Because if they let them die off it would be hard to classify these animals. America isn't the richest country in the world, in fact we are in a huge dephecit. And the fact that it costs 4 million dollars a year dosent help at all.
ReplyDeleteI think that they should just try to at least save some animals. The species that we should focus on saving are the important ones that are going extinct. If it was common animal then i would just say to do whatever you could but, it doesn't mean that if the animal is not endangered that you shouldn't save it you should but you would try to focus on the ones that really need help.
ReplyDeleteI think we shouldn't let endangerd species die out.Although the save the California condor costed 4 millon dollors it brought them back.I can see why people would want to not put fundings in to projects they do help.Hopefully in the futer the people who think this can see how much it helps.
ReplyDeleteI think the biologists should save some species but let some species take a natural path. But save as many animals as possible. if animals die out say... a mouse, then snakes wouldnt have food to survive and soon die out, than owls wouldnt have any food and soon die out. So as you can see one extinction of an animal could affect many animal maybe even us. So save as many animals as possible especially those that are crucial to other species survival.
ReplyDeleteI think they should save the species that they can. That one specie may be a vital part of the environment. Or it may be food for another species and without food they might die off. Maybe that certain species is useful to humans. We won't really know until they are gone. We don't need to save them all, Just the ones we can. We need to address the problem. If it's our fault we should stop whatever is endangering them.
ReplyDelete-Fiona McHugh Period 2