A lot of money has been devoted to the protection of very few species. Is it worth it?

Should we work so hard to save these animals?

Would it be better to use our resources for a better cause?

Would it be better to focus preservation efforts on whole ecosystems rather than individual species?

just trying to spark some discussion and help for an essay

7 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Should we work so hard to save these animals?

    If it is so "hard" to conserve and rehabilitate their habitats we should not have destroyed them so "easily" in the past. A lot of the people involved in the work do not see the work as "hard" ... they see the work as very rewarding.

    Also I would suggest the "hardest" thing for the public is that many people have to consider "others" in their decision making, i.e. conserving the environment is a unselfish act that may not provide any direct benefit to you (especially any monetary gain). Also many people view the environment as a means to an end, i.e. it is there for our use (and abuse) at any cost to the environment.

    Would it be better to use our resources for a better cause?

    "Better" is a very subjective word. You may query the cost-benefit relationship of saving a particular species, i.e. is more economically viable (and environmentally beneficial) to focus conservation efforts at a ecosystem scale or an individual species level (such as your next question). Or perhaps the prioritisation of which habits to conserve first may be delineated by a cost-benefit analysis (i.e. if we spend $X on panda habits we save Y pandas. However if we spend half the money we can save twice as many bengal tigers ... therefore it may be suggested that funding would be "better" spent on Bengal tigers at the moment. However, would also have to focus in prospective costs of species conservation in the future.

    Would it be better to focus preservation efforts on whole ecosystems rather than individual species?

    Typically they are "conservation" efforts not preservation. Conservation of habits (ecosystems) is typically very important for any in-situ conservation efforts, therefore would usually be a major factor for any funding. Individual specie conservation efforts are typically required when either habitat loss is too severe (not large enough to support populations), or there is some other reason that is inhibiting population growths (perhaps drought, introduced pest, breeding issues). This is typically when species based funding is required (and ex-situ conservation is the better means of enabling the species surivival).

    Generally a combination of habitat and individual species conservation management is required. The balance is sometimes hard to manage or get right. As with any environmental management plans there is a need to have adaptive management skills (and mistakes need to be learnt from).

  • 9 years ago

    It's not "a lot" of money - actually, it's a tiny amount. Protecting the species most often means protecting habitats, so species protection does include protecting ecosystems. You can't preserve a species if it has nowhere to live and nothing to eat.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    I continuously bid finally minute... or a minimum of on a similar day if I wont have the skill to get to pc at end time. It annoys me whilst theres like 4 days to pass and its already close on your meant max bid!!

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    sad

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 9 years ago

    Not enough money is being devoted to protect animals.

  • 9 years ago

    Yes it worth it

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    no its bs

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.