greenexpander.com— Last year, studies shown that there are at least 35 different animals with world populations of under 1000. But which are the rarest, the animals on the brink of extinction?
Oct 1, 2007View in Crawl 4
the thing is that preventing extinction is our way of saving ourselves. it will help to prevent overpopulation preserve resources. Prevent degradation. there are many, many human benefits that come under the umbrella of protecting each species. it is best to think of these species as canaries. they let us know when we've gotten in over our heads.
Yeah it has had a small populations in the past. Living on he Chatham Islands, which are quite isolated, would be a tough place to thrive for any species.Maybe I am missing your point though, you said "Man doesn't seem to have impacted this species in anything but a positive way.". Since you have read the Wikipedia article I am sure you saw the sentence "it evolved in the absence of mammalian predators". Who do you think introduced the mammalian predators that caused the Black Robins latest brush with extinction? It was Man kind. So if you call reducing a population to only 5 a "positive" I guess you are quite correct. In my opinion you have an odd definition of what a positive effect is though...Please don't ever try to have a "positive" effect on my life.
Thanks, BabaRamDass, you explain what I meant to say just perfectly :-) As for us shooting snow leopards.. I'm pretty sure the skins made fine boots and jackets.And the buffalo's, wasn't the goal (need!) behind that to kill off the food supplies of native Americans?Even if it's just for "entertainment" (hunting, which I dislike personally) it's a need for a certain thrill. We are animals. We kill animals. It's a natural thing to do, and in a hundred thousand years, nobody will give a crap about us "ruining" whatever you think we are ruining.
staticblakeOct 2, 2007
I count fish and shellfish also.
kaplanfxOct 2, 2007
Too late, they are already extinct.-kap
evanucsbOct 3, 2007
the thing is that preventing extinction is our way of saving ourselves. it will help to prevent overpopulation preserve resources. Prevent degradation. there are many, many human benefits that come under the umbrella of protecting each species. it is best to think of these species as canaries. they let us know when we've gotten in over our heads.
didgitalOct 3, 2007
pictures or it didn't happen
johnboyholmesOct 4, 2007
Yeah it has had a small populations in the past. Living on he Chatham Islands, which are quite isolated, would be a tough place to thrive for any species.Maybe I am missing your point though, you said "Man doesn't seem to have impacted this species in anything but a positive way.". Since you have read the Wikipedia article I am sure you saw the sentence "it evolved in the absence of mammalian predators". Who do you think introduced the mammalian predators that caused the Black Robins latest brush with extinction? It was Man kind. So if you call reducing a population to only 5 a "positive" I guess you are quite correct. In my opinion you have an odd definition of what a positive effect is though...Please don't ever try to have a "positive" effect on my life.
syntaxisOct 4, 2007
Thanks, BabaRamDass, you explain what I meant to say just perfectly :-) As for us shooting snow leopards.. I'm pretty sure the skins made fine boots and jackets.And the buffalo's, wasn't the goal (need!) behind that to kill off the food supplies of native Americans?Even if it's just for "entertainment" (hunting, which I dislike personally) it's a need for a certain thrill. We are animals. We kill animals. It's a natural thing to do, and in a hundred thousand years, nobody will give a crap about us "ruining" whatever you think we are ruining.
nishaaOct 24, 2007
Nope.. The guys were assh**es.(As usual)