|
| Thread: Endangered Species rights vs human rights |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · NEXT» |
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
posted June 13, 2013 11:35 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 06:36, 15 Jun 2013.
|
Endangered Species rights vs human rights
What do you think a government should do, if anything, when it forbids people from doing anything to endangered species that are causing harm to their property? Should rights of humans take a back seat when an endangered species is involved?
Clicky
Quote:
Residents of a small California town wish a certain endangered species would make itself scarce.
Flocks of California condors have descended upon Bear Valley Springs. Residents, who are allowed to do little to chase them away, say the huge birds peck off roof shingles, damage air conditioners and leave porches coated in droppings. And although the majestic birds, with a wingspan of nine feet, are widely admired, the gated community of about 5,200 about 80 miles north of Los Angeles has seen enough of them.
“A lot of people used to think seeing a condor was amazing,” local realtor Beth Hall told FoxNews.com. “After seeing the damage they have done, they have become less popular with people, myself included.”
Unfortunately for the residents, the birds are protected by both federal and state law, leaving them almost powerless to take action. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 66 of the remaining 417 condors live in Southern California.
____________
Revelation
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 11:41 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 23:44, 13 Jun 2013.
|
As much as I personally see value in having a species not die out (I support charity for such a cause), I think it's up to the land owner. We have a similar problem with wolves in Sweden. There are about 120 wolves in Sweden and because it's hard to get permission to shoot them, one wolf has cost half a million USD of tax money due to being constantly moved around (it keeps moving back to areas where it isn't wanted - this means it gets a lot of "free" helicopter rides).
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 12:26 AM |
|
|
|
The question is more: should the human be allowed to expand into other species natural habitat, remove forests and terraform mountains? I think no, there is no more need to prove that without other species the human can not survive. The irresponsibility the governments show when it comes to boost natality is puzzling me.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 12:52 AM |
|
|
You can make a species protected, but then if the species happens to show up and cause trouble for residents, without more discretionary legislation, it's basically "Sucks to be you". The classic and most common conflicts are related to farmers, but sometimes you get examples like this that attract attention in residential areas. Gray wolves have reached high enough populations that they'll very likely be taken off as an endangered species in Montana and instead be hunted during very limited seasons. Often times the rule of thumb is that unless it's in the extremely protected category, then you're allowed to kill it if it's on your property and screwing with you, but otherwise you can't. It's a largely unenforceable law one way or another because it's not like Ranger Rick has an army of National Park Services special ops stealth drones hovering over your house with high resolution live-feed surveillance, but then again under the current administration you might want to take that with a grain of salt. Obama's vassals have apparently ****ed more people than Ron Jeremy.
The most logical solution is to invent time travel and then exterminate any large predators in your nation prior to the 19th century so that you don't have to deal with it if you don't want to. Once peoples' existence becomes mundane enough that they start worrying about random trivial **** that nobody in the past had time to stress over, then you're pretty much screwed. Animal protection groups gonna hunt you down and **** you up.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
NoobX
Undefeatable Hero
Now, this is a paradox...
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 08:19 AM |
|
|
*My friend and I are taking a walk in a forest*
*Suddenly a wolf attacks me*
*My friend has no other option but to kill the wolf before I get killed*
*The wolf, however, is an endagered specie and my friend mustn't do it any harm*
*In the end I die and the wolf attacks my friend*
That's basicly how I see it. If a specie is exterminated, it means that it hasn't adapted. That's how it goes in the nature - if you don't keep up with it, you're gonna get dumped by it. And by dumped I mean removed from exsistance.
Humans must always find a way to make things complicated. Always.
Btw, if anyone wants to argue with me on this topic, please note that I won't give a **** about it and your post will be ignored. Thank you for reading this post.
____________
Ghost said:
Door knob resembles anus tap.
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 08:27 AM |
|
|
Flawed reasoning, Noobie. 
IMO people should protect themselves against animals that are doing harm to them and their homes, endangered species or not. That doesn't mean we should go out on a rampage and hunt down all condors in California though.
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
NoobX
Undefeatable Hero
Now, this is a paradox...
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 08:43 AM |
|
|
Quote:
IMO people should protect themselves against animals that are doing harm to them and their homes, endangered species or not. That doesn't mean we should go out on a rampage and hunt down all condors in California though.
This. However, I wouldn't mind having all of the mosquitos dead. You can't imagine what the nights look like when they come to feast on our blood...
____________
Ghost said:
Door knob resembles anus tap.
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 09:44 AM |
|
|
Without mosquitoes, thousands of plant species would lose a group of pollinators. Adults depend on nectar for energy (only females of some species need a meal of blood to get the proteins necessary to lay eggs).
On the other hand, there's the possiblity of catching a rare and powerful disease from a lousy mosquito bite. That's not funny.
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
master_learn
Legendary Hero
walking to the library
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 01:45 PM |
|
|
I also want the mosquitos dead.
But then they are not endangered specie,so go and destroy them!
____________
"I heard the latest HD version disables playing Heroes. Please reconsider."-Salamandre
|
|
Galileo
Known Hero
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 02:20 PM |
|
|
Quote:
That's basicly how I see it. If a specie is exterminated, it means that it hasn't adapted. That's how it goes in the nature - if you don't keep up with it, you're gonna get dumped by it. And by dumped I mean removed from exsistance.
But it is humans who are exterminating wolves, and that isn't natural process that animals should adapt to. Unless, of course, you consider humans and all their acts natural (a result of evolution), but that also means we can kill all the animals and call it natural.
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 06:14 PM |
|
|
It is People that are hard to live with.
In North America we have few wolves left, (some are in Yellowstone I think) following a century when Deer have not had predators except front-bumpers of Cars & Trucks.
People hunt deer while others say its cruel. Then, some lettuce gets munched in several gardens in suburbia and the anti-hunters cry out...Kill the those pesky deer!
I think it was in Philadelphia where bow-hunting was not allowed in city-limits until a large buck came crashing through the front glass of a bus and killed a couple of kids.
Black bear numbers are growing and starting to once again spread north in my home-state of Missouri. Since all it would take to trigger a large bear-hunt is one mother bear provoked into protecting her cubs, Black bears will not be going very far.
In our day, Man's about "controlling everything" and here in the Mid-West that control is based on threats or nuisance. However in other places it can still be about food or more often greed.
<imo>In both cases the result is the same; we lose an important link in the world around us. Maybe what needs to happen is that people need to pass some tax-money for the fencing of state-parks and accept the transportation-costs of endangered species to that safety until the species rebounds.
I'm not much for the following because it sounds rather sinister to me but it might be a needed compromise; if parks were secured and species re-introduced, then in a future time, over-population could be used to feed the poor and hungry by a state-run ranch system. Otoh, if other countries started setting aside more "natural state parks" than it would give other locations for suitable animals to be introduced around the world.
As I said I'm not crazy about this idea but I believe something needs to be done for the animals (naturally)even if global-human-rights still needs serious work. Both need attention now.
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 07:28 PM |
|
|
Only species that have scientific significance or have ecological value should be protected imo.
What is the use of protecting an endangered species such as wolves? Sure they kill rats and such but instead of wasting millions of dollars in protecting a natural killer, why not invest that money on killing rats and other pests or develop a poison that kills them more efficiently?
Extinction of some species is not always a bad thing. Far too much concern is put into protecting useless species while not enough money is invested in exterminating bats,rats, giant toxic snails(In florida) and other pests.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 08:20 PM |
|
|
|
and once you exterminated them, you realize that it creates an even bigger scourge.
|
|
Hobbit
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 08:49 PM |
|
Edited by Hobbit at 20:49, 14 Jun 2013.
|
I actually think protecting endangered spieces from human is a really good thing. But it's not really about "OMG don't let them die they're too beautiful to extinction". It's about some stupid people who are killing animals not because they're seeking for food nor when they're in real danger. We, as a society, really often have no clue what the real danger is, so when some guys go to the wild forest and see some little bear, they give it some food and just after that kill it because they're scared (which is irrational) or just for fun (which is plain stupid). Yes, it actually happened - in my country. Hopefully they were punished for such stupidity.
And it's not a proof of human domination and little bear's lack of adapting ability - it's only a proof of our progressing distance from the common nature. Not that it's a bad thing, but if we didn't do something about it, the distance would rise and eventually become so high that we wouldn't be progressing anymore due to lack of any danger except some little species (like cockroaches and rats), some diseases and ourselves. Lack of progress means lack of intelligence and knowledge, therefore our society would be very stupid and, to some degree, pretty useless.
That's why protecting endangered animals is actually good - if there's something that would stop many of us, people, from killing animals for some pointless reasons. However, it's also, to some degree, a bad thing - because it encourages some people to say that we have to protect and control EVERYTHING about nature in the world. It's also another proof of lack of knowledge about our common "natural neighbourhood" - if we controlled the nature itself and, as some people would want to, "help the world" as we wanted, then we would be the only animals that are somehow progressing (but in a really slow way, though). The rest wouldn't do anything to adapt in any way to their environment because they would learn from us that we're their "protectors" - and lack of progress would eventually make them extinct (or maybe some of them would survive in zoos and laboratories - wouldn't that be ironic? ).
So, as always, we just have to balance our behaviour and not mess up with the nature too much, or else we'd be screwed.
____________
Horn of the
Abyss on AcidCave
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 09:00 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Only species that have scientific significance or have ecological value should be protected
But how can you know NOW which are potentially valuable? Science evolves every day and every day we discover new ways of healing ourselves, using the nature's ways.
Biodiversity is the variety of life. Saving endangered species from becoming extinct and protecting their wild places is crucial for our health and future.
As species are lost so too are our options for future discovery and advancement. The impacts of biodiversity loss include clearly into fewer new medicines, greater vulnerability to natural disasters and greater effects from global warming. In evolutionary theory, it has become clear that the greater the diversity that exists within a family or genus, the more likely it is to survive environmental change. Thus, evolution depends on biodiversity. However, humans have been the main cause of recent rapid evolutionary change. Ecosystems are being destroyed, animals and plants becoming extinct, and biodiversity is being lost due to increased human activity. Although environments would be shifting and evolving regardless of human influence, it is necessary to understand that humans are causing the rate of change to become particularly dangerous. Environmental conditions are changing so quickly that individual species as well as entire ecosystems are struggling, and often failing, to adapt. For these reasons, it is very important that we protect biodiversity and the natural environment.
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 09:06 PM |
|
|
Kill them all, god will recognize his own.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 09:25 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Only species that have scientific significance or have ecological value should be protected
But how can you know NOW which are potentially valuable? Science evolves every day and every day we discover new ways of healing ourselves, using the nature's ways.
Biodiversity is the variety of life. Saving endangered species from becoming extinct and protecting their wild places is crucial for our health and future.
As species are lost so too are our options for future discovery and advancement. The impacts of biodiversity loss include clearly into fewer new medicines, greater vulnerability to natural disasters and greater effects from global warming. In evolutionary theory, it has become clear that the greater the diversity that exists within a family or genus, the more likely it is to survive environmental change. Thus, evolution depends on biodiversity. However, humans have been the main cause of recent rapid evolutionary change. Ecosystems are being destroyed, animals and plants becoming extinct, and biodiversity is being lost due to increased human activity. Although environments would be shifting and evolving regardless of human influence, it is necessary to understand that humans are causing the rate of change to become particularly dangerous. Environmental conditions are changing so quickly that individual species as well as entire ecosystems are struggling, and often failing, to adapt. For these reasons, it is very important that we protect biodiversity and the natural environment.
It sounds like you're backing people into a corner. We don't know what might be discovered from a plant of animal species at some undefined point in the future therefore it cannot be allowed to die? It's true that if the rainforests disappeared tomorrow we'd surely miss out on a treasure trove of useful information or even life-saving information, but honestly, that argument isn't going to get very far with any large predator, such as wolves or leopards. They pretty much do what we do; kick everything's ass. They're at the top of the food chain and at one point they kept herd populations under control, but with global humanity in the picture that's really entirely unnecessary. There's no need to go out of the way to hunt down wolves or lynx stuck in the middle of ****ville, Northern Canada with a human population of 5, but honestly, I have a hard time seeing what's so important about allowing gray wolves to repopulate in the upper US west outside of National Park territory. We don't need wolves to take care of elk when I have a perfectly functioning digestive system. Shoot them, skin them, eat them.
The only potential long-term problem is that when a pack of wolves is hunting down a herd animal, the slowest or scrawniest herd animal is the one that falls. With a human hunter, it can sometimes work the complete opposite. Trophy hunting has negative implications.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 09:30 PM |
|
|
You will call me cynical, but what makes the human specie useful? Earth survived millions of years without and struggling since it appeared. It is useful to what in particular? To itself, that's all, it has no positive impact on the ecosystem.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 09:35 PM |
|
|
I don't care?
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Hobbit
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted June 14, 2013 10:06 PM |
|
Edited by Hobbit at 22:08, 14 Jun 2013.
|
Quote:
They pretty much do what we do; kick everything's ass.
Actually no. They're killing some other animals to survive. We, apart from that, are killing too many animals for no apparent reason, in many cases - just for fun.
____________
Horn of the
Abyss on AcidCave
|
| |
|
|
