Endangered species should we be more

A century ago, a bird called the passenger pigeon lived in North America.

Endangered species should we be more

By Michael Marshall 14 July Inmountain gorillas were at rock-bottom. Confined to a small mountain range in central Africa, with humans encroaching on their habitat bringing poaching and civil war, their population was estimated at just They would all have fitted into a single Boeing Today things look a little better.

A survey in reported that the population was up to That is a big improvement, but it's still only two Boeing s of mountain gorillas.

They remain critically endangered. We hear similar tales of woe all the time, from all around the world. Whether it's tigers, pandas, California condors or coral reefs, much of the world's wildlife is under threat. It's initially upsetting, and eventually just numbing.

Is it worth worrying about it all? Sure, it will be sad if there aren't any more cute pandas on the planet, but it's not like we depend on them.

Besides, surely it's more important to take care of humans — who, let's face it, have their own problems to worry about — than to spend millions of dollars preserving animals.

What, in short, is the point of conservation? View image of Top predators like wolves make ecosystems more diverse Credit: The most obvious is the staggering cost involved.

Endangered species should we be more

Saving all the endangered marine species might well cost far more. Why should we spend all that money on wildlife when we could spend it to stop people dying of starvation or disease?

It can be particularly hard to understand why anyone would want to preserve animals like wolveswhich pose a threat both to people and livestock. Surely there are some species we would be better off without. Species go extinct all the time anyway.

As well as individual species dying out, there have been five mass extinctions that obliterated swathes of species. The most recent one, 65 million years ago, took out the dinosaurs. The extinction rate has increased a hundredfold over the last century If extinction is a natural process that goes on even in the absence of humans, why should we stop it?

One answer is that species are now going extinct far faster than they used to. A recent study estimated that the extinction rate has increased a hundredfold over the last centuryand we seem to be to blame. But beyond that, there's a simple reason to save species: View image of Coral reefs support a rich variety of beautiful organisms Credit: We think animals are cute, majestic, or just plain fascinating.

We love walking in the dappled sunlight of an old forest, or scuba-diving over a coral reef. Who doesn't think mountain gorillas are awesome? The fact that some of us find nature beautiful, by itself, won't do Nature is beautiful, and that aesthetic value is a reason to keep it, just as we preserve artistic masterpieces like the Mona Lisa or Angkor Wat.

The first problem with this argument is that it spells doom for all those animals and plants that people are less fond of: If we don't find them appealing, they're out. More fundamentally, it comes from a position of luxury and privilege.

It's all very well for a moneyed person in the western world to want to preserve tigers because they're nice to look at, but that doesn't cut much ice with a villager in rural India whose family is in danger from one.More importantly, all living species, including people, depend on other species for survival.

For example, if a fish such as the shortnose sturgeon becomes extinct, all of the species that rely on it will also suffer and may become threatened or endangered.

Endangered species should we be more

Should we do more to protect endangered species? Reason 1: First, more should be done to protect endangered animals because every animal has a right just like a normal person. Yes, endangered specis should be protected for posterity.

I agree that more should be done to protect endangered species. This is because we should preserve the diversity of our planet because the killing off of an entire species is wrong and because future generations should be able to view the diverse organisms of our planet.

“Why save endangered species? Why should we in , more than species, subspecies, and varieties of our Nation’s plants and animals have become extinct. The situation in endangered species, Texas wild rice, could result in a strain adaptable to other regions of the country. On the face of it, there are plenty of reasons why we shouldn't bother to save endangered species.

The most obvious is the staggering cost involved. Should We Be More Concerned With The Current Rate of Extinction? Preserving endangered species isn’t an unfamiliar concept – everyone has seen the tiger commercials looking for donations, and most people are familiar with the “Save the Whales!” ballyhoo, but the question is: is it as big of a concern as people make it out to be?

BBC - Earth - What is the point of saving endangered species?