Chris Packham says we should just let the adorablest animal on earth, the panda, fucking die already.
The zoologist…risked criticism from wildlife conservationists in an interview with the Radio Times in which he describes the giant panda as a “T-shirt animal” on which too much conservation money is wasted.
“Here is a species that, of its own accord, has gone down an evolutionary cul-de-sac. It’s not a strong species,” he said.
Who wants to be on the panda death panels? It’ll be sooooo cute!
Yeah, let’s do in the sloths while we’re at it.
Chris Packham, WORST PERSON EVER.
He has a point. Pandas suck millions of dollars from other preservation efforts. Northern hairy-nosed wombats are down to about 100 individuals, but nobody gives a crap about them.
The whole universe is going supernova in 6 million years. What’s the point of saving anything?
“Here is a species that, of its own accord, has gone down an evolutionary cul-de-sac. It’s not a strong species,”
Same thing could be said for humanity.
Yeah, dude’s got a point. There are lots of endangered species, some of which would be far easier to save and have more of an environmental impact were they to be lost. Why do we instead spend so much energy on a species that, due to their pickiness regarding breeding, is so freaking _impossible_ to save? Because they’re cute?
Who gets first dibs on dead pandas? I want some panda stirfry.
Makes sense to me.
For the big animals, my vote goes to polar bears. Then for the littler ones, any brand of wombat.
Polar bears aren’t savable, because global warming is destroying their habitat. The habitat’s going whether we “do something about it” or not. Pandas are probably in a similar situation; their difficulty isn’t really because of their breeding but because their habitat is gone — and getting China to give a shit about habitat for ANYTHING is even less likely than doing anything about global warming.
For wombats, the answer might be as simple as telling farmers to stop planting invasive buffle grass from South Africa, which is destroying not just the wombat’s food range but dozens or hundreds of other species. Unfortunately in Australia, especially in Queensland, farmers and miners hold sway over every other concern. They’re deliberately destroying their eucalypt forests for pine trees for WOOD PULP, which is fucking insane.
We must work harder to save the screamapiller!!!
http://simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/Screamapi…
@ 3 the sun will supernova in about 6 (well, 5) billion years, not million. big difference.
this is the megafauna factor problem. cute big mammals get the lion’s share of conservation dollars, while everything else, especially insects and plants, can go to hell. if the megafauna in question is a keystone animal (represents the health of ecosystem) then a lot of other organisms benefit from their conservation.
pandas are highly specialized, therefore highly vulnerable. how important is their bamboo habitat to other organisms? what is their cultural value? is the idea of pandas and their survival “too big to fail” at this point?
“I felt like putting a bullet between the eyes of every Panda that wouldn’t screw to save its species. I wanted to open the dump valves on oil tankers and smother all the French beaches I’d never see. I wanted to breathe smoke.”
I can’t believe that movie came out 10 years ago.
“Charismatic megavertebrates” are often tarred as stealing attention from less-appealing species, but in fact they do much to raise public awareness and encourage private contributions and government funding that indirectly benefit many other species and large areas of habitat. In addition, the sums of money that are directly spent on the “superstars” develop technology that has enormous spin-offs in the same way as the space program.
Pandas’ captive-breeding problems have been largely solved through applied behavior and assisted reproduction. Their remaining wild habitat is physically protected by its extremely rugged topography, but is vulnerable to air and water pollution, and the effects of climate change on the bamboo food source. I agree that short-term preservation of any species is largely pointless if sufficient natural habitat cannot be protected or recreated.
I hope people read the actual article before making a decision on this, particularly the counterpoint that “in protecting those mountain areas where pandas live, we are also retaining vital habitat and resources for thousands of other species (many also endangered) and helping the human communities that depend on this landscape” .
I’m not taking one side or the other, just saying this should not be an easy decision to make, for anyone.
Also, I just have to point out that his addition of the words “with dignity” is purely a persuasive mechanism meant to soften his statement, because “Let the pandas die out” sounds too harsh. There is no dignity in habitat destruction and eventual extinction.
Pandas are the ascetics of the animal kingdom. I think if they could speak, they would encourage us to let evolution take its course.
Every panda kept in a zoo means millions of dollars shipped to China that could otherwise be invested in reducing global warming … which would help more pandas survive and breed instead of all these emotional appeals …
@6 Stirfry? I want a coat!
GAH!!! SAVE THE PANDAS!!! WE CAN HAS PANDAS!!!
@16, false dichotomy. If all pandas were summarily evicted from zoos, there would likely not be one thin dime of additional investment in emissions reduction, carbon sequestration, energy efficiency, etc., etc., etc. It’s not the same pool of money.
for the record: pandas are not lovable huggable bears, but vicious and mean. there are 2.5 million hits on the googles for “panda attacks”
@19 – wrong, if we required each panda sent back be replaced with an equal investment, the net impact would mean we increase pandas.
Then again, if we let China do it, they’ll keep building wind farms too far from population centers in windless areas, like they’re doing today (source: NYT, WaPo) and biomass plants that shut down once the government subsidy ends (source: various scientific papers we don’t let you noobs read if you can’t shlep to the university library)
Well, if we preserve the habitat of “Charismatic Megafauna/megavertabrates”, we also preserve all the other unattractive species who live in those habitats with them so you’ll pardon me if I keep supporting those “cute” wild animals.
@21, the Chinese hold the cards. Current agreements with zoos require that they send a portion of the extra $$$$ obtained from increased ticket sales, memberships, gift shop sales, etc. to China, ostensibly for support of habitat preservation and for the captive breeding center at Wolong. Also, offspring born overseas must eventually be returned to China for release into the preserve or captive breeding there. Good luck forcing the Chinese to do anything they don’t want to do.
default darwin, back to business as usual
@3 & 11 No supernova for us. The sun just isn’t massive enough. We’ll get toasted, tho… Most likely scenario is red giant (possibly out as far as the orbit of Mars), blowing off outer layers of matter, then condensing to a white dwarf, sometime in the next 8-10 billion years.