Let the panda die out 'with dignity', says BBC expert Chris Packham

[Bandito]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6844303.ece

Let the panda die out 'with dignity', says BBC expert Chris Packham


The BBC wildlife expert Chris Packham has questioned the millions spent trying to save the giant panda from extinction and suggested that the bamboo-eating bear should be allowed to die out "with a degree of dignity".
The zoologist, who has replaced Bill Oddie as a presenter on BBC's Springwatch, 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.
"Unfortunately, it's big and cute and a symbol of the World Wide Fund for Nature and we pour millions of pounds into into panda conservation


"I reckon we should pull the plug. Let them go, with a degree of dignity."
Packham's comments raised hackles at the WWF, which has used the giant panda as its symbol since its foundation in 1961 and is active in panda conservation in the Chinese forest reserves where the animal still survives.
Dr Mark Wright, chief scientific adviser at WWF UK, dismissed Packham's assertion that the giant panda was at an evolutionary dead-end because it relied on bamboo. "It's like saying the blue whale is in an evolutional cul-de-sac because it lives in the ocean," he said.
He added: "Chris has taken an irresponsible position. Pandas face extinction because of poaching and human pressures on their habitat. They have adapted to the area in which they live and if left alone, they function perfectly well.
"However, he is right in his assertion that we must secure habitat in order to protect endangered species. This is exactly what we work to achieve in the case of the giant panda.
"Importantly, 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"
In his Radio Times interview, Packham, a noted wildlife photographer, was especially outspoken about agricultural policy in the UK.
"Farming policy has trashed this countryside more than any other part of Western Europe," he said. "Go into the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs with a flamethrower and torch all of the stupid bureaucracy that dogs our farmers. Let's start organising fair pricing for UK farmers."
It's not only pandas that need worry, however. Asked which animal he would not mind becoming extinct, he replied: "Human beings. No question. That's the only one."





Opinions?

[Bilan]

Panda's have dignity?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

He has a point, but for all the wrong reasons. The idea that pandas as a species or as individuals have so human a concept as "dignity" is plainly ridiculous.

But what of the millions spent on preserving a single species, when it could be so much better spent on the ecosystems from which they came? Isn't it a better idea to work to preserve biodiversity, as opposed to only the animals we find cute?

[Invincible Summer]

He has a point, but for all the wrong reasons. The idea that pandas as a species or as individuals have so human a concept as "dignity" is plainly ridiculous.

But what of the millions spent on preserving a single species, when it could be so much better spent on the ecosystems from which they came? Isn't it a better idea to work to preserve biodiversity, as opposed to only the animals we find cute?

I agree. Although I am a vegetarian, I find the concept of "dignity" strange to apply to an animal (I won't go into a lengthy discussion about vegetarian ethics here because it's been done so many times. ) - reducing their pain/suffering, sure, but I'm sure animals don't have any sense of "shame," or even aware of their endangered status.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Iv always wanted to eat a panda.

[Revy]

obligatory?

G3ek0hTdlPA

Even though it's a joke, it does bring up serious points. It's easy to keep a few pandas in captivity and act like making them have babies is helping them. Has anyone considered the effects living in a zoo can have on an animal's emotional existence? If there were better environmental policies toward their natural habitat perhaps there wouldn't be a point in keeping them captive.

There are thousands of pandas in the wild, I doubt a low birth rate will lead to extinction. What will lead to extinction is the same reason why the dodo bird became extinct.

[bcbm]

But what of the millions spent on preserving a single species, when it could be so much better spent on the ecosystems from which they came?yes, what of them? from the article:


"However, he is right in his assertion that we must secure habitat in order to protect endangered species. This is exactly what we work to achieve in the case of the giant panda.
"Importantly, 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"

http://pandamoniumnyc.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/2781323558_1317c016fb.jpg

[Tatarin]

"Let the BBC expert Chris Packham die out 'with dignity', says panda."

[9]

Iv always wanted to eat a panda.



http://pandamoniumnyc.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/2781323558_1317c016fb.jpg


"Let the BBC expert Chris Packham die out 'with dignity', says panda."


:lol: Either I'm slap-happy from lack of sleep, or this thread is heavy on the lulz.

[ls]

Yep, let's wipe out species of animals then let them "die with dignity", that way everyone is happy. What an awesome idea, thinking anything else makes one a filthy left-deviator bourgeoisie hippy-communist ecoterrorist with a terrible rainbow coloured hat.

[Manifesto]

This does make sense as much I hate to admit it to let them die out although the dignity thing is pretty ridiculous and it is humans fault that they came to this point.

[Revy]

I just think it's funny, this idea "Let the panda die out".

Has the panda ever wanted to die out? It's dying out because of human-caused environmental destruction and poaching.

If we don't stop the cause of animals becoming endangered and extinct, they will continue to be. It's an issue far beyond the panda.

[9]

I just think it's funny, this idea "Let the panda die out".

Has the panda ever wanted to die out? It's dying out because of human-caused environmental destruction and poaching.

If we don't stop the cause of animals becoming endangered and extinct, they will continue to be. It's an issue far beyond the panda.

I don't know much about this issue, so I'm not taking a position because I don't know the details (and, quite honestly, I don't find it terribly interesting), but I do know there are some cases where certain animals would be extinct because the environment that sustained them is gone, but where scientists have "preserved the species" and have several of the creatures in facilities "just in case their natural habitat returns". In cases such as those I described, I think money should not go toward sustaining the animals in enclosures if the natural environment necessary for their survival is no longer present and they should be permitted to die out.

[bcbm]

I do know there are some cases where certain animals would be extinct because the environment that sustained them is gone, but where scientists have "preserved the species" and have several of the creatures in facilities "just in case their natural habitat returns". In cases such as those I described, I think money should not go toward sustaining the animals in enclosures if the natural environment necessary for their survival is no longer present and they should be permitted to die out.

pandas still exist in the wild and the reason they are having trouble is because of human encroachment, particularly in the forms of environmental destruction and poaching. their natural environment is dwindling but it is not beyond rebuilding by any means. i don't think we should give up on trying to save the species and their environment just because of the short-sighted profit motives of a few.

but pandas are my favorite animal, so i may be somewhat emotionally involved in this argument.

also the picture i linked was in solidarity with the "pandamonium (http://pandamoniumnyc.wordpress.com/)" event in nyc.

[9]

pandas still exist in the wild and the reason they are having trouble is because of human encroachment, particularly in the forms of environmental destruction and poaching. their natural environment is dwindling but it is not beyond rebuilding by any means. i don't think we should give up on trying to save the species and their environment just because of the short-sighted profit motives of a few.

but pandas are my favorite animal, so i may be somewhat emotionally involved in this argument.

also the picture i linked was in solidarity with the "pandamonium (http://pandamoniumnyc.wordpress.com/)" event in nyc.

Yes, my comment was not regarding animals that still live in the wild, that's a different story.

[Vanguard1917]

Pandas are fascinating creatures. There should be at least a few kept in zoos in every large city in the world so that we, and especially our children, can continue marvelling at them.

If they're failing to reproduce naturally, surely there are some artificial means through which we can help them?

[*Viva La Revolucion*]

To be honest, I doubt the pandas would care whether or not they died out 'with dignity'. :lol:

But I do think it's important to protect pandas - Chris Packham's comment seems almost lazy. I agree with some of the points he's making, but surely there's a better way to solve the other problems rather than to just give up and let a species die?

[KC]

Edit

[Patchd]

Too much emphasis is made on continuing species, what does it matter to us even if the human species were to die out tomorrow? Nothing, we wouldn't be here to worry about it for one, secondly, shit happens. Get on with it pandas, that way we can make a facebook group sooner than later called "when I was alive, pandas existed".

[bcbm]

E63ExmhOk8g

[Stranger Than Paradise]

I think it is tragic to think the Panda could die out and I definitely think we should help to preserve it and allow it the conditions to let it prosper. I do not think this is possible in Capitalism however.

[Dean]

Well, as long as we get to keep the Red Panda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Panda)...

[Oneironaut]

I've never heard the term 'evolutionary cul-de-sac' before. It made me think for a minute how this guy may actually have a point. Then I rightfully remembered that the only reason the panda is in the spot it's in now is because of us. Not because the panda can't adapt to a changing environment, but that it's suitable environment has now dwindled to ranges that simply can't support them. What a silly notion to think we can just let such an amazing creature with millions of years of evolutionary history go extinct because some rich fucks want the land for development under the guise of an 'evolutionary cul-de-sac'. When are we going to start making the rich responsible for what they do?

[Coinneach]

My understanding of the matter is that Pandas are, by and large, incapable of sustaining their population in the wild due to extremely slow reproduction and the loss of their habitat. Not that I can blame the Chinese for destroying a lot of the bamboo forest - i mean its easy for us in the west, with smaller rural communities and deforestation completed centuries ago, but the fact is China is a massive country with an even larger population. And its not exactly like Pandas are peaceful, loving creatures who'd never harm any human.

[Dean]

And its not exactly like Pandas are peaceful, loving creatures who'd never harm any human.
Actually, Great Pandas will not attack unless provoked.

[Coggeh]

The guy who wrote that article should be shot tbh , the reasons for the extinction are not natural , they are not apart of the chain of evolution .This guy is an idiot and i love pandas ... their so damn adorable when their eating bamboo ....who would ever let such intelligent creatures like pandas die out :(

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/125/321246932_097ae66b29.jpg:)

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

It's not a matter of "letting them die out". Hundreds of species are going extinct all the time. There's no rational reason for pouring so many resources into one endangered species. Evidently the reason why pandas have been singled out for rescue is that they're cute. It's bullshit reasoning, however, and reflects the unscientifc and unrational route taken by the right in the fields of hard sciences.

[KC]

Edit

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

What I don't understand is why they can't get the pandas to conceive in captivity? Can't they artificially inseminate pandas the way they do with livestock? Can't they artificially inseminate pandas in the wild? Why are they just sitting around waiting for these stupid bears to fuck each other?

[Revy]

Maybe they don't have sex because they're depressed. You should have watched the video but I'll give you the cliffs notes. It's from The Onion. They artificially inseminated a panda which became pregnant. Then through panda speak translator they found out the panda wanted the baby removed (an abortion) because her life sucked so much in captivity.

Or maybe they evolved to the point where reproduction is rare for them. Who knows. I don't know that much about pandas. What I do know is the extent capitalists will go to destroy ecosystems in the name of development. The reason the panda is endangered in the first place is because deforestation. That's the main threat to it. Then there's poaching. So there's really two common ways in which the panda is dying in the wild, being killed by humans, or having their habitat destroyed and starving to death.

We can really see the effect Deng had. He articulated the idea that his brand of "socialism" prioritized the "development of the productive forces". Which meant, anything in the way of economic development, can be freely trampled upon. Whether it's workers...or pandas.

We do not need to have an either-or situation, where all the non-human life gets annihilated and the planet's ecosystems are all destroyed. Think Coruscant in Star Wars. The whole planet is one big city. Nor do we need a return to primitive lifestyle without technology. What we need to do is use technology for the betterment of humankind and the Earth and have a compromise so that all these species are not threatened with extinction. Obviously we can't leave all the land to the animals, but we can make a compromise. They don't just need those rainforests and jungles, we do. Those forests produce oxygen. In fact, I would argue this planet needs reforestation as well as renewable energy in order to balance against the CO2 emissions.

[RedStarOverChina]

Don't really care if they die out or not. The guy is right---they should let them die out instead of spending hundreds of millions of dollars on them every year.

By the way, it was under Deng that China started enforcing laws protecting wildlife and in particular, Pandas.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Maybe they don't have sex because they're depressed. You should have watched the video but I'll give you the cliffs notes.

I did watch the video and I did fnd it quite amusing.
Treating panda depression is not te goal here and their emotional state doesn't need to be an obstacle for reaching the real objective of reproduction. Serious question: why no artificial insemination?

[RedStarOverChina]

I did watch the video and I did fnd it quite amusing.
Treating panda depression is not te goal here and their emotional state doesn't need to be an obstacle for reaching the real objective of reproduction. Serious question: why no artificial insemination?
They first suceeded in artificially inseminating a female Panda back in 1978. They've been doing it since then, but it doesnt seem very productive. Don't know why. Here's an article from 2005.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-11/17/content_495577.htm

CHENGDU -- Artificial insemination gave birth to 25 baby pandas this year[2005], of which 21 have survived, a record number since China first took the challenge in the 1960s.