|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 1:10 am
I have got to quit reading my National Geographic and my Smithsonian Magazines! (grin)
I was just reading about how some of the not so pretty or gracious animals are now becoming endangered because people do not seem to care about them as much as the intiquing animals such as elephants, rhinos, hippos, big cats, etc.
So - do we try to spread the money out and save ALL the species? Is it realistic to do so? Where would you spend your money? On ALL the threatened and endangered species and spread it a little thin for them all or on your favorite ones like pandas, elephants, wolves, etc?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 2:48 pm
Gee, I have no idea. I guess it would be nice to be able to help preserve all animals but, it might be just a dream. Kinda like expecting the frontiers in the world to disappear... mrgreen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:03 am
crying I have no money to donate tward any species at this point. cheese_whine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:14 pm
i think spending money on the any animal is useless for the simple fact the people over populate the world. the ratio of animals to people is sad. we kill hundreds to thousands of animals on weekly basis for food, clothes and just cause we can. alot of people dont care about endangered animals and such so they will continue to have them killed.
its just like global warming and the omega hole in the ozone. its just gonna get bigger and worse cause most people dont care enough to do any thing about it.
what others dont understand is that no one does any thing about a dangerous situation until its too late.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 11:17 am
Yeah, that and some people who care but, can't do a darn thing about it; like myself. rolleyes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2007 5:12 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 2:08 am
It is interesting that we can fell so frustrated and helpless about so many things so much of the time, isn't it? I get so mad when I find out some big wig spent 10000 dollars for a wrench (and what kind of favors?) when there are so many worthwhile things out there!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 7:31 am
Human population growth is slowing down, but time does seem to be running out particularly for large species. As for which we should try to preserve, in theory the best practice would be to save the most important species in an ecosystem, but determining which they are can be hard, and usually involves finding out the hard way - i.e. watchng an ecosystem suffer under their loss. Such is what happened with wolves in Yellowstone. I think that conservation is better served in setting aside areas of land and sea, that man just leaves alone, instead of focusing on species.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 11:34 am
Or that, yeah...
Yes it is Ms Jo. I find it strange how some people cna spend lots of money on what seems to be silly things but, then I remember that I usually like to waste most of my money on videogames, he-he. mrgreen
That sounds good SK. It's too bad there aren't many organizations here (guatemala) that do things like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 7:55 am
I also once wondered if since extinction is natural, and new species replace them, by saving some species, we may be dooming other species in advance by never giving them the chance to evolve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 11:06 am
Well, if you ask me, ever since mankind began to affect the environment, everything went to hell. So might as well start saving every animal we can anyway. Will that make up for all the mistakes man has made? Maybe not, but it may be our best bet. rolleyes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 10:55 pm
What kind of animals are considered "ugly"?
Pics or it didn't happen.
Mostly because I don't know of any animals which are really all that ugly, that I can think of at the moment. sweatdrop
And of course they should be protected, just because they aren't pretty doesn't mean they aren't endangered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 9:23 pm
I agree that ugly animals should be protected - they just should be protected where we don't have to look at them lol Just a little joke there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
