Should we try to protect all species or only some?…



  1. 0 Votes

    There’s a range of opinion on this.

    Some people feel what’s going on now is natural, and there’s not much reason to protect any species. (Except the ones they like, or eat, etc.)

    Other people put stock in an Endangered Species list, usually the IUCN (link below). There are two main problems with this. First, there are 100,000s of species we don’t know about. Others where we don’t have a good idea of how many are left, or how endangered they are. The second problem is choosing which species to protect. People are coming to the realization that some are just too expensive to save, given the available money and resources. Sometimes that’s because the animal (or plant) was close to dying out, anyhow. It’s thought, for example, that the Panda, in its current limited numbers, might be close to the end of its evolutionary road.

    Protecting all species would involve a collosal change to human civilization. There are various opinions on what a sustainable human population is. Currently, the Earth has seven billion people. There are suggestions that one billion or even a half a billion would be optimal. Since that’s probably not going to happen, we need to work with protecting less than all species.

Please signup or login to answer this question.

Sorry,At this time user registration is disabled. We will open registration soon!