extinct species

It's unbelievable that species are still becoming extinct. Surely it's a government responsibility to ensure enough land is preserved to keep what little number of animals or birds (that are under threat) protected. Good on Steve Irwin for creating new parks for wildlife. More of it please.

Vote
81%
19%
Rating
Votes
32
Views
3120
Mark as inappropriate

13 Comments

  • Ricky

    United States United States | 7 years ago
    I think hunting of an animal while it's endangered is abominable. It should be made illegal untill the animal balances itself out.

    0 0

  • Really insensitive, brah. Steve Irwin Is dead.

    0 1

  • He still did a good thing while he was here, and at least in the US, it IS illegal to hunt any endangered species...granted the species may only have a few thousand left before it is given that status.... I fully agree with this post.

    0 0

  • I object because preserving species is easy look at cows, chickens, pigs thy get slaughter and their fine, hunters should buy what they kill and people should farm these so they don't go extinct.

    0 0

  • I agree with this post due to the fact that humans are mostly a selfish race & don't consider the life of anything else on our planet being of equivalant to their own. Also, @ KingofReason1, you will always need hunters/fisherman.

    Hunting is the practice of pursuing any living thing, usually wildlife, for food, recreation, or trade. In present-day use, the term refers to lawful hunting, as distinguished from poaching, which is the killing, trapping or capture of the hunted species contrary to applicable law. The species which are hunted are referred to as game, and are usually mammals and migratory or non-migratory gamebirds.

    Hunting can also involve the elimination of vermin, as a means of pest control to prevent diseases caused by overpopulation. Hunting advocates state that hunting can be a necessary component of modern wildlife management,

    [1]for example to help maintain a population of healthy animals within an environment's ecological carrying capacity when natural checks such as predators are absent.

    [2] In the United States, wildlife managers are frequently part of hunting regulatory and licensing bodies, where they help to set rules on the number, manner and conditions in which game may be hunted.

    The pursuit, capture and release, or capture for food of fish is called fishing, which is not commonly categorised as a form of hunting. Trapping is also usually considered a separate activity. It is also not considered hunting to pursue animals without intent to kill them, as in wildlife photography or birdwatching. The practice of hunting for plants or mushrooms is a colloquial term for foraging or gathering.

    Skilful tracking and acquisition of an elusive target has caused the word hunting to be used in the vernacular as a metaphor, as in "bargain hunting" or "hunting down corruption and waste".

    0 0

  • If there weren't hunters or fisherman, our world would not only be currently overcrowded by people but also overcrowded by animals & fish as well. Some of our waterways you already can barely drive a boat through without a couple thousand fish jumping at you such as the Flying Silverfish which are way over populated. What usually happens is say 1 type of fish becomes overly populated in an area. That type of fish will begin to eliminate any other & all other species of fish in that area until it either kills itself off, runs out of food, or decides to relocate. The problem is however, if we farm or hunt animals too much, they will also become extinct. So we have to kind of keep the equilibrium going.

    0 0

  • Why is the extinction of a species over time more tragic than the death of another species at the same rate, but where their extinction isn't threatened? It's a strange and human sentiment.

    0 0

  • the planet is changed forever when one species disappears. Change is not a bad thing but what are the long term consequences?

    0 0

  • In other words, you think Agenda 21 is a GOOD idea. Even though its entire purpose is to CONFISCATE private property in the name of the "environment" so that government can claim it for their own? While they build "sustainable" communities which reach the clouds for us serfs to live stacked/ packed together? With no more travel or venturing OUTSIDE of those Nazi communities in which we will be enslaved in.... just so the ANIMALS can roam free and have more land than US.

    0 1

  • I agree but only for species that are endangered because of man. The dinosaurs for instance was not our fault

    0 0

  • Species become extinct because they don't cope with the environment. It's absolutely pointless and ridiculous to delay that.

    0 1

  • I object because preventing species from becoming extinct goes against the laws of nature. New species are constantly developing as a result of natural selection. Less robust species are selected against and become extinct. Countless billions of dollars have been spent to protect the few remaining specimens of an admittedly amazing life form, but those resources could have been spent instead on saving lives in third world countries. We should take care of this Earth, and do what we can not to force certain species into extinction, but not at the cost of human life, and we shouldn't spend our time on a species that has been so obviously selected against.

    0 0

  • ogd

    Australia Australia | 3 months ago
    Economics and nature do they really work together?
    Economics is just an invention.

    0 0

Similar Ideas:

Instantly search any time by typing

Sorry, we couldn't find
"".