Today's extremely spicy take is that endangered species protection is a very expensive national vanity project
Show this thread
-
The elephant stock of a nation is the public resource. Poachers have an interest to harvest said resource for money, but cannot legitimately own the resource, so have zero interest/ability to ensure their continued existence. Either let the state manage the resource, or privatize
The percentage of endangered species in decline due to poaching is very small, but a priori it's reasonable to imagine that they're more likely to serve a critical function than a species that's failing to thrive due to e.g. competition from invasive species or habitat loss
-
-
Do we actually spend a lot of resources on save-guarding such species in the first place? I actually don't totally disagree with your view, but at least for the few "cause celebre" species it seems to always come down to a public resource management problem.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.