Should The Giant Panda Be Left To Fend For Itself?

[Weather-history]

Chris Packham says we should leave the giant panda's fate to mother nature even if it leads this magnificent animal to extinction.

Do you agree?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/23/panda-extinction-chris-packham

[cheeky_monkey]

why do species die out?..is it because the cannot adapt to a changing environment or they are pushed to extinction by a new more dynamic species?

either way it happens and has done since the beginning of time..i say let them go and if they become extinct so be it.

[Weather-history]

why do species die out?..is it because the cannot adapt to a changing environment or they are pushed to extinction by a new more dynamic species?

Another reason...the human race. There are species that should really never had been driven to extinction. The passenger pigeon, quagga are examples...

[Devonian]

Another reason...the human race. There are species that should really never had been driven to extinction. The passenger pigeon, quagga are examples...

Absolutely agree. The Panda is in the peril it is not because of a changing environment but because of human beings. The problem is not environment change but change brought about by humans.

If we are to, as a principle, leave species to fend for themselves, there will be: a fishing free for all, a logging free for all, a hunting free for all and a planet populated by human beings, our food crops and animals and only large numbers of wild species like rats, crows and gulls...

Edited September 23, 2009 by Devonian

[ickledoozer]

Human activity, mainly deforestation and at one time poaching, are the reasons why Giant Panda's are listed as endangered, not evolution. Nurturing and protecting the mammal is the least we can do for robbing it of its natural habitat.

Edited September 23, 2009 by ickledoozer

[Sharkbait]

I've voted yes but I don't think the question quite relates to the article. I would not want the Panda to become extinct but agree that the Panda should not have the priority over other species just because it looks cuddly and is such an icon. More effort needs to be done to stop the deforestation.

[cheeky_monkey]

Another reason...the human race. There are species that should really never had been driven to extinction. The passenger pigeon, quagga are examples...

no that falls into my second catergory of becoming extinct due to another species whatever those reasons are.

[jethro]

How much have we impacted upon the Panda? Is their existence threatened because of us or in spite of?

If it were the Orang-utan, it's fairly clear that de-forestation of their habitat is our fault but is it as clear cut with the Panda?

Genuine question, I don't know, can anyone shed any light for thicko here?

[ickledoozer]

How much have we impacted upon the Panda? Is their existence threatened because of us or in spite of?

If it were the Orang-utan, it's fairly clear that de-forestation of their habitat is our fault but is it as clear cut with the Panda?

Genuine question, I don't know, can anyone shed any light for thicko here?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_Panda

[Devonian]

no that falls into my second catergory of becoming extinct due to another species whatever those reasons are.

And doesn't that mean this "If we are to, as a principle, leave species to fend for themselves, there will be: a fishing free for all, a logging free for all, a hunting free for all and a planet populated by human beings, our food crops and animals and only large numbers of wild species like rats, crows and gulls..."?

[cheeky_monkey]

And doesn't that mean this "If we are to, as a principle, leave species to fend for themselves, there will be: a fishing free for all, a logging free for all, a hunting free for all and a planet populated by human beings, our food crops and animals and only large numbers of wild species like rats, crows and gulls..."?

no this is about pandas or do you advocate turning the world into one giant safari park..what exactly do pandas bring to the evolutionary table?..who to say they wouldnt have died out whether humans populated the globe or not?..thousands of species became extinct before humans evolved.

[Mondy]

Is this image supposed to equal that of the dying four ton polar bear standing on floating melt ice in the apparent "sub-tropical Arctic"?

I mean, look at it. We have snow in the forefront of the picture and healthy tropical bamboo shoots in the foreground. Brilliant!

As for the fate of the Panda. Why didn't the Great Auk receive this much attention?

Not fussed, tbh.

Edited September 23, 2009 by Mondy

[Devonian]

no this is about pandas or do you advocate turning the world into one giant safari park..what exactly do pandas bring to the evolutionary table?..who to say they wouldnt have died out whether humans populated the globe or not?..thousands of species became extinct before humans evolved.

Pandas are a species, I don't want to play god, deciding which species exists, which not. Who are we to judge such things?

...

As for the fate of the Panda. Why didn't the Great Auk receive this much attention?

Not fussed, tbh.

Because even more people then were either unaware or unfussed?

Edited September 23, 2009 by Devonian

[cheeky_monkey]

Pandas are a species, I don't want to play god, deciding which species exists, which not. Who are we to judge such things?

exactly so just leave them alone..if they die out they die out, by spending time and money trying to save them you are playing god!

[Devonian]

exactly so just leave them alone..if they die out they die out, by spending time and money trying to save them you are playing god!

Oh, if you mean leave them alone, really alone, then you also mean stop people interfering with them by destroying their habitat, or hunting them , or simply killing them. Is that what you mean? Because, then, yes, I understand you and agree with you. I do think we should leave species alone, but really alone, not 'alone' as in 'you're a species on your own as we carry one destroying you and your habitat regardless'.

Edited September 23, 2009 by Devonian

[cheeky_monkey]

Oh, if you mean leave them alone, really alone, then you also mean stop people interfering with them by destroying their habitat, or hunting them , or simply killing them. Is that what you mean? Because, then, yes, I understand you and agree with you. I do think we should leave species alone, but really alone, not 'alone' as in 'you're a species on your own as we carry one destroying you and your habitat regardless'.

yes thats exactly what i mean

[gigabite]

Keep the panda, and bring back the woolly mammoth.

http://esciencenews.com/sources/la.times.science/2008/11/20/scientists.map.woolly.mammoths.dna.bringin

[The PIT]

Funny according to the Wiki the numbers are increasing. Of course they would have more chance of survival if they didn't depend on one food source which does suggest they have gone down the road towards extinction anyway.