# Conservation and Wildlife (Almost $100 already donated)



## Infrarednexus (Dec 29, 2019)

I've taken an interest in conservation and helping endangered species. I figure that it's our responsibility to help these animals because it is usually our fault they are endangered in the first place. I made this thread so we can share and inform each other of endangered species and ecosystems we know of and spread awareness to educate one another on environmental protection. 

Share your opinions and knowledge on the subject if you'd like.

Also, for each post in this thread I will be donating money to the kakapo recovery program in New Zealand's conservation department to help them in their efforts to replenish the endangered parrots population in their native habitats. 






You're posts will go towards a good cause.


----------



## Fallowfox (Dec 29, 2019)

If people haven't seen it yet '7 world 1 planet' is a new Attenborough series which has discussions about conservation at the end of each episode.


----------



## Sarachaga (Dec 29, 2019)

That's a great cause! It's really cool that you're doing this 
And yeah we ought to own our mistakes. I used to live near a coral reef and it's crazy to witness first hand the damage humans can do on such a beautiful ecosystem.


----------



## Borophagus Metropolis (Dec 29, 2019)

Save the party parrots!


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Dec 29, 2019)

I know we haven't always gotten along but you're doing a very good thing. Keep up the good work!


----------



## Breyo (Dec 29, 2019)

This is so sweet and wholesome! I agree with you wholeheartedly. I think I may actually pick some place to donate to, as well. It's up to people who care to save our furry, feathered, or scaled friends! Are there any other causes that you'd recommend donating to?


----------



## Infrarednexus (Dec 29, 2019)

bkk1 said:


> This is so sweet and wholesome! I agree with you wholeheartedly. I think I may actually pick some place to donate to, as well. It's up to people who care to save our furry, feathered, or scaled friends! Are there any other causes that you'd recommend donating to?


It never hurts to check your local conservation departments and see if they need aid. It's always nice to help your local community. However if there is a certain animal you love that is endangered you can always spread awareness and help them. 

There are so many causes I don't know where to begin honestly. Do some exploring and find an ecosystem, animal, or charity you like and go from there.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Dec 29, 2019)

I'm surprised there aren't more threads about this. We need all we can get.


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

Why should I care about some obscure species? They die off and make place for others. Its called natural selection


----------



## ConorHyena (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Why should I care about some obscure species? They die off and make place for others. Its called natural selection



Then please be so kind to bugger out of threads like this with your bullshit, thank you.


----------



## Groggy (Dec 29, 2019)

Very well then, allow me to make a post.
We have a largely respected preservation group in my country that's dedicated to sea turtles and other sea life, Projeto TAMAR.
I can almost certainly say that my interest for sea turtles began when I was visiting an aquarium on a school trip. I found out a lot about their work and discovered a lot of things about turtles that I didn't even imagine on that day. In fact, I was so amazed by it, I barely remember paying attention to the other animals... 
The sea turtle has been my favorite animal ever since.

Putting that little story aside, the people working in those wildlife preservation groups are heroes. This is a very noble act from your part, and I sincerely hope the kakapos don't suffer the same fate as the glaucous macaw.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Dec 29, 2019)

You know what? I'll match Nexus' donation up to $50 and I encourage everyone to do the same. Please drop a link to the donation page, Nexy.


----------



## Groggy (Dec 29, 2019)

ConorHyena said:


> Then please be so kind to bugger out of threads like this with your bullshit, thank you.


As much as I disagree with his opinion, it still counts as a post. So...


----------



## Infrarednexus (Dec 29, 2019)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> You know what? I'll match Nexus' donation up to $50 and I encourage everyone to do the same. Please drop a link to the donation page, Nexy.


Here is the link www.doc.govt.nz: Kākāpō Recovery


Doomer said:


> Why should I care about some obscure species? They die off and make place for others. Its called natural selection


When colonists arrived to the New Zealand islands they brought with them predators that invaded the Kakapos natural habitat, killing off the birds rapidly. Kakapo were hunted down to less than a hundred on the islands, do to human interference and invasive species.

Their plight is our fault, not the birds. *WE* are the ones responsible. Human beings are the only creatures on Earth with this level of capability of helping species other than ourselves. We should be using our intellect to save and protect life. If you don't care about any of that, I see no reason for you to be here.


----------



## KD142000 (Dec 29, 2019)

Always lovely to see people helping with conservation! It's real important so that future generations can still see and look after them.
I wish I could donate, but right about now, money is tight. As soon as it becomes available, I'll make sure I help out, too!

Humans do so much damage to the environment...but only humans can fix it again.

*hugs for @Infrarednexus and all the Kakapos in the world*
Also *hugs for all the animals in the world, even the gigantic ones that are rather difficult to hug*

EDIT: Also, whilst watching the news, they had a segment about a guy who travels all over the world. He was in Borneo this time and went to an orangutan sanctuary they have.
It was very heartwarming to see the orangutans settled into a safe haven and the staff there were hopeful that they could repopulate. It does take a long time, though, so they still need some support from the public.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Why should I care about some obscure species? They die off and make place for others. Its called natural selection


Because this is likely the first mass extinction caused by the activities of a single animal species.


----------



## KD142000 (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Why should I care about some obscure species? They die off and make place for others. Its called natural selection


I don't want to argue with you, so just think about what you said and how wrong it is.
If you don't want to help, whatever, but don't go trying to look for trouble.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Dec 29, 2019)

I know some opinions have been said that have been controversial but I want this thread to be civil and on topic. Let's try our best to be calm.


----------



## Deleted member 112695 (Dec 29, 2019)

Preservation of species when necessary is good, but humans are superior in value and in worth.


----------



## MetroFox2 (Dec 29, 2019)

Felix Bernard said:


> Preservation of species when necessary is good, but humans are superior in value and in worth.



You worded that like we're going to start sacrificing people to our almighty gods the Kakapos


----------



## ConorHyena (Dec 29, 2019)

Infrarednexus said:


> I know some opinions have been said that have been controversial but I want this thread to be civil and on topic. Let's try our best to be calm.





Felix Bernard said:


> Preservation of species when necessary is good, but humans are superior in value and in worth.



Observe the writings of the great @Infrarednexus, and thou shalt be enlightened and gain wisdom.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Dec 29, 2019)

Felix Bernard said:


> Preservation of species when necessary is good, but humans are superior in value and in worth.


We shouldn't destroy habitats and such just for our gain.


----------



## Tallow_Phoenix (Dec 29, 2019)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> We shouldn't destroy habitats and such just for our gain.



Really, like, at this point we've already conquered the world, what more do we need?


----------



## Thrashy (Dec 29, 2019)

This thread is a wonderful idea!
What comes to my mind at my country, is the 30% decline in insect biodiversity. Also Within the short period of only three decades, humans have decimated the insect populations in various areas by up to 75 percent.
Imagine if all insects die. We die too.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Dec 29, 2019)

Felix Bernard said:


> Preservation of species when necessary is good, but humans are superior in value and in worth.


That attitude is what got us into this mess in the first place, and a big part of why I'm an anti-theist.


----------



## Night.Claw (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Why should I care about some obscure species? They die off and make place for others. Its called natural selection


Then please consider your own logic. Delete your account and make place for someone with manners.



Infrarednexus said:


> It never hurts to check your local conservation departments and see if they need aid. It's always nice to help your local community. However if there is a certain animal you love that is endangered you can always spread awareness and help them.
> 
> There are so many causes I don't know where to begin honestly. Do some exploring and find an ecosystem, animal, or charity you like and go from there.



There is a few, non-profit bird hospitals around where i live, sustaining itself on small donations and voluntary work. People donated money, and got reservation rights for one of the hospitals, and now after years, it's visible that they are succeding. Since i was little, i can see a lot more birds, what was barely if ever visible around here. Mostly birds around water, since i live beside a river. If people give a little care, things can easily be achieved.

Around my home, there was an awareness rising about Fork tail Swallows. They dropped in numbers greatly, when i was little. So i personally have several Swallow nests around my house. Even if it "ruins" the look of the house itself it doesn't bother me much. Swallows leave stains, and dirt around, but meh... i can clean it up. I have my outside cable lines adjusted in a way, that Swallows can rest under my roof during hot summer days. Beside that i leave mud pools around, so they can repair/build nests. I can see a lot coming back every year, and they are growing in numbers. And since Swallows are natural predators of flies and mosquitos, and since i live beside a river, where mosquito infestation is common, even i gain from keeping them around.

Every little matters in the whole. Even if you can only effect few, it matters. Species can be saved if people give a damn about problems.

Here is a picture of them during the beginning of Fall.


----------



## Simo (Dec 29, 2019)

This is something I think about a good deal, and ways to help...for my part, I try and leave as little footprint as I can on the land, in terms of housing, and also, in terms of transportation, and the use of fuels...I think that using fewer resources is a huge part of this, and something that's in everyone's power to make a difference with. Once I'm more settled in, I'm going to look into wind/solar, to supply/supplement power/heat...and happily, it seems very popular here to do so. And also, some huge wind-farms are going in the southern part of the state; very, very nice to see; flat, rolling fields of corn and windmills.

More immediately, I hope to set aside and preserve 150 acres of mostly forested, hilly land in Leelanau County, along with my sister, that's been in the family, and see that it's not subdivided and sold; there's fewer and fewer blocks of land this size in the county, and I feel it's important to set aside as much as possible. 

One threat I see is the constant 'development' of land: how it gets cut up, subdivided and sold off, to build big, ugly McMansions, and such: maybe I'll also try in some way to work for better city and county planning, and ways to prevent sprawl.

And so what I aim to do has mostly to do with curbing the human footprint, and encouraging people to tread a bit more lightly, and even get by with less, so that other species can have some space, too.


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

Infrarednexus said:


> When colonists arrived to the New Zealand islands they brought with them predators that invaded the Kakapos natural habitat, killing off the birds rapidly. Kakapo were hunted down to less than a hundred on the islands, do to human interference and invasive species.
> 
> Their plight is our fault, not the birds. *WE* are the ones responsible. Human beings are the only creatures on Earth with this level of capability of helping species other than ourselves. We should be using our intellect to save and protect life. If you don't care about any of that, I see no reason for you to be here.



Finally someone will try to reason. Fair enough I wont try to spoil your little gathering just because I dont believe in charity.


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

Felix Bernard said:


> Preservation of species when necessary is good, but humans are superior in value and in worth.



lovely. But how do you know which human to sacrifice when the time calls?


----------



## Fallowfox (Dec 29, 2019)

Since some people have made comments questioning the utility of conservation, I'll ask people whether they like Bananas, Coffee, Grapes?

_All of those _tasty plants are under threat from diseases. Farmers cross-breed them with closely related wild species to improve their genetic diversity and therefore resistance to disease. 

A lot of wild Coffee plants though are endangered because of the world's changing climate and land-use change. 

So that's why we should all be interested in the natural world. If you're not in it for the animals, take an interest for the cappuccinos. 

advances.sciencemag.org: High extinction risk for wild coffee species and implications for coffee sector sustainability


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

Fallowfox said:


> Since some people have made comments questioning the utility of conservation, I'll ask people whether they like Bananas, Coffee, Grapes?
> 
> _All of those _tasty plants are under threat from diseases. Farmers cross-breed them with closely related wild species to improve their genetic diversity and therefore resistance to disease.
> 
> ...



People will always find a way


----------



## Simo (Dec 29, 2019)

People could also live on Soylent Green, it just wouldn't be a lot of fun; a lot of joy would go out of the world.


----------



## Telnac (Dec 29, 2019)

Excellent thread! It took the Earth millions of years to recover from each mass extinction. The loss of biodiversity puts an enormous strain on the natural processes that we still depend on to survive. Preserving the wilderness and helping species come back from the brink of extinction ensures that the future generations have all the world's beauty to enjoy.


----------



## Deleted member 112695 (Dec 29, 2019)

Kit H. Ruppell said:


> That attitude is what got us into this mess in the first place, and a big part of why I'm an anti-theist.


What attitude? The attitude that brought us modernized society and medicine?
Sorry dude, it isn’t strictly “theist” to govern your own species above inferior ones. If we and our parents are just as morally valuable as the the animal kingdom, why is eating our babies illegal?


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

Felix Bernard said:


> What attitude? The attitude that brought us modernized society and medicine?
> Sorry dude, it isn’t strictly “theist” to govern your own species above inferior ones. If our parents are just as valuable as the the animal kingdom, why is eating their babies illegal?



Because eating babies is immoral. Don't try to argue by using logic, use emotions instead, fallacies. Politicians are the master of this.


----------



## Tallow_Phoenix (Dec 29, 2019)

How fascinating to see furries argue _against_ conservation efforts. Like, can you guys give some intelligent reason _other_ than "screw 'em"?


----------



## Deleted member 112695 (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Because eating babies is immoral. Don't try to argue by using logic, use emotions instead, fallacies. Politicians are the master of this.


If it’s not immoral for other animals to eat their babies, why is it immoral for us to do so?

This is a major intellectual incoherence on your part. I say we should see our own needs as superior to animals, but now you say somehow our actions have more moral weight *shrugs*


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

Tallow_Phoenix said:


> How fascinating to see furries argue _against_ conservation efforts. Like, can you guys give some intelligent reason _other_ than "screw 'em"?



Did they ever save your life? Did they save lives of other humans? What makes them entitled to such our generosity? We should focus our efforts on reducing poverty, school funding so out children, our future, could get better education.


----------



## Night.Claw (Dec 29, 2019)

Tallow_Phoenix said:


> How fascinating to see furries argue _against_ conservation efforts. Like, can you guys give some intelligent reason _other_ than "screw 'em"?


Sadly ever thread falls into disagreements and fights, when a specific person show their disagreement, and the others try to protect the idea.
Even a noble one like this.





For the thread. 

In my town, the building below, was made completely on charity, and helped wildlife grow of birds by hundreads in numbers. The nearby waters and forests are complete part of the reservation, and people can only enter with guides, not to bother the wildlife.

This was able to happen, because people (less then 3000 person) decided to give, and not just take as always.

Think before talk/act, and you can change the world.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Dec 29, 2019)

To everyone contributing to the topic, thank you. It means a lot.

For the people fighting, I'd tell you stop but every post is more money for my Kakapo friends. You're arguments are going towards buying their yummy food pellets. I've already donated enough to feed one for an entire month thanks to you.


----------



## MetroFox2 (Dec 29, 2019)

Felix Bernard said:


> If it’s not immoral for other animals to eat their babies, why is it immoral for us to do so?
> 
> This is a major intellectual incoherence on your part. I say we should see our own needs as superior to animals, but now you say somehow our actions have more moral weight *shrugs*



I hate to be rude, but nobody asked for you to derail the thread into moral and intellectual thought. Some of us _just _want to give to good causes and be done with it.

God forbid every time I put a pound in the RSPB box somebody came up to me and started asking "Uh, what use do the birds of the Norfolk Broads have for your half-crowns?"


----------



## ConorHyena (Dec 29, 2019)

"Then the Lord said to Noah, “Go into the ark, you and all your household, for I have seen that you are righteous before me in this generation. Take with you seven pairs of all clean animals, the male and his mate, and a pair of the animals that are not clean, the male and his mate, and seven pairs of the birds of the heavens also, male and female, to keep their offspring alive on the face of all the earth. For in seven days I will send rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and every living thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the ground.” And Noah did all that the Lord had commanded him. ..."


----------



## Deleted member 112695 (Dec 29, 2019)

Apologies for de-railing


----------



## Tallow_Phoenix (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Did they ever save your life? Did they save lives of other humans? What makes them entitled to such our generosity? We should focus our efforts on reducing poverty, school funding so out children, our future, could get better education.



Well, alright, at least that's a reasonable argument. It's not going to stop anyone from donating to conservation efforts, but while you're here, have any good links to charities and such that you feel are worthy causes?


----------



## Joni (Dec 29, 2019)

Infrarednexus said:


> I made this thread so we can share and inform each other of endangered species and ecosystems we know of and spread awareness to educate one another on environmental protection.





Doomer said:


> Why should I care about some obscure species? They die off and make place for others. Its called natural selection


I heared insted of educated discussion to enhance our understanding in ecology. Stupid people are writing bullshit. Not surprising.


Doomer said:


> Did they ever save your life? Did they save lives of other humans? What makes them entitled to such our generosity? We should focus our efforts on reducing poverty, school funding so out children, our future, could get better education.


Yeah... education. About extinct species. Could be good for you rn, while they're still living.
Also yes. They did something for us.  We have a lot of technology thx to observation of nature.


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

Tallow_Phoenix said:


> Well, alright, at least that's a reasonable argument. It's not going to stop anyone from donating to conservation efforts, but while you're here, have any good links to charities and such that you feel are worthy causes?



I just think conservation should not be our priority.


----------



## Skittles (Dec 29, 2019)

Whoa! Some of this logic! Which rock did some of you crawl out from! Haha!

Seriously. Save the bloody planet. 
Simply because we are next on the endangered species list due to our hubris and stupidity.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Did they ever save your life? Did they save lives of other humans? What makes them entitled to such our generosity? We should focus our efforts on reducing poverty, school funding so out children, our future, could get better education.


This is a strange mentality to come from someone who loves anthropomorphic animals ._.


----------



## Thrashy (Dec 29, 2019)

I just remembered, that we have an ornithological institute in Switzerland too:
www.vogelwarte.ch: Home
I should support them again as soon as my finances become more stable, as they do lot of great stuff!

Our cat once brought home a bird.
The Vogelwarte healed the injured little guy - for free! They could release him after a few weeks


----------



## KD142000 (Dec 29, 2019)

Felix Bernard said:


> What attitude? The attitude that brought us modernized society and medicine?
> Sorry dude, it isn’t strictly “theist” to govern your own species above inferior ones. If we and our parents are just as morally valuable as the the animal kingdom, why is eating our babies illegal?


Modernised society can still exist without killing off thousands of species, you know?



Doomer said:


> Did they ever save your life? Did they save lives of other humans? What makes them entitled to such our generosity? We should focus our efforts on reducing poverty, school funding so out children, our future, could get better education.


Big shock, you can also work on those things, too. We're not saying we should ignore some problems and focus entirely on others. That's how this whole mess of mass extinction started...focusing only on solving our own problems and ignoring how it would impact the animal kingdom.

Did the schoolkids you want to educate save your life? Did the people in poverty save your life? No, they did not. By your own logic, you should be ignoring them, too.
But actually wanting to make a difference regardless of how it benefits you or has benefitted you is the whole point of being a good, wholesome person.
You wanna go work on those? Kindly go do that.



Felix Bernard said:


> If it’s not immoral for other animals to eat their babies, why is it immoral for us to do so?
> 
> This is a major intellectual incoherence on your part. I say we should see our own needs as superior to animals, but now you say somehow our actions have more moral weight *shrugs*


Eating babies is illegal and immoral for a reason. Don't bother questioning that, even intellectually. Only the lowest form of humanity in my book even THINKS about questioning that.

I won't bother telling you why. You should know that, quite frankly.


----------



## Tallow_Phoenix (Dec 29, 2019)

Welp, I tried. 50th post!
edit: 51st post!


----------



## Night.Claw (Dec 29, 2019)

Why don't we just focus on sharing our interest in the actual topic of the thread, and sharing our achievements of making changes IN THE CURRENT TOPIC and not other thing we need. Because when last time i checked, the topic was about saving kakapos, and not education, cannibalism and the bible. 

So why don't we continue the starting conversation instead of trailing down to every possible unwanted direction?

I would personally be interested what YOU did to make changes and what the areas/towns around provide to save some animals/the environment.


----------



## Pygmepatl (Dec 29, 2019)

There are so many endangered species in Mexico, some of them beautiful and majestic, that I wouldn't ming helping for their preservation.


----------



## ZeroVoidTime (Dec 29, 2019)

Simo said:


> People could also live on Soylent Green, it just wouldn't be a lot of fun; a lot of joy would go out of the world.


----------



## Nax04 (Dec 29, 2019)

Had to log in and leave the shadows once again to say. What the _*FUCK*_ is wrong with you @Doomer


----------



## ConorHyena (Dec 29, 2019)

There's a rather sizeable National Park close to where I live - they're trying to recreate some of the old moors they used to have apparently. Also, as far as I've learned, they have wild cats there, but I haven't seen much.

I did help to pull down anti-chew netting during my first few weeks here.


----------



## Pygmepatl (Dec 29, 2019)

My species of skunk, Spilogale pygmaea or Pygmy spotted skunk, which is endemic of Mexico, has been classified as a vulnerable species due to a 30% decrease in their population during the past three generations in 15 years. This due to the reduction of their habitat by human activity.

I really don't want to see them gone. And I hope something is done soon to save this beautiful species.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Dec 29, 2019)

Nax04 said:


> Had to log in and leave the shadows once again to say. What the _*FUCK*_ is wrong with you @Doomer


There have been some users over the years who seem to be here simply because no other community will have them. But by all means, let them continue. They only reinforce what I already suspect.


----------



## Fallowfox (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Because eating babies is immoral.



Oh shit _I'm_ in trouble.


----------



## Deleted member 111470 (Dec 29, 2019)

Me: _"What a nice thread, I bet it's gonna be furries getting together sharing some wholesome posts about helping animals"
_
Actual posts: _"aminal is inferor lul" 
_
Out of all the things in this fandom, this is something I didn't expect, to be honest. This community never fails to disappoint.


----------



## Joni (Dec 29, 2019)

ConorHyena said:


> There's a rather sizeable National Park close to where I live - they're trying to recreate some of the old moors they used to have apparently. Also, as far as I've learned, they have wild cats there, but I haven't seen much.
> 
> I did help to pull down anti-chew netting during my first few weeks here.


OwO yes right we have the national park here.


----------



## Skittles (Dec 29, 2019)

We just got wolves back to Denmark. This is considered a win for conservation. (Although the farmers disagree some..)


----------



## Night.Claw (Dec 29, 2019)

Rimna said:


> Me: _"What a nice thread, I bet it's gonna be furries getting together sharing some wholesome posts about helping animals"
> _
> Actual posts: _"aminal is inferor lul"
> _
> Out of all the things in this fandom, this is something I didn't expect to be honest. This community never fails to disappoint.


Thankfully not for everyone.
We have a handful of people who actually can be counted on, to make some changes.
And the rest... >->
My best advice is to try to provide more, so the lazy/ignorant/egoist/self centered people don't need to take part in donating and making things better.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Dec 29, 2019)

Rimna said:


> Me: _"What a nice thread, I bet it's gonna be furries getting together sharing some wholesome posts about helping animals"
> _
> Actual posts: _"aminal is inferor lul"
> _
> Out of all the things in this fandom, this is something I didn't expect, to be honest. This community never fails to disappoint.


As long as arrogant, self-centered creation myths are tolerated, they will always be an obstacle to conservation and animal welfare.

Back on topic, does anyone here donate to Eco Defense Group? They are a counter-poaching organization that takes the fight directly to the source.


----------



## KD142000 (Dec 29, 2019)

Spilogale Pygmaea said:


> My species of skunk, Spilogale pygmaea or Pygmy spotted skunk, has been classified as a vulnerable species due to a 30% decrease in their population during the past three generations or 15 years. This due to the reduction of their habitat by human activity.


I hope that they can be saved, too.

Also, I guess as a little bit of a link to conservation here, I did recently see a couple of red kites in my local area. They really are beautiful birds, once the most persecuted in Britain. One of my favourite predatory birds. Kestrels and Sparrowhawks are in the top 3, too (though they aren't endangered).





They introduced them to Yorkshire in around 2002, and a few other sites before that.
The population is now over the 2,000 mark, but they still need some more help for it to get higher.

@Skittles My brethren will hopefully thrive...though you may notice them wearing a lot of leather.


----------



## MetroFox2 (Dec 29, 2019)

If nobody minds, I will share some bigger UK charities if people want to throw their money at something. I will note, the RSPCA, as far as I know, is more geared towards domestic strays than conservation, but just as valuable. I'll also share FFI as they featured on the Yogscast Jingle Jam a few years back. I would also recommend Ferne Animal Sanctuary as they were the charity for 2019's Furcation.

I don't know if you can donate to them, but I'd recommend also looking-up two reintroduction efforts in the UK: The project to reintroduce the Wild Cat to Scotland, and the project to reintroduce the Pine Marten to Mid-Wales.

www.rspb.org.uk: The RSPB Wildlife Charity: Nature Reserves & Wildlife Conservation
www.rspca.org.uk: The Largest Animal Welfare Charity in the UK | RSPCA
www.fauna-flora.org: Fauna & Flora International


----------



## Thrashy (Dec 29, 2019)

Skittles said:


> We just got wolves back to Denmark. This is considered a win for conservation. (Although the farmers disagree some..)


Oh, that's similar to Switzerland then.
The wolves are slowly coming back. The same goes for Lynxes.
But plenty of mountain farmers want to shoot the wolves because they don't want to protect their sheep properly. That way more sheep die because they fall down cliffes is of course an ignored fact at these circles...

I think we now have like 70 known wolves here


----------



## Fallowfox (Dec 29, 2019)

KD142000 said:


> I hope that they can be saved, too.
> 
> Also, I guess as a little bit of a link to conservation here, I did recently see a couple of red kites in my local area. They really are beautiful birds, once the most persecuted in Britain. One of my favourite predatory birds. Kestrels and Sparrowhawks are in the top 3, too (though they aren't endangered).
> 
> ...



I see a huge number of red kites here in the south. They're absolutely everywhere. I never used to see them in my childhood.


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

Fallowfox said:


> Oh shit _I'm_ in trouble.



I was mocking people who believe eating babies is wrong. My fault I didnt make it clear enough, sorry


----------



## Skittles (Dec 29, 2019)

Thrashy said:


> Oh, that's similar to Switzerland then.
> The wolves are slowly coming back. The same goes for Lynxes.
> But plenty of mountain farmers want to shoot the wolves because they don't want to protect their sheep properly. That way more sheep die because they fall dawn cliffes is of course an ignored fact at these circles...
> 
> I think we now have like 70 known wolves here



Same reasons. Farmers don't want their livestock munched. We have 10-20 I think


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

Kit H. Ruppell said:


> As long as arrogant creation myths are tolerated, expect little improvement.



Suppose both your kid and your dog is drowning, but you can save only one. Who will it be?


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Suppose both your kid and your dog is drowning, but you can save only one. Who will it be?


I'm not having kids, so obviously the dog. Of course, I might never get a dog either.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Suppose both your kid and your dog is drowning, but you can save only one. Who will it be?


Doomer...like.....can you not?


----------



## Tallow_Phoenix (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Suppose both your kid and your dog is drowning, but you can save only one. Who will it be?



...what does that have to do with conservation? This isn't about whether you like animals or people better.


----------



## Night.Claw (Dec 29, 2019)

Skittles said:


> Same reasons. Farmers don't want their livestock munched. We have 10-20 I think


I'm not sure about it, but aren't the easiest way to protect livestock would be low voltage electrical fence?
I'm seeing it around here on some farms, but there are no large carnivores to treathen them, so i don't know how effective it is against them.


----------



## Skittles (Dec 29, 2019)

Night.Claw said:


> I'm not sure about it, but aren't the easiest way to protect livestock would be low voltage electrical fence?
> I'm seeing it around here on some farms, but there are no large carnivores to treathen them, so i don't know how effective it is against them.



Hard to say. A determined hungry pack would probably find a way around.


----------



## KD142000 (Dec 29, 2019)

Fallowfox said:


> I see a huge number of red kites here in the south. They're absolutely everywhere. I never used to see them in my childhood.


I believe they must be thriving from the introduction to the Chilterns, long ago. Glad to hear they are absolutely everywhere, there.
The most I've seen at a time is 3, though they're usually on their lonesome.



Doomer said:


> Suppose both your kid and your dog is drowning, but you can save only one. Who will it be?


Ah, a great question and one that baits an obvious response. Clever move.
How about I match that with another question: If you don't care about this situation, why are you still posting?

You do realise you can't gain anything from this...and the Kakapos are getting fed from your ramblings, right?
There's two for you to think about. Now be on your way.


----------



## Thrashy (Dec 29, 2019)

Night.Claw said:


> I'm not sure about it, but aren't the easiest way to protect livestock would be low voltage electrical fence?
> I'm seeing it around here on some farms, but there are no large carnivores to treathen them, so i don't know how effective it is against them.


Even that costs money. And they don't want to pay for that. 
Also, some fields in high alpine areas might not be near an electrical source. I'm not sure if this is an argument for them though


----------



## MetroFox2 (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Suppose both your kid and your dog is drowning, but you can save only one. Who will it be?



Neither, I'd piss in the lake and laugh all the way to the claims office

_Sarc_


----------



## Fallowfox (Dec 29, 2019)

KD142000 said:


> I believe they must be thriving from the introduction to the Chilterns, long ago. Glad to hear they are absolutely everywhere, there.
> The most I've seen at a time is 3, though they're usually on their lonesome.
> 
> 
> ...



I've seen scores of Red Kites circling in Hampshire before.

I looked them up on wikipedia though and apparently while they've made an improvement in Britain they're still declining in continental Europe where most of them live.



Thrashy said:


> Even that costs money. And they don't want to pay for that.
> Also, some fields in high alpine areas might not be near an electrical source. I'm not sure if this is an argument for them though



I think in Sweden Farmers are reimbursed for livestock taken by wolves, maybe @quoting_mungo can confirm that. Still, Sweden's wolf population is only 200-300, which is actually_ not a very big number_ when you think about it.


----------



## Deleted member 111470 (Dec 29, 2019)

Before this thread gets closed, I'll drop a link to Dean Schneider's instagram page. He has a wildlife oasis in South Africa, and looks after animals.

Dean Schneider (@dean.schneider) • Instagram photos and videos

It's worth checking it out.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Dec 29, 2019)

KD142000 said:


> and the Kakapos are getting fed from your ramblings, right?


They are going to be quite chonky borbs


----------



## Joni (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Suppose both your kid and your dog is drowning, but you can save only one. Who will it be?


If this supposed to be an an accurete analogy. You and your kid are at the beach watching the dog drowning. We humans have everything, only because of our own stupidity and a fucked up system, we have a huge gap between poor and rich. And now we're too stupid to keep our own planet in order.


----------



## MetroFox2 (Dec 29, 2019)

Fallowfox said:


> I've seen scores of Red Kites circling in Hampshire before.
> 
> I looked them up on wikipedia though and apparently while they've made an improvement in Britain they're still declining in continental Europe where most of them live.



Birds of prey are neat, I've seen plenty nesting around the volunteer railway, it's a very good habitat for animals. Slow-moving vehicles, little human disturbance... Except when we _occassionally _come along and burn the overgrown vegetation, which trust me, there's loads of that shit.

I think I've seen a Red Kite once at the Gloucester & Warwickshire Steam Railway, very majestic birds.


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

Infrarednexus said:


> Doomer...like.....can you not?



So after all a kid is more important. We don't have ultimate amount of money either, we have to choose between saving species or children.


----------



## ConorHyena (Dec 29, 2019)

Night.Claw said:


> I'm not sure about it, but aren't the easiest way to protect livestock would be low voltage electrical fence?
> I'm seeing it around here on some farms, but there are no large carnivores to treathen them, so i don't know how effective it is against them.



This is a bit of an icky thing, and really can't be discussed in this thread - wolves and farmers have a problematic relationship, in adding to that, the wolf is not an endangered animal. I work with this in my day job - so if you want, PMs


----------



## Telnac (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Suppose both your kid and your dog is drowning, but you can save only one. Who will it be?


That's not a good analogy. We don't have to choose between human existence and the existence of animals. With proper planning and environmental awareness we can continue the development of our civilization without all the wanton destruction of the past.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> So after all a kid is more important. We don't have ultimate amount of money either, we have to choose between saving species or children.


 We have plenty of money to help both. It's not one or the other.


----------



## KD142000 (Dec 29, 2019)

Fallowfox said:


> I've seen scores of Red Kites circling in Hampshire before.
> 
> I looked them up on wikipedia though and apparently while they've made an improvement in Britain they're still declining in continental Europe where most of them live.


That's a definite shame. I hope that they can be as successful as they are here, someday.



Infrarednexus said:


> They are going to be quite chonky borbs


Perhaps we can also get them some top hats and canes? Those would look very stylish.
Oh, and can't forget the monocle.



Doomer said:


> So after all a kid is more important. We don't have ultimate amount of money either, we have to choose between saving species or children.


INFINITE. Not ultimate.
Also, we don't have to choose anything. You just want people to choose one specific thing, cos you don't care about the other.
I ain't gonna make you care about conservation. I'd rather let you just get on with things and not bother those that do care about it.

You want to go out and help people in poverty? Go give them a warm blanket, some decent food and point them towards a shelter.
We all want to do that, too, so stop treating us like we're somehow lower than dirt.


----------



## Thrashy (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> We don't have ultimate amount of money either, we have to choose between saving species or children.


Around 1% of humanity owns around 99% of the money.
Don't tell me, we don't have enough to do both. 
The distribution just sucks.


----------



## Fallowfox (Dec 29, 2019)

Telnac said:


> That's not a good analogy. We don't have to choose between human existence and the existence of animals. With proper planning and environmental awareness we can continue the development of our civilization without all the wanton destruction of the past.



The interests of future generations and natural ecosystems are also very much aligned, because we will rely on wild spaces to buffer some of the effects of climate change over the coming century. 

The real choice we face is between greed and posterity, isn't it? Few nations in the world are currently meeting their commitments to posterity, but we're probably (hopefully?) going to live through that change.


----------



## Pygmepatl (Dec 29, 2019)

Well, the Mexican Wolf is also doing some progress, an species which was considered extinct 50 years ago. Right now their population ascends to 40+ individuals in wildlife.


----------



## Joni (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> So after all a kid is more important. We don't have ultimate amount of money either, we have to choose between saving species or children.


----------



## foussiremix (Dec 29, 2019)

Just gonna throw in here, every living creature has a right to exist so whats so bad about helping them cute kakapoos to survive?
I would surely spend half my monies to help most of the endangered species.

AND THATS THE TEA
PERIODT


----------



## Infrarednexus (Dec 29, 2019)




----------



## CaptainCool (Dec 29, 2019)

Felix Bernard said:


> Preservation of species when necessary is good, but humans are superior in value and in worth.


There are around 7.8 billion people on earth right now.
Meanwhile there are less than 2000 black and white ruffed lemurs.
Less than 2500 ring-tailed lemurs (~90% of all 113 known lemur species are endangerd, many of them critically)
Less than 10.000 red pandas.

And those are just the species I support through conservation networks.
We are not superior. We are not worth more.
All living things are family. Except for humans. We are like that one disgusting uncle you are certain about that he raped one of your cousins when they were 4 years old.
We are filth. If anything, we need to prove that we actually do deserve to exist on this planet that we are slowly but surely killing.

Also yeah, I do support some conservation networks  I make donations when I can and I make my photos available to them free of charge, they are using them on social media sites to raise awareness.


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

Thrashy said:


> Around 1% of humanity owns around 99% of the money.
> Don't tell me, we don't have enough to do both.
> The distribution just sucks.



Where do you think the rich keep their money? They have it invested in the economy, creating new value, jobs and higher life quality for everyone. You should be very thankful to rich people.


----------



## Deleted member 132067 (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> So after all a kid is more important. We don't have ultimate amount of money either, we have to choose between saving species or children.


When America alone has enough money to build some wall for shit's and giggles, I'm sure "we" have enough money to save a bunch of fat looking birds.


----------



## KD142000 (Dec 29, 2019)

Infrarednexus said:


>


My money's on the Victorian Gentleman.
Kakapo: "Engage in fisticuffs, you intolerable brute"
People Arguing: "Oh snap..."



Doomer said:


> Where do you think the rich keep their money? They have it invested in the economy, creating new value, jobs and higher life quality for everyone. You should be very thankful to rich people.


They have it...in a bank account.
They spend it on their luxury mansions, their multiple swimming pools, their Lamborghinis and their lady friends in skimpy bikinis.

I'm pretty darn sure they wouldn't even give you a second look, let alone any money at all to solve any problems you had.
But sure, keep on putting them up on a pedestal. Totally gonna help the situation.

Also, whilst you're at it, ask them to save the Kakapos, the Red Kites, the Mexican Wolves, the Pygmy Skunks, the Lemurs...and every other endangered species.
THEN, if they actually pull their finger out, I might start respecting them.
Until then, keep your useless rambling to yourself.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Dec 29, 2019)

Thrashy said:


> Oh, that's similar to Switzerland then.
> The wolves are slowly coming back. The same goes for Lynxes.
> But plenty of mountain farmers want to shoot the wolves because they don't want to protect their sheep properly. That way more sheep die because they fall down cliffes is of course an ignored fact at these circles...
> 
> I think we now have like 70 known wolves here


I've gotten into quite a few arguemente over this for some reason. Farmers' lives depends on their animals staying alive. If it meant I'd get more money to stay alive and feed my family, you bet I'd shoot wolves too. I don't care about, and I hate the word, what snowflakes think about me or someone else trying to make a living just because I hurt one of their precious animals. It's funny because most of the people hurt will turn around and eat a cheeseburger. Your animal hierarchy of which one's more important doesn't matter if it isn't endangered.


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

KD142000 said:


> They have it...in a bank account.
> They spend it on their luxury mansions, their multiple swimming pools, their Lamborghinis and their lady friends in skimpy bikinis.
> 
> I'm pretty darn sure they wouldn't even give you a second look, let alone any money at all to solve any problems you had.
> ...



They can save any specie you like or they can create more jobs and keep people of the streets.


----------



## CaptainCool (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> They can save any specie you like or they can create more jobs and keep people of the streets.


It would cost about 10 million dollars to save all lemur species from extinction.
Compared to how much money the richest people in the world own that would basically be pocket change for them. It's about 0.01% of Jeff Bezos' capital.
They can do both. They could create jobs, save all species and yet still keep sipping their champagne.
And yet they are too stingy to achieve either of that. To me they are still failures, no matter how big their tech corporations and package empires are.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Dec 29, 2019)

Donated $75 NZD or $50 USD to the fund! Here's hoping they're over a thousand in number by 2030!


----------



## Doomer (Dec 29, 2019)

CaptainCool said:


> It would cost about 10 million dollars to save all lemur species from extinction.
> Compared to how much money the richest people in the world own that would basically be pocket change for them. It's about 0.01% of Jeff Bezos' capital.
> They can do both. They could create jobs, save all species and yet still keep sipping their champagne.
> And yet they are too stingy to achieve either of that. To me they are still failures, no matter how big their tech corporations and package empires are.



Youre just jumping on hate the rich bandwagon. Jeff has donated hundreds of millions for humanitarian causes. How much have you donated?


----------



## KD142000 (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> They can save any specie you like or they can create more jobs and keep people of the streets.


They CAN. Doesn't mean they DO.
Having the ability to do something doesn't mean that they will do it, you know?
I also recommend that you go and spend your time elsewhere. You won't gain very much, here.
Those Kakapos are almost thankful for your many bullshit posts.

Look, none of us want to force you to care about conservation. Even though it's not an ideal standpoint, you've made it clear you won't change your mind.
I suggest leaving this thread well alone and devoting your time to something more productive...like helping the situation with poverty and education.



Doomer said:


> Youre just jumping on hate the rich bandwagon. Jeff has donated hundreds of millions for humanitarian causes


Hasn't yet saved the lemurs, though, has it?
Why doesn't he just donate the $10 million already?
This is our point. We don't just hate the rich cos they have more money than us. We dislike them cos they do absolutely bugger all to solve real problems.


----------



## Night.Claw (Dec 29, 2019)

KD142000 said:


> I also recommend that you go and spend your time elsewhere. You won't gain very much, here.


But... he already did. People answering him and trying to make him understand things. He already won. Why do you think he is here?


----------



## KD142000 (Dec 29, 2019)

Night.Claw said:


> But... he already did. People answering him and trying to make him understand things. He already won. Why do you think he is here?


Oh...right.
I often forget about that.


----------



## CaptainCool (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Jeff has donated hundreds of millions for humanitarian causes. How much have you donated?


Why would I donate for that? We have enough people as it is. Donating for that is like adding fuel to a fire that is gonna burn your own house down...
And besides, why does he have to keep that much money for himself? I get by just fine with my salary. If he is such a great guy, why is be being so selfish with his billions?

I made photos availabe which, if they had been taken by a paid photographer, would have cost them thousands of dollars.
Now I am not an actual "pro". Neither did I study photography. My 7 years of experience aren't even that much. But I am good enough that my shots get the attention of their audience and I am good enough to be asked to become the local zoo's official photographer.
I do what I can with the limited means that are available to me. Jeff and the other rich "elite" aren't even doing a fraction of what they could be doing.
They just want to become even more rich... No matter what it takes.


----------



## Sirocco~ (Dec 29, 2019)

KD142000 said:


> Perhaps we can also get them some top hats and canes? Those would look very stylish.
> Oh, and can't forget the monocle.


I shall help fund this worthy cause~


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Youre just jumping on hate the rich bandwagon. Jeff has donated hundreds of millions for humanitarian causes. How much have you donated?


Some of us can't actually donate that much. I make something like $200 a month from a caring family member and I still find time to donate most of my money. If I were Bezos I'd probably have donated hundreds of millions if I put my percentage given to his wealth.


----------



## AppleButt (Dec 29, 2019)

Awesome thread.  I’ll make a donation to a conservation cause every so often.

I also like to help in smaller more direct ways.  When I find an injured wild animal, I’ll call a rehabilitater. 

Like once when I found an injured red tailed hawk, I called a woman who rehabilitates. 

Unfortunately, it was too far gone and had to be euthanized, but I felt good that I at least tried to help it.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Dec 29, 2019)

Can you send a kakapo emote so I can add it to my server @Infrarednexus ?


----------



## Infrarednexus (Dec 29, 2019)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> Can you send a kakapo emote so I can add it to my server @Infrarednexus ?


Sure


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Dec 29, 2019)

Infrarednexus said:


> Sure


thanks fam


----------



## Kinare (Dec 29, 2019)

Snow leopards <3
snowleopard.org

They're so pretty and I luff them. I've bought a few shirts when they have them (very limited edition, gotta grab when ya can). Also got the most adorable booties for my nephew when he was born handmade by villagers that live among the snow leopards, got a lot of compliments on them and everyone wanted to know where I got them. It's a really great program they have going to help the local people and the cats. I have them set as my Amazon smile contribution too. Don't forget you can do that for a lot of charities! It adds up.


----------



## ManicTherapsid (Dec 29, 2019)




----------



## SSJ3Mewtwo (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Suppose both your kid and your dog is drowning, but you can save only one. Who will it be?



I'm going to just drop this as a reminder, rather than an outright warning or other infraction:

Please do not attempt to deliberately gaslight and derail discussion.  

Your question, and a number of other questions/stances you've posed in this thread are so clearly diametric that they don't come across as genuine discussion.  They come across as attempts to stir the pot.

If you're not going to genuinely discuss an issue, please do not participate in the thread.



Felix Bernard said:


> What attitude? The attitude that brought us modernized society and medicine?
> Sorry dude, it isn’t strictly “theist” to govern your own species above inferior ones. If we and our parents are just as morally valuable as the the animal kingdom, why is eating our babies illegal?



Same warning.  

I don't know why you got so incensed at the idea of care for the environment, the cycle of life, and the animals we interact with that you had to compare it with eating babies.

And I don't care.  

Your post was vaguely (oh so vaguely) on topic that I won't count it as spam.  But if you're not going to discuss issues with people reasonably and with actual honesty, you shouldn't participate in the thread.


----------



## Simo (Dec 29, 2019)

Doomer said:


> Fair enough I wont try to spoil your little gathering just because I dont believe in charity.



OK, Doomer

~

Gosh...is nice to see all the support for animals still...I recall a similar thing happening on another forum, years ago: there will always be a few Furries Against Animals but most seem to support conservation.


----------



## Deleted member 112695 (Dec 29, 2019)

SSJ3Mewtwo said:


> I'm going to just drop this as a reminder, rather than an outright warning or other infraction:
> 
> Please do not attempt to deliberately gaslight and derail discussion.
> 
> ...



Thank you. I promise I am going to do better at this.


----------



## SSJ3Mewtwo (Dec 29, 2019)

Felix Bernard said:


> Thank you. I promise I am going to do better at this.



Good to hear!


----------



## Ravofox (Dec 30, 2019)

Ooh! Very interesting thread!

I'm a big fan of the emerging compassionate conservation movement, which calls for the greater use of alternatives to culling, whether of invasive species or diseased individuals of threatened species.

Invasive species are certainly a major problem and have caused or contributed to extinctions, but their impact is largely overshadowed by habitat destruction and are only rarely the sole factor. So the movement is largely based around increasing the population of possible natural predators (dingos against foxes in Australia for instance), conditioning individuals of either species to avoid each other which can potentially be passed on to their offspring, physical and/or chemical castration, the use of protective barriers, breeding programs and more.

I don't think this can really work on its own, at least not yet, but I think a combination of some degree of continued culling along with the greater adoption of the above methods may well be effective as well as less harsh. I actually wish to get involved in something like this someday.

Here's a good article which addresses it:

www.google.com.au: When Conservationists Kill Lots (and Lots) of Animals


----------



## Doomer (Dec 30, 2019)

Simo said:


> OK, Doomer
> 
> ~
> 
> Gosh...is nice to see all the support for animals still...I recall a similar thing happening on another forum, years ago: there will always be a few Furries Against Animals but most seem to support conservation.



it's an echo chamber, not a proper discussions


----------



## volkinaxe (Dec 30, 2019)

Infrarednexus said:


> I've taken an interest in conservation and helping endangered species. I figure that it's our responsibility to help these animals because it is usually our fault they are endangered in the first place. I made this thread so we can share and inform each other of endangered species and ecosystems we know of and spread awareness to educate one another on environmental protection.
> 
> Share your opinions and knowledge on the subject if you'd like.
> 
> ...


thanks for this I live in new Zealand  have not seen one in wild


----------



## Anthrasmagoria (Dec 30, 2019)

Conservation going forward definitely needs to be more grassroots and less governments promising things they won't deliver. For that though we need to get local people on side. For them to be on side, the wildlife has to bring them some kind of benefit.

This is why hunting reserves in say, Africa get more local people on side than if you passed some law banning hunting altogether. There'd be poachers ignoring the law and killing the wildlife for short term gain regardless of how much fencing and how many rangers you employed. But if you incentivized locals to protect the wildlife while allowing small hunting quotas, they would guard it as a precious asset against poachers. Reserves do need to be managed these days now anyway, so it's better to get the local people involved, even if it does mean x amount of wildlife must be culled each year to maintain the ecosystem of the reserve in balance. If it must be culled, why not let people with money pay to do it toward the upkeep of the reserve as a whole. Everyone is happy - the rich hunters, the local people, and the wildlife get to keep on existing within their protected reserve.

In many places of the world where things need conserving, there just isn't the social or governmental infrastructure to preserve wildlife any other way than this.

That said it's clear that we can't keep increasing our population on this planet exponentially and somehow expecting nature to keep giving ground. Education and local involvement is key, really. Get people caring, but not by lecturing at and shaming them - that doesn't work when people are poor and/or starving.


----------



## Fallowfox (Dec 30, 2019)

Anthrasmagoria said:


> Conservation going forward definitely needs to be more grassroots and less governments promising things they won't deliver. For that though we need to get local people on side. For them to be on side, the wildlife has to bring them some kind of benefit.
> 
> This is why hunting reserves in say, Africa get more local people on side than if you passed some law banning hunting altogether. There'd be poachers ignoring the law and killing the wildlife for short term gain regardless of how much fencing and how many rangers you employed. But if you incentivized locals to protect the wildlife while allowing small hunting quotas, they would guard it as a precious asset against poachers. Reserves do need to be managed these days now anyway, so it's better to get the local people involved, even if it does mean x amount of wildlife must be culled each year to maintain the ecosystem of the reserve in balance. If it must be culled, why not let people with money pay to do it toward the upkeep of the reserve as a whole. Everyone is happy - the rich hunters, the local people, and the wildlife get to keep on existing within their protected reserve.
> 
> ...



This is a bit of a nuanced topic. I can't confidently comment that trophy-hunting is good for conservation- and in general the scientific community doesn't endorse the practice.
I would probably err on the side of saying that it's a false narrative that hunters who have historically harmed ecosystems severely use to make themselves feel good about themselves.

The whole thing strikes me as being fundamentally flawed in the same way as people who donate to charity to carbon-offset their flights, rather than taking fewer flights.

and you know, we don't want to end up getting trapped in a world where the only reason Lions still exist in Africa is because impoverished Africans allow them to exist so that wealthy Americans can kill them for fun.

It's a vision of dystopia.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Dec 30, 2019)

Already over a hundred posts. If anyone else wants to throw in some of their spare change to go in to the birds efforts, the link is right here. 

www.doc.govt.nz: Kākāpō Recovery

$2, $1, even just 50 cents goes to providing food, equipment, and medicine for New Zealand's endangered wildlife. It all adds up.

Simply being here and talking with one another contributes to helping a species recover from the brink of extinction.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Dec 30, 2019)

So thoughtful of you to do this <3


----------



## Zerzehn (Dec 30, 2019)

Would you be willing to accept semechki as a donation?

Of course, I am posting to help the kakapos.


----------



## Anthrasmagoria (Dec 31, 2019)

Fallowfox said:


> This is a bit of a nuanced topic. I can't confidently comment that trophy-hunting is good for conservation- and in general the scientific community doesn't endorse the practice.
> I would probably err on the side of saying that it's a false narrative that hunters who have historically harmed ecosystems severely use to make themselves feel good about themselves.
> 
> The whole thing strikes me as being fundamentally flawed in the same way as people who donate to charity to carbon-offset their flights, rather than taking fewer flights.
> ...



I agree, but the world being how it is now and those places with wildlife in greatest need have a tendency to be so bad that this really is the best shot for some of this wildlife. I heard we recently lost a rhino species forever to poaching and there are so many others right on the brink. Even if we were to save these animals in zoos, that would be the end of their existence as wild animals effectively without the preservation of chunks of existing habitat along with them. Once they get put into zoos, their behavior and epigenetics will change to the point where they probably would not make it if they were returned to the wild (if there ever will be a wild left for them to return to). It's a sad situation but I do want as much habitat to be preserved as possible and this does seem a good way to get both the animals and the land they live on to be considered something too valuable to just disregard or destroy, or turn into farmland.

At the end of the day most people in the world do not care about the environment or animals in general as much as they care about feeding themselves and their families. And that's understandable. Humans aren't built to worry about things beyond their experience or immediate interests. I don't see that changing for the near future, until most people's basic needs are met. Meanwhile the wildlife's time is running out.


----------



## Fallowfox (Dec 31, 2019)

Anthrasmagoria said:


> I agree, but the world being how it is now and those places with wildlife in greatest need have a tendency to be so bad that this really is the best shot for some of this wildlife. I heard we recently lost a rhino species forever to poaching and there are so many others right on the brink. Even if we were to save these animals in zoos, that would be the end of their existence as wild animals effectively without the preservation of chunks of existing habitat along with them. Once they get put into zoos, their behavior and epigenetics will change to the point where they probably would not make it if they were returned to the wild (if there ever will be a wild left for them to return to). It's a sad situation but I do want as much habitat to be preserved as possible and this does seem a good way to get both the animals and the land they live on to be considered something too valuable to just disregard or destroy, or turn into farmland.
> 
> At the end of the day most people in the world do not care about the environment or animals in general as much as they care about feeding themselves and their families. And that's understandable. Humans aren't built to worry about things beyond their experience or immediate interests. I don't see that changing for the near future, until most people's basic needs are met. Meanwhile the wildlife's time is running out.



I am really not sure that legalised trophy hunting is a viable answer. I'm not aware of any substantial consensus among scientists in favour of it.


----------



## Anthrasmagoria (Dec 31, 2019)

Fallowfox said:


> I am really not sure that legalised trophy hunting is a viable answer. I'm not aware of any substantial consensus among scientists in favour of it.



Scientists who study the reserves know that they already have to cull lions, elephants, herbivores etc. to maintain the populations at numbers the land area can sustain. Someone has to pull the trigger, and it makes more sense to have someone who is bringing money in to do it than someone who doesn't, when the parks are always needing funds to stay maintained. Of course it would make even more sense for whoever does to be accompanied by rangers on which animals they can and cannot take.

Trophy hunting isn't in itself a big problem compared to the problems caused by locals killing the wildlife because it comes too close to their farms or livestock, the threat from poachers or habitat loss from big multinationals etc. It's one way an inevitable loss of certain number of animals can be made to help the overall cause of preserving the whole. Given how desperate the situation is for some areas, it's the lesser evil. Obviously tourism pays too, not just trophy hunting, but as we said, if animals have to be culled, it's logical they make some funds from it that can go back into the running of the reserve.

By far the biggest problem wildlife on land faces at the moment is humans keep taking and using the land it lives on and having little motivation to value the wilderness. That's more of an economic and social problem than anything.


----------



## Zerzehn (Dec 31, 2019)

Happy New Year to the kakapos!


----------



## Deleted member 112695 (Dec 31, 2019)

I am going to donate a little bit.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jan 1, 2020)

Anthrasmagoria said:


> Scientists who study the reserves know that they already have to cull lions, elephants, herbivores etc. to maintain the populations at numbers the land area can sustain. Someone has to pull the trigger, and it makes more sense to have someone who is bringing money in to do it than someone who doesn't, when the parks are always needing funds to stay maintained. Of course it would make even more sense for whoever does to be accompanied by rangers on which animals they can and cannot take.
> 
> Trophy hunting isn't in itself a big problem compared to the problems caused by locals killing the wildlife because it comes too close to their farms or livestock, the threat from poachers or habitat loss from big multinationals etc. It's one way an inevitable loss of certain number of animals can be made to help the overall cause of preserving the whole. Given how desperate the situation is for some areas, it's the lesser evil. Obviously tourism pays too, not just trophy hunting, but as we said, if animals have to be culled, it's logical they make some funds from it that can go back into the running of the reserve.
> 
> By far the biggest problem wildlife on land faces at the moment is humans keep taking and using the land it lives on and having little motivation to value the wilderness. That's more of an economic and social problem than anything.



This thread probably isn't the place to begin discussing the nuances of this subject; there is not room to address whether trophy hunting changes the genetic resilience of populations by selectively killing the largest males, whether quotas for a safe number of a threatened species that can be killed are generated in a trustworthy way (for example quotas are issued for the number of African leopards that can be killed in spite of nobody really being sure how many African leopards exist in the wild or whether investment from trophy hunting is even benefiting them anyway), or whether an economic model for conservation that requires African communities to be economically reliant on North American and European 1-percenters is really sustainable. What happens if it becomes clear trophy hunting has become unsustainable for a species, but an African community has become economically reliant on continuing the practice? 

Long essays could be written on any of these subjects.


----------



## Doomer (Jan 1, 2020)

Felix Bernard said:


> I am going to donate a little bit.



dont need to brag


----------



## Telnac (Jan 1, 2020)

Doomer said:


> dont need to brag


Why is that bragging? And by making a post here about it, he's helping even more. Nothing wrong with that!


----------



## Doomer (Jan 1, 2020)

Telnac said:


> Why is that bragging? And by making a post here about it, he's helping even more. Nothing wrong with that!



Makes you doubt the true intentions behind acts of good will


----------



## Breyo (Jan 1, 2020)

Doomer said:


> Makes you doubt the true intentions behind acts of good will


Geez... you're kinda pessimistic, aren'tcha? Besides no one is making you read this thread against your will (at least I hope not!), right? Let this be a nice, peaceful, hopeful thread like it was meant to be, please.

Good on everyone who donated! You all are great


----------



## Doomer (Jan 1, 2020)

Most people donate out of self righteousness


----------



## Breyo (Jan 1, 2020)

Doomer said:


> Most people donate out of self righteousness


And most people who ruin the joy of others do it out of lack of self-control, rudeness, or lack of respect. Either way, I'm not pushing you to be more kind or more malicious. I'm just asking you to please respect others and let them have their happiness and fun when/where they can have it


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jan 1, 2020)

Doomer said:


> Most people donate out of self righteousness


In the end, does it matter if it's going toward a good cause?


----------



## AppleButt (Jan 1, 2020)

Doomer said:


> Most people donate out of self righteousness



You’re right.  

Donating to good causes is terrible and people suck for doing it.  

They should be ashamed of themselves.  Very ashamed!

You’re not a true furry if you love animals so much you want to help preserve them.


----------



## Deleted member 82554 (Jan 1, 2020)

Doomer said:


> Most people donate out of self righteousness


Better than donating out of selfishness...


----------



## rekcerW (Jan 2, 2020)

I've been donating to the Raincoast Conservation Foundation for years and years, CanadaHelps lets you set it up as just a recurring monthly payment. They send stuff every year to let you know what they've been doing, which is sweet. The best part is it's a tax write-off like any other donation in the world, and you can just print out the forms to put it toward your taxes at the end of the year, which is a kickass bonus 

That's a topic I'm huge on, probably the one thing I'm most concerned about in the entire world. I never talk about because I have really really really strong feelings toward that shit that I find to be much easier to just do what I can by keeping a stiff upper lip about it and hopefully making a small difference in the best way I can right now.

I just find it fundamentally completely fucked in the absolute worst way possible that it seems like such a general consensus that it is acceptable to come into this world, tear it to shreds, and act like we're some sort of saintly wildlife management force that maintains critically-diminished populations by fucking eradicating others. It's fucking insanity to me, especially when we are in a world that WE FUCKING KNOW has experienced several mass-extinction events in history that it has recovered from, some being incredibly substantial; so, who in the fuck never said shit _at the point it became apparent_ _to us _that we are adversely affecting the fucking planet we also live in, that maybe it'd be best left to let nature just do its thing like it has so many fucking times in history and say "alright, we'll stop killing shit and see how this pans out."

Maybe we shouldn't be desecrating the fucking land we live in by flattening more and more lands that shouldn't be considered ours to build farms to support a population that is growing like crazy. Maybe we should consider condensing our operations to the best of our ability, and actually embracing fucking genetically modified organisms that could be produced in a much smaller footprint. Maybe we should consider condensing our oil operations and promoting more technologies like SAGD, and finding ways to survey without having to provide gridded cutlines that enable predators to find prey in otherwise serene places. Maybe we should consider alternatives to disposable shit, like maybe reusable containers that you bring back to the grocery store to get washed when you're done with them. Maybe we should consider that there are a shit-pile of other people living on this same planet than makes sense, and that being so hostile to the fact that what you are eating has a mere potential to have some different genes in it, that it's fucked and it's going to kill you. That's the other fucking thing that pisses me the fuck off way worse, is the fuckhead 'off-the-grid' motherfuckers that hunt for their own food because 'that's more sustainable'... The answer to that fucking stupidity is simple: times yourself by 7.53 billion and see how FUCKING SUSTAINABLE THAT IS. That shouldn't even require a bunch of thought, what in the flying fuck do you think made the fucking industrial revolution a big thing? For the love of fuck, I wish they'd stop making TV shows about those fucking pieces of shit. Fuck you, Discovery Channel and History Channel, what the fuck happened to you?

Maybe we should be looking at this much more seriously, like when we busted a move to put the fucking Apollo mission on the moon to stay ahead of Sputnik. I'd guess to say where we're headed is at least on par with WWIII


----------



## MaelstromEyre (Jan 2, 2020)

Whatever causes or charities you are involved in, just know where your money is going, if it's even doing a thing to improve the cause itself, not just paying administrative costs and giving the head of the organization a nice salary.


----------



## Deleted member 82554 (Jan 2, 2020)

New Zealand charities and government are nowhere near that corrupt. Trust me, most donation money goes towards the cause, not lining pockets.


----------



## MaelstromEyre (Jan 2, 2020)

Mr. Fox said:


> New Zealand charities and government and nowhere near that corrupt. Trust me, most donation money goes towards the cause, not lining pockets.


 The larger the organization, the more corruption you're likely to find.
My previous post was relating more to the international organizations, things like environmental causes and animal rights, that haul in a lot of money through donations that may not ever do a thing to help the cause.
As the saying goes, think global but act local.


----------



## Zerzehn (Jan 2, 2020)

Doomer said:


> Most people donate out of self righteousness


Aren't we edgy like a katana folded a thousand times by a smith with OCD?

The hypocrisy is strong with this one by posting here, after all...


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Jan 2, 2020)

rekcerW said:


> That's the other fucking thing that pisses me the fuck off way worse, is the fuckhead 'off-the-grid' motherfuckers that hunt for their own food because 'that's more sustainable'... The answer to that fucking stupidity is simple: times yourself by 7.53 billion and see how FUCKING SUSTAINABLE THAT IS. That shouldn't even require a bunch of thought, what in the flying fuck do you think made the fucking industrial revolution a big thing? For the love of fuck, I wish they'd stop making TV shows about those fucking pieces of shit. Fuck you, Discovery Channel and History Channel, what the fuck happened to you?


The glorification of hicks in the media has gone on for far too long. Its marketability says a lot about American intelligence, though.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jan 2, 2020)

rekcerW said:


> I've been donating to the Raincoast Conservation Foundation for years and years, CanadaHelps lets you set it up as just a recurring monthly payment. They send stuff every year to let you know what they've been doing, which is sweet. The best part is it's a tax write-off like any other donation in the world, and you can just print out the forms to put it toward your taxes at the end of the year, which is a kickass bonus
> 
> That's a topic I'm huge on, probably the one thing I'm most concerned about in the entire world. I never talk about because I have really really really strong feelings toward that shit that I find to be much easier to just do what I can by keeping a stiff upper lip about it and hopefully making a small difference in the best way I can right now.
> 
> ...


If you don't think hunting is good, go vegan. Those people are just getting their food themselves rather than paying a hitman to kill for them.


----------



## ConorHyena (Jan 2, 2020)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> If you don't think hunting is good, go vegan. Those people are just getting their food themselves rather than paying a hitman to kill for them.



hunting for sport isn't.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jan 2, 2020)

ConorHyena said:


> hunting for sport isn't.


He was talking about hunting for food, not for sport.


----------



## ConorHyena (Jan 2, 2020)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> He was talking about hunting for food, not for sport.


apologies.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jan 2, 2020)

ConorHyena said:


> apologies.


Yer good fam


----------



## Attaman (Jan 2, 2020)

I find it particularly depressing that when we had a sister thread going "Hey, don't donate to these people because they're anti-LGBTQ+ and fund shit like conversion therapy", the reply was "Well _*I*_ never had a problem with them and their bell-ringer seemed nice!", but _now_ when talking about donating to various environmental protection / conservation / restoration groups we have _multiple_ people come in trying to warn us against it because "It's all totally corrupt" and "Billionaires already have funding under control" and "You're just doing this to virtue signal". Curious that when it comes to conservation and climate change we get people crawling out of the woodworks to proclaim responsibility in one's donations and thorough vetting (to the point of suggesting not donating anything until 100% certain!), but when it comes to human rights "You're just exaggerating" (admittedly I'm pretty sure that's going to be the next step when people are eventually bothered enough to dig up documents to show they're donating to trustworthy causes: "Oh it's not as bad as people say", we already had that happen with the whole insect ecosystem going tits up. Something I'm sure is entirely unrelated to a lot of problems being faced by our feathered friends).

Like, this shit is getting pretty dire. And is often not being helped by official policy. Birds very much need our support, so while I do recommend people take time and look carefully... it's chiefly to see which ecosystems they think their money can most immediately help. Because trust me: We _will_ notice when the birds are gone.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jan 2, 2020)

Attaman said:


> I find it particularly depressing that when we had a sister thread going "Hey, don't donate to these people because they're anti-LGBTQ+ and fund shit like conversion therapy", the reply was "Well _*I*_ never had a problem with them and their bell-ringer seemed nice!", but _now_ when talking about donating to various environmental protection / conservation / restoration groups we have _multiple_ people come in trying to warn us against it because "It's all totally corrupt" and "Billionaires already have funding under control" and "You're just doing this to virtue signal". Curious that when it comes to conservation and climate change we get people crawling out of the woodworks to proclaim responsibility in one's donations and thorough vetting (to the point of suggesting not donating anything until 100% certain!), but when it comes to human rights "You're just exaggerating" (admittedly I'm pretty sure that's going to be the next step when people are eventually bothered enough to dig up documents to show they're donating to trustworthy causes: "Oh it's not as bad as people say", we already had that happen with the whole insect ecosystem going tits up. Something I'm sure is entirely unrelated to a lot of problems being faced by our feathered friends).
> 
> Like, this shit is getting pretty dire. And is often not being helped by official policy. Birds very much need our support, so while I do recommend people take time and look carefully... it's chiefly to see which ecosystems they think their money can most immediately help. Because trust me: We _will_ notice when the birds are gone.


I'm just doing my best whenever I can. I know there are probably more dire situations that need my attention but I just did what felt right.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Jan 2, 2020)

Doomer said:


> Most people donate out of self righteousness


No, we donate because we can't be everywhere ourselves.


----------



## Guifrog (Jan 2, 2020)

@Infrarednexus +1 post:






Noticed the party parrot SVG's file is CC-SA so I thought I'd give my input ^w^


----------



## Anthrasmagoria (Jan 2, 2020)

Fallowfox said:


> This thread probably isn't the place to begin discussing the nuances of this subject; there is not room to address whether trophy hunting changes the genetic resilience of populations by selectively killing the largest males, whether quotas for a safe number of a threatened species that can be killed are generated in a trustworthy way (for example quotas are issued for the number of African leopards that can be killed in spite of nobody really being sure how many African leopards exist in the wild or whether investment from trophy hunting is even benefiting them anyway), or whether an economic model for conservation that requires African communities to be economically reliant on North American and European 1-percenters is really sustainable. What happens if it becomes clear trophy hunting has become unsustainable for a species, but an African community has become economically reliant on continuing the practice?
> 
> Long essays could be written on any of these subjects.



Agreed. But long story short, I don't think the wildlife has the time. Humans are the current mass extinction event for most large mammal species on earth and there probably won't be any sustainable populations of them 50 years hence if there's only talk and study and no on-the-ground action to preserve them ASAP. I mean I do think we're in last resort territory with many species now. The human population is going to increase in these areas and the situation is likely to continue to get worse.


----------



## Attaman (Jan 2, 2020)

Regrettably, we're _already_ experiencing a number of ecosystem collapses (I've mentioned birds and insects above, but a lot of tropical waters are also under dire threat due to changes in temperature and / or acidity: While not necessarily tropic, one prominent example of this is the waters around Tasmania and the nigh-extinction of their giant kelp beds / the effect that's been had on its oyster farming).

This is a large part of why it's so important to start on this today (or, ideally, yesterday) instead of waiting until it's unignorable: Because we're already in the "ignorable" stage, and said stage is already far too late to recover the ecosystems in question during our lifetimes. If we're _*lucky*_, we might be able to at least stabilize them and see the start of a bounce back within that period (or, most probably, a far less rapid death / adjustment). If we're unlucky (or, more likely, don't even bother), we're very likely to enter an era wherein the ecosystems of our grandchildren will look utterly distinct / unrecognizable from the ones we inherited from our grandparents. "I remember when cod was not a luxury food", for example, or "I use to wake up to the song of several birds that you can now only find inside a zoo."


----------



## Fallowfox (Jan 4, 2020)

Infrarednexus messaged me to say thankyou to everybody who participated in the thread and helped reach his $100 goal.


----------



## Sirocco~ (Jan 11, 2020)

Fallowfox said:


> Infrarednexus messaged me to say thankyou to everybody who participated in the thread and helped reach his $100 goal.


_Make that over $350 raised._

_Nexus donated another $250 to adopt a kakapo. He asked me to take over this thread in good spirit. _


----------

