Collect-and-preserve or protect-and-conserve

From: drosera drosera (droseradrosera@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Apr 25 2000 - 09:21:05 PDT


Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 09:21:05 PDT
From: "drosera drosera" <droseradrosera@hotmail.com>
To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <aabcdefg1264$foo@default>
Subject: Collect-and-preserve or protect-and-conserve

This whole issue of protecting / collecting endangered species is a real can
of worms so here is my ten cents worth. Please read all this through before
coming to the boil and flaming me. Like Paul I am perhaps playing Devils
Advocate here a bit but if we are going to debate this in a civil fashion
its worth trying. If you are the type of reader that is just going to read
part of this and then explode I suggest you delete this quietly in advance!
I have more questions than answers.

....

Should we try to save species from extinction?

Plants and animals have been going extinct for millennia. It is perfectly
normal and natural. In many ways it is probably good for evolution and for
the gene pool.

The theory of large-scale cyclic events in global environment is now widely
accepted in palaeoenvironmentology and palaeontology. Such cycles may be
controlled by events as fundamental as the gyroscopic wobbles in the Earths
orbit or subtler (but just as catastrophic) events such as switching in the
paths of oceanic currents. Such events change the environment in complex
ways.

If a species can out-compete a rival it may push the less competitive forms
into extinction. Some (NOT including myself in this group, before you reach
for the flame button!) might even argue that as humans are obviously
out-competing many whole genera it is the natural thing for others to become
extinct.

On the other hand we could be engineering our own downfall by changing our
environment. Again this might not be a disaster in global terms. If man did
become extinct life would go on.

So if like Michael you believe that Man has little to do with global
environmental change that is fine, I do not have a problem with natural
environmental changes. I do however believe that we should take any steps
that we can to avoid making the situation worse.

....

As many others have pointed out the potential loss of CP species is not just
due to changes in environment. In fact it is predominantly due to habitat
loss or destruction most of which is directly attributable to human
activity. Should we try to collect and preserve?

OK time to get off the fence. I do believe that we should try to protect as
much of the original habitat and species diversity in situ as we can. If
possible we should leave the plants where they are. However that is not
always possible and we may be faced with a choice of collecting and
preserving some live material in collections. The use of that material is
then of concern.

If I have a rare species, should I only be able to pass on these plants as
donations? Or should be able to sell propagated plants to enable me to
continue looking after my collection and increasing the diversity of the
material that I hold?

What about a commercial tissue culture lab then? Should they be able to sell
propagated plants, even if that they argue that by flooding the market with
cheap plants they are reducing the collecting pressure on the wild plants?

I said that I had more questions than answers!

....

Final point, what do we do in a situation where there are say, four
specimens of a rare Nepenthes (for example). They are just hanging on to
existence on a remote outcrop. There is a known El Ninio event coming and
they will die when the rains fail. That seems to be a perfectly natural
extinction. Should we collect them, propagate up a few plants and then
return most of them to the wild when the crisis passes? Perhaps we would
like to but it might be more natural to allow the extinction to happen. In
fact collecting them and preserving them in collections for our
gratification but leaving them out of the natural ecosystem might be argued
to be more natural.

What I am trying to say is that the collect-and-preserve or
protect-and-conserve is a very complex issue. I'm enjoying the debate. My
current vote is to prevent as much of the human sponsored damage as we can
and collect where necessary. The issue of natural disasters is possibly an
even bigger ethical minefield. Like Paul I am not dogmatic about this and I
am open to others opinions.

Steve.

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:35:07 PST