Why does your panda donation fund conservation theatre, not biodiversity protection? Learn the semantic tools that redirect environmental dollars toward real impact.
You are preaching to the converted here. The problem is that conservation needs money, and that money has to come from somewhere. My local Wildlife Trust raises quite a lot by concentrating on beavers and rewilding projects, giving its existing high biodiversity sites a very low priority. I understand why they do it but they have this bland assumption that they can maintain that business model of introducing a new headline species every five years into the future.
What could happen is that they plateau and that a new generation pushes them back to the habitat-centric conservation which used to be the way UK conservation worked.
Understood, money for icons is the easier option, and they can be umbrellas, keystones and ecosystem engineers to make it seem worthwhile. I even wrote a research paper on termites as ecosystem engineers, so I am guilty too. However, if we keep asking for the easy money, the real and existential issues of biodiversity loss go unnoticed in the public consciousness.
Great distinction. I also think that conservation isn’t just about saving species, but about preserving the balance that keeps us alive, too. In a world where ecosystems unravel silently, how do we decide which lives—human or nonhuman—deserve protection? Where do you think our responsibility truly begins?
You are preaching to the converted here. The problem is that conservation needs money, and that money has to come from somewhere. My local Wildlife Trust raises quite a lot by concentrating on beavers and rewilding projects, giving its existing high biodiversity sites a very low priority. I understand why they do it but they have this bland assumption that they can maintain that business model of introducing a new headline species every five years into the future.
What could happen is that they plateau and that a new generation pushes them back to the habitat-centric conservation which used to be the way UK conservation worked.
Understood, money for icons is the easier option, and they can be umbrellas, keystones and ecosystem engineers to make it seem worthwhile. I even wrote a research paper on termites as ecosystem engineers, so I am guilty too. However, if we keep asking for the easy money, the real and existential issues of biodiversity loss go unnoticed in the public consciousness.
Great distinction. I also think that conservation isn’t just about saving species, but about preserving the balance that keeps us alive, too. In a world where ecosystems unravel silently, how do we decide which lives—human or nonhuman—deserve protection? Where do you think our responsibility truly begins?