Saving Wildlife: We Can If We Try
People are smart. We can make a choice moving forward. Will we help wildlife, or will we help to speed the disappearance of many species from the planet?
In India, these people banned together to save a baby elephant. In America, the President of the United States supports shooting elephants and will allow for legally bringing back tusks as “trophies.”
The U.K.’s Prince William, the U.S.’s primatologist Dr. Jane Goodall, and countless others are working to celebrate and save wildlife. Even Russian Prime Minister Vladamir Putin actively supports efforts to save the polar bear and other endangered species in Russia.
We have a choice. And, should we continue to make the wrong choice, human beings will pay a price on two accounts:
- Perhaps some don’t care if we live in a world without rhinoceroses or elephants or orangutans, but I can’t personally imagine our planet would be the same, aside from the ethical issue of allowing their disappearance in the wild to occur.
- Trickle down ecology—that’s a term I just coined, but it’s true. What impacts one species will impact others, and eventually will affect us, perhaps even in unexpected ways. One example: By killing off so many predators of deer and other species, and with warmer overall temperatures (combined with other factors), there is more tick disease in America than ever before. Try telling someone suffering from Lyme how none of this matters.