Is animal extinction really that bad?

Question

Everyone is crying that certain animals will become extinct soon, Polar Bears, Tigers, Condors and many others.
So what? Nature will provide.
Millions upon millions of animals, large and small, have had their chance on this planet and failed. That's life!
If the Sierra Club or Green Peace were around millions of years ago, interferring with natures selection we would all be fighting dinasaurs today.
If the Polar Bear dissapears, something else would take out all the seals and penguins. Sure there may be a period where seals dominate the Sourth Pole but something would come along and level out the playing field.
No animal is vital for life to thrive on earth. If one or two die out, get over it. It's nature.
P.S. Don't bring up "Global Warming" That's another issue.

Answer 1

no
its the circle of life
something goes extinct because it was its time
something new may be found by someone to take its place
i believe that every new animal or whatever is a replacement for something that has gone extinct

Answer 2

New species evolve when they come under pressure or because they find a way to exploit a food source that is available. What conservation tends to do is preserve the status quo and therefore ensure the species cannot evolve. It also tends to preserve much smaller areas which tends to lead to inbreeding amongst the species and thus to the ever weakening of it. But there can never be an easy or correct solution. Just like the furore about the bear cub - every problem needs to be looked at and dealt with on an individual basis. Not only that but every time action is taken to preserve or protect a species the decisions and their effect should be examined on a regular basis to see if they are working, if they are having any unexpected effects and to see if anything can be done better. In short what it needs is good scientific open minds and to avoid at all costs doing something because of bleeding hearts. Only cold clinical research and excellence stands a chance. Bleeding hearts almost always do things for the wrong reasons and in the wrong way and end up causing more harm than good!

Answer 3

I'm not an animal lover, but a plant lover, and plants don't appreciate animal extinction.

The animal extinction that's happening in our planet is human cause. Humans haste the "supposed to be" natural process that you're talking about. So therefore... HUMANS SHOULD PAY FOR WHAT THEY'RE DOING!!! Nature won't be able to repair it fast, because what is happening now is not part of what nature is usually doing.

Answer 4

I agree with you about natural selection and survival of species.In the present scenario,it's not the nature but humans who are directly or indirectly influencing the nature to do it's worst.Further,one,two or even a couple of species becoming extinct wouldn't make much of the difference in this universe but once the nature starts it's damaging process ,can humans control or limit it? No way.We all know that NGOs and other specific groups are quite extremists about many issues but they work on the principle that if they ask for a moon,they may get, say,6th floor,All said and done,unless we spread awareness now and initiate measures to save our environment now,it may be too late when Nature takes things under it's control and make us suffer.

Answer 5

YES ! When an animal's population increases or decreases sharply, it affects its enviroment. For example:

A grey wolf population is becoming exctinct. Scientists & government officials decide to not do anything about this. Because the wolf population will decrease, so wll it's consumption rate. Because the population's consumption rate will go down, the wolf's prey population will go up because they are not hunted as much. If the wolf prey on moose, then there will be more moose. This can lead to more roadway accidents or a decrease in grasses in the area ( because there will be more moose walking on roadways and there will be more moose eating grass). Decrease in grass could affect a bird's habitat coverage and may lead to the increased predation of the bird's eggs. This can affect the bird's population in the future. The ecosystem is delicate, any change in the birth or death rate can affect more than you think.

Answer 6

Global warming. If we are the cause of an animal dieing out, then its a bad thing. If we are chopping off the woods it lives in its our fault. If we are hunting them out, its our fault.

Whenever its our fault, its a bad thing because it not caused by nature.

When they start getting extinct by themselves, that nature. Like the Quagga, which was used as a labouring animal, and shot in the early 1800s for sport. Yet we didn't make it extinct, but they died out because they couldn't keep up with the other species.

The reason we dont like animals dieing out, is that our children will not be able to experience the animal's glory.

The reason nature doesn't like animals dieing out, is that it "co-endangers" other species.

On the other hand, humans can become extinct too. The current humans "Homosapiens", killed out all competition as we flourished and they disappeared, like the "Homo Erectus". Yes, we co-existed with other "human like beings".

Lets hope we dont get extinct too soon. Nature is realizing we are getting too heavily populated, hench aids and cancer. That has been its way to control population since the begining.

Answer 7

Because its not natural for these species to be dying out at this rate, it's not natural extinction - we're killing them faster than evolution can plug up the gaps. Extinction is generally a slow process of replacement by another, more suited species in that area, but the killing off of a certain animal within 10, or even 100 years is in no way natural.

Small, swift changes in the food chain can have drastic consequences on everything else in it. If we pollute the oceans enough to kill the krill and plankton, vast numbers of creatures that depend upon them, including whales, will lose their food source and die out. It's not like in the 100 years or so in which we kill off these animals, something else will evolve to take their place, or the other animals that feed off them will suddenly be able to eat large fish. Going up the food chain, suddenly the fish we want to eat are in small numbers because there was not enough food.

And before you know it, all this unbalancing and dying out will come back to bite us on the ****. Our impact upon species numbers, health and population spread can mean that viruses ordinarily dealt with within the population, strong enough to live through it, can spread outwards with the animals trying to find food further and further from their natural territory and infect others, not to mention animals coming further into human civilisation to try and survive. Much of our invention was inspired by natural systems and the chemicals found within it - destroying incredible structures and substances as of yet undiscovered could destroy potential solutions to our problems. A natural check by one species on another removed from the system because we didn't care about it could mean the secondary species becomes a huge problem.

It's very naive to think that we can tinker with nature and it will not impact on us - we ourselves are a part of nature and in a system where everything is connected, the consequences of our actions will hit us eventually.

Answer 8

I also dont get what the fuss is about,iof cows hens pigs chickens were going to be extinct then Yah, Id understand, cos this is vital for our tastebuds.
Others say future generations will want to have seen them, but why not take pictures and keep them 4 the future, besides they wont care about our sorry asses rotting undergnd, and they will probably cos mo damage than us.
I think if the ecolosystem isnt affected drastically, aint no need to fret,u areright, polars will be replaced in the balance
The earth has managed to take care of itself since be4 men, dinosaurs, dodosetc have perished but we still,live on, so what is the fuss, besides all things come to an end

Global warming-they want to ban certain products,industries, some planes... also dont see the fuss, the rich buggers already set it in motion, trying to curb it only makes life unbearable for the poor cos the ozone friendly stuff is accessable,and made by the wealthy. Its only a front to sell their new products/ideas, they dont care abt it,
they just wanna dominate the mkt by banning the poor who cant stick to their "new enviromentally frienldy methods"
Go figure caring abt the environment after making millions of profit through toxic waste.Now that their bellies are sated/full
they out of nowhere"think" of the environment

Answer 9

if one species became extinct, the whole ecosystem would be in a state of disorder. think about this. if flies become extinct, frogs would have no food to eat anymore. if frogs die, eagles would have no food anymore. animals are created to balance the order of the ecosystem.

Answer 10

It's a natural process. If no animals went extinct we would be overcrowded. When it comes down to it, it's survival of the fittes. Those who aren't strong enough don't last.