Western Black Rhino Declared Extinct

act.resist

Active member
London (CNN) --

Africa's western black rhino is now officially extinct according the latest

review of animals and plants by the world's largest conservation network.

The subspecies of the black rhino -- which is classified as

"critically endangered" by the International Union for Conservation

of Nature's (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species -- was last seen in western

Africa in 2006.

The IUCN warns that other rhinos could follow saying Africa's

northern white rhino is "teetering on the brink of extinction" while

Asia's Javan rhino is "making its last stand" due to continued

poaching and lack of conservation.

"In the case of the western black rhino and the northern

white rhino the situation could have had very different results if the

suggested conservation measures had been implemented," Simon Stuart, chair

of the IUCN species survival commission said in a statement.

"These measures must be strengthened now, specifically

managing habitats in order to improve performance, preventing other rhinos from

fading into extinction," Stuart added.

The IUCN points to conservation efforts which have paid off

for the southern white rhino subspecies which have seen populations rise from

less than 100 at the end of the 19th century to an estimated wild population of

20,000 today.

Another success can be seen with the Przewalski's Horsewhich was listed as "extinct in the

wild" in 1996 but now, thanks to a captive breeding program, has an

estimated population of 300.

The latest update to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

reviews more than 60,000 species, concluding that 25% of mammals on the list

are at risk of extinction.

Many plants are also under threat, say the IUCN.

Populations of Chinese fir, a conifer which was once widespread

throughout China and Vietnam, is being threatened by the expansion of intensive

agriculture according to the IUCN.

A type of yew tree (taxus contorta) found in

Asia which is used to produce Taxol (a chemotherapy drug) has been reclassified

from "vulnerable" to "endangered" on the IUCN Red List, as

has the Coco de Mer -- a palm tree found in the Seychelles

islands -- which is at risk from fires and illegal harvesting of its kernels.

Recent studies of 79 tropical plants in the Indian Ocean

archipelago revealed that more than three quarters of them were at risk of

extinction.
 
Once again nature suffers so Asians can sprinkle something on their tiny penises and pretend it makes them a man.

So sad.
 
the amount of anger that fills inside me when i think about this is enough to send that place to the bottom of the ocean.
 
It's sad, but I try to not feel bad about it.

I have no reason more to be unhappy about the loss of a creature like the western black rhino than I do about dodos, tasmanian wolves, or dinosaurs. If you look at the situation in a logical way, they are merely products of nature, as are we ourselves, and everything which arises from our inhabitance of the Earth.

___

That being said, biodiversity is regarded as important for a large number of reasons, such as the greater opportunity of medical discoveries, economic development & challenges such as climate change.

A larger number of plant species means more variety in crops; species diversity ensures natural sustainability for all life forms, and healthy ecosystems can withstand & recover from a variety of disasters more easily.

Biodiversity on this planet offers a handful of useful products:

• ecosystem services (water resource protection, soil formation, nutrient storage, pollution absorption...)

• biological resources (food, medicinal products, wood, diversity in genes, breeding stocks...)

• social benefits (research, education, cultural values...)

The cost of replacing all of these natural resources would be extremely high in comparison to working in a conservational manner - trying to preserve what we have and make the best of it.

___

On the other hand, I have a feeling that current & future technology is taking the place of biodiversity, in one way very literally (due to things such as deforestation, rare earth mining, even city growth), and in another way by replacing the need for things such as genetic diversity, by research & development of both current and future possibilities of life forms.

My opinion is that such conflicts will solve their own problems. While it's a shame that animal species go extinct almost daily or possibly even more often than that, I don't think that it's possible for humanity to come up with a plan which prevents these losses successfully.

Orangutang_baby.jpg


Somehow I feel wrong about what I just wrote, but those are just a collection of thoughts and I would be happy to discuss them.
 
I don't necessarily agree because i dont think it's ok for humans to push an animal to the brink of extinction/to extinction due to poaching them because of our own selfish, pathetic, and worthless needs.

we are no doubt an extremely powerful population and we have the power to change the earth in drastic ways. I think that it's our responsibility to preserve what's here and let nature take its own path. The population of rhinos are mostly ALL becoming extinct because of us.

The course of nature doesn't just kill of off an animal, other than the dinosaurs due to a freak natural occurrence, which is also not completely true. It slowly changes and adapts it to its environment.
 
Quit referring to a handful (relatively speaking) of poachers as representative of the human race. Rhinos are not becoming extinct because of 'us'. My 'pathetic, worthless, needs' (contradictory) have nothing to do with the extinction of rhinos or other species.
 
How is that in any way an appropriate response? Am I happy they are gone? No. Is it ruining my day? No. Real people with real problems are ruining my day.
 
you DO have reason to be unhappy. theyre so fucking sick, like modern day dinosaurs. Rhinos gotta be my favorite animal

just look at this fucker

western-black-rhino2.jpg


 
I think we have maybe different definitions of nature.

By having developed brains which are capable of posing the question whether or not we should try to preserve a species, we have not escaped nature's ways. As I see it, we are part of nature, and that means all of our cognitive processes - which may lead to the destruction of other species - are just another piece of mother nature herself.

If we try to preserve certain species, we are not intervening with nature, we are just following pre-programmed or learned thought processes.

There will be a certain amount of the population who takes part in conservation work, and a part who doesn't. No matter what we do as individuals, we can't influence "nature", because what we do becomes nature.

That's how I see it.

___

Maybe this is all wrong. Maybe once we gain the capability to consciously think about ourselves as components of a larger system & what we contribute to it, and with the ability to choose what we do, we are moved into a separate category which can no longer be classified as nature.
 
New show idea:

Rhino Wars

whale-wars-meet-the-crew-300.jpg


Now just shoot to kill all poachers and you've got yourself a 5-star show
 
No i completely agree that we are the definition of nature, we may be the top of the food chain, but we had to start from the bottom to get to the top.

My opinion is that since we are what we are, highly developed organisms with thought processes capable of conserving and altering life and since we arent going anywhere anytime soon we should not completely obliterate it all.
 
humans have evolved to a stage where there self-awareness and intelligence, forgivably, gives them a feeling of importance and worth. We as a species are so 'smart' that over time we have convinced ourselves that we have 'souls' and we are the 'chosen ones'

People need to realise, despite the argument that technology etc is the next step in evolution, that we are not all-important and shouldn't base all decisions of growth, conservation efforts etc purely on what benefits the human population (which is already too high / unsustainable)

Conservation and upkeep of biodiversity shouldn't be just about man gaining from it in the future, it should continue because nature is why we 'special' humans are here for one but it has it's place just as we do and 'deserves' to remain
 
Haha its funny cuz there is already a show called rhino wars where retired soldiers fight to save them, similar to whale wars but ive never seen it
 
Poaching is the worst. Bullshit beliefs like "Hurr durr this horn will cure my cancer," "this fin will help me look youthful," or "this ground up penis will make me fertile" are the root of the problem.
 
It was a subspecies, who gives a fuck? No one would care if we found a cure to disabled people and they went extinct.
 
Funny thing is he had a lot to do with the black rhino going extinct. He failed to pass a national conservancy bill that would provided plenty of care for endangered animals. It would have allowed international agencies to go into areas and stop poaching.

Funny how he doesn't support wildlife through the mammal and sea creature conservancy bill but he has no problem bailing out his bank buddies
 
Quit trying so hard to be funny/get people to hate on him. I agree. It is in no way my fault that they went extinct, nor is it his fault b
 
Maybe I'm reading all your posts in the wrong light, but you sound idiotic. If this was nature taking its course, then I would say fuck. You referenced dodoss and such, those went instinct because they could not fly, not because their beaks allegedly gave you a boner or looked great polished up on your mantel. Nature is now changing because we are changing it. If we all had your fuck it, let nature take her course and I'll keep sitting happily behind my computer consuming attitude the world would be fucked. I'm on mobile, so this is getting hard to type. But your way off the mark my friend
 
yeah but his argument still stands. humans are a product of nature, and so is our intelligence, our greediness, our selfishness, etc. so it's perfectly natural for us to kill these animals for reasons that we think are stupid. i mean obviously it blows that we're wiping out tons of species but at some point the human race is going to experience a decadence because we wipe out all our food or other resources, and nature will go on just as it always has.

new animals will evolve, others will go extinct. yes it's stupid to kill animals for reasons other than food, yes the world would be a more balanced place if humans returned to our hunter-gatherer stage in evolution, no, in the big picture, this is not unnatural at all.
 
double post

but also, nature isn't changing..... nature does not simply "change"

the ecosystem that is Earth is changing, specifically its biodiversity, but nature is not.
 
Fuck you I love animals. This is horrible.

Its the people in Africa noone cares about. And they deserve all the shit they get cocksuckers killing elephants and rhinos.

My dream vacation is to go to that spot in Japan where they trap and kill dolphins in a harbor armed with a machine gun and kill all the Japs who are there murdering the dolphins.
 
While reading this I assumed you were an enraged 14 year old girl who just got an NS account. Then I looked up and saw a familiar blue name.
 
stop trying to be a hero. i wasn't intending to get everyone to hate on him, i was joking. ever heard of it? it's sometimes made in the form of sarcasm and is meant to make people laugh. you obviously have never heard of it because you are the most unreceptive person on this website.
 
Back
Top