| You are currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and that there are some features you can't use or read. We are an active community of worldwide senior members participating in chat, politics, travel, health, blogging, graphics, computer issues & help, book club, literature & poetry, finance discussions, recipe exchange and much more. Also, as a member you will be able to access member only sections, many features, send personal messages, make new friends, etc. Registration is simple, fast and completely free. Why not register today and become a part of the group. Registration button at the very top left of the page. Thank you for stopping by. Join our community! In case of difficulty, email worldwideseniors.org@gmail.com. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Budgeting for survival of species | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Dec 30 2013, 10:41 AM (94 Views) | |
| Kahu | Dec 30 2013, 10:41 AM Post #1 |
|
Budgeting for survival of species Australia is following a scheme introduced in NZ to decide which wildlife should be allowed to die off It's conservation by numbers, or - as one headline writer put it - "survival of the cheapest". In a country with one of the world's highest extinction rates, scientists are using a mathematical equation to determine which species should be saved and which let go. The approach, adopted by the New South Wales Government this month, reflects the practical impossibility of rescuing all of Australia's threatened plants and animals from the brink. Proponents call it a more efficient and effective way of targeting limited resources. .... New Zealand was the first country to apply the algorithm, adopting it about five years ago. Richard Maloney, a senior DoC scientist who has been advising the NSW Government, said 300 threatened species had been identified as most likely to benefit from conservation measures. Early results indicated a fantastic improvement, he told Fairfax. Source Link |
|
|
|
| Trotsky | Dec 31 2013, 02:23 AM Post #2 |
|
Big City Boy
|
In the list of species, did they assign a place for Homo "sapiens." (The "sapiens" is the joke part.) But I guess for Australian the term might be better Homo bigotus. |
|
|
|
| Kahu | Dec 31 2013, 10:49 AM Post #3 |
|
Jokes aside ... this is a real problem, and the Australians are only just finding this out. We've spent millions over the years on trying to protect, preserve and invigorate our unique species of wildlife, with only limited overall success. The wildlife of both countries are unique, and the cute Koala bear is popular with overseas tourists, and a cultural icon of the country. Koala chlamydia: the STD threatening an Australian icon Kiwi in crisis The kiwi once lived throughout New Zealand and numbered in the millions. Since European settlement their numbers have plummeted. Surveys on mainland New Zealand during the 1990s showed kiwi numbers falling by an alarming 4% each year: each decade, kiwi numbers drop by a third in areas where predators are not controlled. Kiwi face one main threat: introduced predators. Stoats, dogs, cats and ferrets are their worst enemies. Without management, nearly 90%of kiwi chicks die before they are six months old, while adults are often killed by ferrets and dogs. By 2006 there were about 70,000 kiwi left. If the present rate of decline continues, most kiwi species will be extinct on the mainland within a human lifetime and their on the mainland within a human lifetime and their future will depend on predator-free offshore islands. Source Link |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Pets & Wildlife · Next Topic » |