Question:

Why is it important to protect wildlife?

by  |  earlier

0 LIKES UnLike

Why is it important to protect wildlife?

 Tags:

   Report

20 ANSWERS


  1. Protection of wildlife increases the biodiversity and subsequently the ecosystems.

    Descration and devastion of the ecosystems causes pollution and reduces oxygen levels in the air, increasing global warming and consequences of that.


  2. There are so many reasons!

    Wildlife is important because we don't fully understand their role yet. There are things called Keystone Species that if taken out of their ecosystem would cause a collapse of that system. But scientists don't know which species are keystone species yet.

    Wildlife plays a huge role in nutrient cycling. When a wolf, for example, kills a deer and leaves it's carcass when it is done feeding, scavengers will begin to break it down. When these scavengers (also known as decomposers) die, or releases f***s, the nutrients are put back into the earth. New deer will eat the grass and the cycle continues.

  3. of the earth's estimated 10 million species, 300,000 have vanished in the past 50 years. each years, 3,000 to 30,000 species become extinct.

    a lot of human activity is speeding that up since we tend to overpower all the other species in one way or another.

    some reasons why animals are being wiped out ,in the forrests are:

    the hunting of exotic species for the consumer market

    only about 10% of the animals caught survive

    the hunting of animals for food by settlers

    forrest fires ,that have started because of slash and burning of forrest ,to clear the land for farming, had gotten out of control

    the loss of Habitat because the conditions have changed ,e.g less humidity because of surrounding farmlands ,or over pumping of rivers for human use(farming and utility)

    because of contamination of the waters ,

    expanding populations and expanding farming ,that has to keep pace with the expanding populations are very strong forces that encroach upon the rainforest's

    clearing them for farming and settlement areas .

    In Mexico is a famous jungle that the Media has been trying to save for years

    the Naturalists ,and the government ,keep watch .laws are made for protection the wild and to forbid logging.

    TV put out a series of documentaries

    there are campaigns in the News papers

    and all of this has not made the slightest difference

    Rainforest's always are in third world countries and always in third world countries corruption and the need for money s highest

    the jungle gets smaller by the day

    more and more farmers move in .and burn the trees

    it is an impossible situation

    as long as there is poverty in these regions the destruction will continue

    and the Animals will continue to be trapped ,as long as people keep buying the exotic animals

    CLIMATE CHANGE

    And now many animals are becoming sick because of changes in temperature ,

    vital links in the food chains are disapearing affecting other species further along in the chain

    90% of the feral (wild) bee population in the United States has died out.

    Recent studies in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands have shown that bee diversity is down 80 percent in the sites researched, and that "bee species are declining or have become extinct in Britain." The studies also revealed that the numbers of wildflowers that depend on pollination have dropped by 70 percent.

    If bees continue to die off so would the crops they support and with that would ensue major economic disruption and possibly famine.

    Bees are not the only pollinators but if these things are happening to bees we can bet on it that other insects are also in trouble ,on top of this many people are spraying for mosquitoes ,with drastic effects .

    so much follows the insects in the food chains ,that we can expect a lot of very bad changes in the environment .

    only time will tell what is in store for us ,and that time is running now .

    everything is happening so fast it is not possible to monitor events any more

    Source(s):

    ) Lester E Brown is the director and founder of the global institute of Environment in the United states .he has compiled a report based on all the satalite information available from NASA,and all the information that has

    come from Universities and American embassies WORLD WIDE ,

    his little book--a planet under stress , Plan B has been trans lated into 50 languages and won the best book award in 2003

       relevant answers

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

  4. first let me say this, a poster critized another  saying...

    "A note on "keystone" species (mostly hoping the above poster will read it): These usually aren't the species that we have identified as being most vital. Rather, they are generally cute species that will engender significant public support, that will, on the side, protect lots of ugly, yet vital, species."

    Actually, the original poster was correct, what this person is trying to refer to is called an umbrella specie.  That means when we work to protect that species the others associated with the habitat are also protected.

    A keystone species does what the first person said, it holds the community together.  One example is the gopher tortoise.  This reptile digs a burrow that is home to over 70 species, and during a prescribed or wild fire, the burrow can be a refuge for over 200 species.

    It is improtant to protect wildlife because we are the only ones who can.  Animals can not compete with cars for the roads.  Plants can not compete with buildings for sunlight.  We must stand up for them and allow all species to exist and flourish.

    Someone else said that we don't know what values, uses, and benefits we can derive from our natural resources, renewable resources that is.  That is also true.  Discoveries like Horseshoe crab blood  provides medical wonders. Plants that are now endangered may not yet have been examined close enough.

    To think we are here to subdue them is just ridiculous thinking and certainly would not be a wish of God.  Life evolved to what we have now, each link in a chain contributes to a web of life, and if you tug on one thing in that web, you'll find it is attached to the rest of the world (John Muir).

  5. Its because if we dont act quickly most of the animals etc will be wiped out and be extinct like the dinosaurs  was and we wont be able to show the next generation of life creatures instead of looking at a stuffed one.

  6. because the earth's riches and beauty would be gone otherwise. GONE.

    remember.. EXTINCTION IS FOREVER.

    the world and LIFE is a lot more to it than just eating going to work .. tv .. pc pc pc ... NO

    see how it feels like its so beautiful to sit on the edge of a huge mountain rock and watch the eagles SOAR

    to sit under a dense deciduous magical forest and trickle ur fingers under the waterfall springs

    to be with the native americans and watch their culture like (dont laugh) pocahontas

    THIS IS WHY SOME PEOPLE REALLY DO WANT TO STOP THIS WORLD FROM DESTRUCTION

    WE LIVE HERE TOO.

    __________________________

    HELP THE AMUR LEOPARDS

    ONLY 30 LEFT WORLDWIDE

    http://www.wcs.org/international/Asia/ru...

  7. because Greenpeace will bUrn ur house down if you don't

  8. Everything serves a purpose, all are interconnected. You don't know what the importance is many times until something is gone, then it is too late.

  9. 1.  We don't know everything.  

    Black widow spiders seem crappy right now, but their poison may someday end up curing cancer.  OK, it isn't going to cure cancer, but it could be involved a cure for a disease we don't know about yet.  Also, it could turn out that they keep flies in check, which prevents another disease from spreading.  Or they keep flies in check, which keeps frog in check, which prevents frogs from eating all of our crops.  

    The entire ecosystem is incredibly complex.  We just don't know enough yet to be able to control it, and we may never know that much.  We also don't know enough to do away with natural remedies--the best drugs that exist today are the result of studying natural plants and animals.

    2.  Overall, we do know that the ecosystem, left alone, will keep the earth functioning such that we will survive.  Paving the entire earth *would* kill us--we'd use up all of the oxygen in the atmosphere, we'd end up with nothing to recycle our pollution, and we'd die.  However, with enough wildlife with functioning ecosystems around us, we'll live.

    3.  We don't have technological processed to replace wildlife (yet).  We know that we breath in oxygen, and exhale carbon dioxide.  We know that plants breath in carbon dioxide, and exhale oxygen.  We don't know a method to turn carbon dioxide into oxygen efficiently without using plants.  There are tons of other toxins or byproducts of human existence that are readily recycled back into something useful for us by wildlife.  We just don't know how to replace the wild yet.

    A note on "keystone" species (mostly hoping the above poster will read it):  These usually aren't the species that we have identified as being most vital.  Rather, they are generally cute species that will engender significant public support, that will, on the side, protect lots of ugly, yet vital, species.

    Leopards, lions, and elephants are good examples.  People like them.  They will donate money, time, effort, and votes to saving them.  People will not do the same for worms, insects, or hyenas, regardless of how vital they actually are.  How much support would you give to a group that wants to "protect the mosquitoes", for example?  They fulfill a fairly important roll in many ecosystems, but I, personally, am more likely to rally behind a tiger than behind the mosquitoes, even if protecting tigers means that mosquitoes also get protected.

    Environmentalists and scientists endeavor to identify this kind of species (cute, protection of them protects vital species) and they call them "keystone" species.  Protecting them protects a lot of vital species.  They may themselves be vital, but the important issue that they will provide a blanket protection to many other vital groups.  They may not actually be vital to their ecosystem.  It's a trick employed by environmentalists, scientists, and policymakers to engender support for unpopular species by presenting another species whose protection overlaps with the unpopular species.

  10. to make the world a peaceful and better place

    what kind of question is that

  11. Serious?

    Well first of all you have this thing called the food chain.

    Secondly, LIFE.

    Repeat, LIFE.

  12. I always say that Wildlife was on this earth first and really more entitled to it before the human species. Its very important to take care of it ,preserve it for the future, and humans that follow us.We need to do this because Man is gradually destroying it bit by bit. The Human species   seem to think that they own this Planet when in fact they do not, and with over population, buildings, and the rest of the destruction, it has little hope of reaching that aim.

  13. Because, if we don't then certain animals will disappear at the hands of humans and be gone forever. I hate zoos, I hate to see animals caged instead of being in their natural homes.

    But because of humans lust for blood "sports" far too many species are now endangered in their natural homes and zoos are the only way they can be properly protected and preserved.

  14. wildlife are an important and crucial part of the earth we live in, withotu irt we wouldnt have food, beause of the food chain and we also wouldnt have better quality of air because they also work with plants t help make oxygen and all. but mainly cause they are ours and they cant looks after themselves as much as we can and we shoudl do our best to save them =]=]=]

  15. so that life may continue, take the Bee it pollinates most of the Plant life if it dies so will humans as they will part of the food chain and as most humans haven't a clue on survival like Bear Grylls

  16. That's what zoos are for, people.  God gave us the earth to subdue for purposes we see fit.  Wildlife is good for eating, making fur coats, melting down into glue and grinding up into pet food.  Other than that, it really serves no purpose--just stupid animals and mindless organisms.  Our technology makes us self-sufficient, so that we don't need to rely on the food chain any longer.

  17. I don't know, maybe because of the Food Chain?

  18. "And God went on to say: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the domestic animals and all the earth and every moving animal that is moving upon the earth.”

    Genesis 1:26

    They were given to us, and like all gifts if we appreciate them we take care of them.

    x x x

  19. Some of them might be scary to us, and with current technology and social development it may even sometimes seem like an unnecessary chore.  However, as Earth's dominant species, the rule of nature endows us humans with the responsibility of being conscientious regarding other life forms. That's what the gorillas do, that's what the hippos do, that's what the lion's do, because that's how it works.  If we're all going to live together, it is imperitive that we do it in a way as to prevent our own destruction.  That means that we can be a threat with our dominance or we can be a positive force.  

    If the leader of a pack of wolves was to begin hunting the weaker members of its pack (rather than deserting them if they did not fit in reasonably), I probably don't need to tell you that that wolf would have more problems to look forward to than finding food and safety.  The anarchy would be tremendous.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to give wild animals credit for the ability to reason about whether humans are there to protect them or not, but if we were to present ourselves purely as a threat, it wouldn't be well met. Furthermore, if you think about it, its always ignorance that is behind the intent of destruction; when you look at genocide, terrorism, even jealosy.  There isn't proof that it is behoovable for one to make accomodation for oneself without considering their environmental impact - and if you think I'm referring only to animals and carbon footprints, I honestly have no remorse for choosing to end my remark at this point.

  20. I would say to keep Evolution alive

Question Stats

Latest activity: earlier.
This question has 20 answers.

BECOME A GUIDE

Share your knowledge and help people by answering questions.