Love him or hate him, zoologist Chris Packham says what’s on his mind. Some time back he made the comment that he’d be willing to eat the last Giant Panda if it meant the money spent on their survival could be used on other, more viable species.
Looks like he’s banging that gong again…
Conservationists should “pull the plug” on giant pandas and let them die out, according to BBC presenter and naturalist Chris Packham.
“Here’s a species that, of its own accord, has gone down an evolutionary cul-de-sac,” Packham told Radio Times magazine.
Packham believes that money spent on conserving the panda would be better invested in other animals as the species is not strong enough to survive alone.
“It’s not a strong species. Unfortunately it’s big and cute and it’s a symbol of the WWF (Worldwide Fund for Nature) — and we pour millions of pounds into panda conservation,” he added.
“I reckon we should pull the plug. Let them go, with a degree of dignity …”
Sadly enough, I tend to agree with Packham. China’s admittedly cute Pandas are notoriously difficult to breed in captivity, and they do precious little of it even when left in the wild. Maybe its’ time to admit that the Giant Panda has crossed the conservation rubicon, so to speak.
I also have to agree. I think that the biggest failing that many environmentalists and pro-animal people have is that they fail to realize that nature is constantly changing, with new species and extinctions occuring all the time, with or without man's help. They tend to view the world as static and unchanging, and want humanity to use it's knowledge and technology to keep things exactly as they are now.
Forcing nature to stay stagnant by artifically keeping dying species around and, thus, suppressing the emergence or spread of other, possibly more successful, species, is just as arrogant as believing that we can use all the Earth's resources without consequence, and willl likely cause just as much harm in the long term..