Giant panda census: is zoo panda conservation work useful or hooey?

DavidBrown

DavidBrown

Well-Known Member
15+ year member
Interesting article from the Los Angeles Times on a new census of giant pandas that is getting under way in China. There is an interesting discussion of whether China's efforts to conserve the pandas and try and increase their number will work.

There are some very negative comments from an American running a panda research program in China about whether conservation of pandas is working. She dismisses the conservation breeding of pandas as "just a game". I'm not sure that this is a person that I would want running a panda conservation project!

In China, it's panda census time - latimes.com
 
There are many conservationists and researchers that believe captive breeding programs are a waste of time and money. They'll dismiss the entire philosophy and not even consider zoos as legitimate conservation entities.

While zoos may have the fore-sight and positive outlook for conservation, those working at the front lines are often jaded and negative towards any future of conservation if regions they are working in are taking steps backwards. They've seen years of their research, formed opinions, and considered themselves experts just to see their work falter. You will only find happy conservationists where their work is actually contributing to the long-term survival of a species.
 
gerenuk said:
There are many conservationists and researchers that believe captive breeding programs are a waste of time and money. They'll dismiss the entire philosophy and not even consider zoos as legitimate conservation entities.

While zoos may have the fore-sight and positive outlook for conservation, those working at the front lines are often jaded and negative towards any future of conservation if regions they are working in are taking steps backwards. They've seen years of their research, formed opinions, and considered themselves experts just to see their work falter. You will only find happy conservationists where their work is actually contributing to the long-term survival of a species.
Click to expand...

Very well said.
 
DavidBrown said:
Very well said.
Click to expand...

Whilst I am not, perhaps sadly, a believer in any organised religion, I would suggest that one negative result of the general decline in religious faith in the Western world is that too few people now have the ability to think beyond their own lifetimes.

Whereas the builders of the great medieval cathedrals carried on with their labours, despite knowing that with their levels of technology they would probably never see these projects completed, the assumption too often is that a captive breeding programme that does not work at the first attempt, and which has not led to additional self-sustaining populations in the wild within (say) 15-20 years, has failed.

By this mark, grudging approval may be earned for golden lion tamarin and Arabian oryx programmes, but Sumatran rhinos are deemed a failure.

One day, population modellers have told us, the current rate of human population increase will cease. The task is to hold onto as much biodiversity as possible during this demographic winter.

As such, the giant panda, as aberrant a terrestrial carnivore as may be imagined, and a global symbol for the conservation of wildlife, is a cause worth fighting for, surely?
 
IanRRobinson said:
As such, the giant panda, as aberrant a terrestrial carnivore as may be imagined, and a global symbol for the conservation of wildlife, is a cause worth fighting for, surely?
Click to expand...

I think very much so Ian. Part of the conservation job that zoos can do that no other organization can that I know of is bring people in direct contact with the living animals (and perhaps some replication of their habitat) that need to be conserved. This is why I like zoos and why I think that they have a role to play in our society. I think that they are just at the dawn of figuring out how to do meaningful conservation. Zoos have assumed that their primary conservation mission is breeding endangered animals as reserve populations. This is certainly true for some of their residents (California condors, Arabian oryx, golden lion tamarins, etc.), but not for the great majority of them.

I think that gerenuk's point is that conservationists working in the field without a support network get exhausted and discouraged, because it is very demanding, draining work and the challenges never end. Wildlife conservationists need sustained and deep support networks in the range country and in other parts of the world where interested people who care about particular species and ecosystems can participate in their conservation in some meaningful way. Can zoos play such a role in developing and running these support networks?
 
If Giant Pandas did become extinct what would happen to habitat conservation within the areas they currently live? They are the star appeal animal, but there are many other less heralded species also dependent on the same habitat. Would fund raisers, researchers, conservationists, government agencys etc still put the same levels of effort/finances into the locations where Giant Pandas used to live. Its not just the pandas that are being protected.

A captive Giant Panda population increases the profile, the why,where,what is being protected and will always counter the excuse of 'well the pandas have gone now so why the need to bother investing in protecting this area'.
 
Then the title should be "Is field panda conservation work useful or hooey?"

Chinese program with pandas in the wild is succesful. One recent example is discovery of breeding sites of Blackthroat, almost unknown bird, inside panda reserve.
BBC Nature - Rare robin breeding sites found

DavidBrown said:
There are some very negative comments from an American running a panda research program in China about whether conservation of pandas is working.
Click to expand...

Why people are obsessed about cost-effectiveness of just zoos, but field protection schemes are failing, many national parks are emptied of wild animals, expensive field campaigns are launched but no clear benefits etc?
 
I especially liked this line in the article: "Although Dai's specialty is predatory birds, all wildlife researchers are being pressed into service whether they love pandas or not, and one does sense a certain panda fatigue."

That sums it up perfectly. Everybody knows, how bad or non-existing laws China has, in relation to conservation, animal welfare, endangered species...
Panda is basicaly the only animal with real protection.
Pandas are being protected, bred in captivity, reintroduced, they are even trying to clone them. And at the same time - Bear farms, tiger parts trade, poaching, terrible condition of captive animals...
One have to ask - Why Panda???

So - should Panda conservation continue? - Yes!
Should they learn from it and try to protect other species as well? - Definitively!

Right now, they are just laughing to our faces, using Panda as an answer for everything.
 
Maybe read about Chinese programs on crested ibis, chinese alligator, yunnan snub-nosed monkey, pere david's deer, about the scale of reforestation, and how poor and densely populated is China. Then compare it to Irish and British situation with birds of prey and large carnivores. And think again who can laugh at whom and why.
 
Jurek7 said:
Maybe read about Chinese programs on crested ibis, chinese alligator, yunnan snub-nosed monkey, pere david's deer, about the scale of reforestation, and how poor and densely populated is China. Then compare it to Irish and British situation with birds of prey and large carnivores. And think again who can laugh at whom and why.
Click to expand...

Utterly fair comment. Granted, the US has far more space (not to mention money), but at least they have made space for bears and wolves.

We got rid of them centuries ago. And judging by the screams of pain engendered by attempts to put back beavers in the Highlands and white-tailed eagles in East Anglia, I don't imagine large mammalian carnivores coming back to the UK any time soon.
 
Which country has perfect environmental, conservational and animal welfare laws? None.

I´m not saying, that we are a great example for Asian countries.

You stole my line - I often use the ironic comparison of Ireland and India - We want them to live alongside the dangerous tigers while eagles are being poisoned by farmers in Ireland. And as far as I know, there are still one or two fur farms in Ireland. (but I´m not quite sure, what the situation is now)

Sorry, I got carried away a little, I answered to this thread shortly after listening 45 minutes long podcast about the research on Bear bile trade.

China´s lack of proper animal-related laws is appalling and you can´t really compare it to anything, when the perception of animal welfare is completely different from ours. And that´s not only China, of course.

I hope I don´t have to explain things like "I´m not a rasist, it depends on individual, bla bla bla bla.." Yeah, I know.

In my opinion, one of the worst things is the trade of wild animals parts for Traditional Chinese Medicine. Everytime I hear some TCM story, I wanna scream. And I don´t care, about all that "that´s the only income of many people, that´s their tradition, their believe..." I really don´t care, no excuse is good enough. Until this changes, I can´t really take them seriously. Sorry.

And again, this is not only about China, I hate lots of other laws in lots of other countries, western or eastern.


P.S. I know, there are other conservation actions going on. (But I´m not gonna pretend that I know about all of them.) But really, how often do you hear about the Crested Ibis? (If you´re not an wildlife enthusiast reading all the related news?) Most people doesn´t even know, what that is. Only thing they hear about is Panda, Panda and... Panda.
 
China´s lack of proper animal-related laws is appalling and you can´t really compare it to anything, when the perception of animal welfare is completely different from ours. And that´s not only China, of course.....In my opinion, one of the worst things is the trade of wild animals parts for Traditional Chinese Medicine. Everytime I hear some TCM story, I wanna scream. And I don´t care, about all that "that´s the only income of many people, that´s their tradition, their believe..." I really don´t care, no excuse is good enough. Until this changes, I can´t really take them seriously. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Some uncomfortable truths here. China, and its current headlong surge towards Western standards of living, is at the back of too many of the world's nastier environmental issues currently. Conservation of the Giant Panda may be most use if it helps get the Chinese to treat the natural world in a kinder fashion.

Another thought: China might be less determined to grow its economy if North America, Western Europe, Australasia and Japan really were prepared to cut their own levels of consumption. I'll try to remember that while shopping for the DS games my kids want for Christmas. :o
 
I agree with the general concensus of this debate. It does seem a bit strange that the Chinese go out of their way to protect giant pandas, but allow other endangered specis to be killed for meat and/or 'medicinal' purposes. It is almost as if the panda reserves are there to keep producing pandas that can be loaned out to zoos for vast sums of money. Luckilly, protecting pandas in the wild also preserves other species, so it isn't all doom and gloom.

As regards the viability of the giant panda, I remember Chris Packham getting a lot of abuse when he said that panda conservation was a waste of time as the giant panda was on the way out due to being in an evolutionary cul-de-sac. I can understand this viewpoint as the panda's metabolism isn't well adapted to feeding on bamboo. I wouldn't like to see this animal become extinct, but there are many other, less iconic, species that are on their way out due to habitat destruction etc, rather than making an evolutionary wrong turn.
 
As regards the viability of the giant panda, I remember Chris Packham getting a lot of abuse when he said that panda conservation was a waste of time as the giant panda was on the way out due to being in an evolutionary cul-de-sac. I can understand this viewpoint as the panda's metabolism isn't well adapted to feeding on bamboo. I wouldn't like to see this animal become extinct, but there are many other, less iconic, species that are on their way out due to habitat destruction etc, rather than making an evolutionary wrong turn.
Click to expand...

All species are destined to become extinct, but surely ethics dictate that as sentient beings we do not deliberately push them over the edge. IMHO, the giant panda's current parlous state is due to humans chopping down corridors linking isolated areas of bamboo forest - not to it having become steadily more of an evolutionary blunder since Pere David's description of the animal to the outside world in 1869.
 
Hallo, Ian. Like you, I don't want to see people pushing animals into extinction, but that is what is happening with so many species. It was sad seeing specimens of recently extinct animals at Paris's Grand Museum of Evolution and realising that many of these could have been saved if someone had cared.

The arguments about giant pandas are at Chris Packham: 'Giant pandas should be allowed to die out' - Telegraph, Wildlife Extra News - Chris Packham - It is time to let the Panda go? and similar websites. I agree about saving natural habitats now, rather than breeding lots of individual animals in captivity, while habitats are destroyed and then hoping that people will be enlightened in a few decades time and return urban environments to the wild. I really can't see this happening. Habitat destruction doesn't just lead to the deaths of charismatic animals - it also leads to the deaths of thousands of species that most people haven't heard of, let alone care about. I agree with Gerald Durrell's philosophy of trying to save the 'little brown jobs that no-one else is interested in'. Conservation should be about saving habitats, not just individual species.
 
Giant panda....

The flagship species concept suggests that, if you conserve the habitat for your panda, condor or whatever, everything else in that habitat benefits
 
Hallo FBBird. I understand the concept of the flagship species and the fact that most people have probably heard of a very few endangered species. I just wonder how safe the giant panda habitat is. Are people poaching other wildlife for meat and 'medicinal' purposes within the panda reserves? It should be realised that giant pandas are not the only endangered animals living in China and there are probably several species in a far more precarious position. I went to a series of talks on Chinese wildlife at London Zoo a week ago and there are big problems facing giant salamanders, with their meat being sold in restaurants, while young salamanders are being placed in fluid-filled plastic bags as toys or jewellery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top