Tigers Nearly Extinct

[Dana22]

Meh. It's unfortunate if they die out, but if they can't survive on their own, it's not something we should be overly concerned about. Species go extinct at least on a weekly basis, it's not a big deal. Hell, it's part of evolution/natural selection.

Wrong. We are so highly advanced and developed species, we should be outside of the natural food chain.
We "won" the natural selection ~4-5k years ago.

 

[uchi mata]

Easy way to fix the situation. Make tigers economically viable.

Allow people to farm them for pelts, meat, and whatnot. It's what saved the bison.

The fact that tigers are economically viable is why they're going extinct. Poaching.

And there's a reason people don't farm big predators, dude.

Tiger is an ingredient in some "traditional" medications. However it's illegal to hunt tiger. Which makes tiger quite expensive. Which entices people to hunt them.

Legalize farming of tigers for such materials and companies will fight for the tiger to survive.

yeah.... that doesnt work, companies will deplete a resource before anyone knows its gone if you let them, the only reason tigers are still around right now is that its illegal to hunt them

really any large mammal, humans tend to render extinct without allot of protections

Why would a company deplete a resource that they can make money on.

 

[Casual Shinji]

If people made tigers "economically viable" by paying people large sums of money to keep them not-shot then there would probably be few problems.

Maybe that's the problem: Tigers being endangerd makes them even more valuable to poachers.

It's sad, but there is absolutely nothing we can do to stop this from happening. Tigers are big, beautiful and majestic creatures that live in some of the poorest regions on the planet; do the math.

 

[Dogstile]

Fuck the Panda.

To be honest, that's kind of the idea with pandas.

 

[Captain Pirate]

Such a shame.
We, as a species, have fucked up.
I think we should definately try and preserve the iconic Tiger's existance, but I'm not hopeful, sadly.
Come on Vladimir Putin, you're our only hope.

Tiger is an ingredient in some "traditional" medications. However it's illegal to hunt tiger. Which makes tiger quite expensive. Which entices people to hunt them.

Legalize farming of tigers for such materials and companies will fight for the tiger to survive.

Also, this. Your idea would work, good sir.
As twisted as it is that major companies would only be interested in saving an endangered species because it would make them a profit.
But, if it means the Tiger's continued existance, I hope it happens.

 

[AlexWinter]

(irregardless of the countries involved)

I didn't read any of what you said so the only feedback I can give is, irregardless isn't a word.

 

[SinisterGehe]

Ok... What you want me to do BESIDE of giving out money?
Honestly, Species come and go, that will be our fate too.
According to laws of nature, dominating species who can adapt will destroy other specie what can't. Humans are a specie of animals, so if something dies to our actions it is the law of the nature.

Just wondering, in what way is the existence of tigers important?

Because the are cure, and... and... part of natures great diversity.... and.. and... It is warning of capitalist taking over the world... and... Global warning, 2012, diseases, communist, capitalist again, corruption, gene-manipulating.. And, AND... AND!
Sorry I can't even try to be a fundamental nature lover... Losing them doesn't really have much of a impact on nature really, some other specie is going to take their spot in the nature and life goes on.

But it will be huge impact of culture... But that is about is.
Oh, yeah... It is a living proof of how poor people who don't have job or a farm try to get their money and food. What a bunch of assholes, right. Trying to stay alive and achieving better standard of living.
/sarcasm.

 

[Private Custard]

Just wondering, in what way is the existence of tigers important?

I take it you understand how the food chain works, and how it helps maintain the correct balance in nature?

If not, go and read something, or watch the entire David Attenborough back-catalogue.

 

[silasbufu]

Sorry for the bland content of my post but : NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

[SinisterGehe]

Ok...It is a living proof of how poor people who don't have job or a farm try to get their money and food. What a bunch of assholes, right. Trying to stay alive and achieving better standard of living.
/sarcasm.

The law is the law anyone who breaks it deserves to be punished regardless of their reasons.

Yes that is true and I agree. But what forces someone to break the law?
I am not defending the people who poach these tigers, I am merely observing their reasons why this happens.
What I am trying to say is that; these people need to live, living is expensive, these people need money and it is the human nature to always survive to the next day, so for if you need money for that and this is the best or last resort for it, can we blame them for doing it.
Answer is yes, why? Because law is not moral. ( We all can agreed )
By this method of thinking we come down to the question "Is it right to steal a piece of bread if you are poor and hungry?"
Basically these poachers have no other or better income, so we who sit here in our central heated houses eating cheap food, having 6hrs workdays and lots of free time shouldn't be pointing the finger with attitude of "This is your fault".
But saying these points again.
- Law is not moral.
- They do not have other source of income/food
- We shouldn't be pointing the finger here.
- Yet if you want to point the finger, go there start a factory or something pay the people decent paycheck to buy food for their families, if they still do it then feel free to point your finger.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

There's a difference between adapting to a gradual change over hundreds of generations and going extinct because your fur looks really awesome, and killing a tiger makes you hardcore.

We should care because as humans we're causing extinction rates far greater than would naturally happen...and what happens when everything else but us on this planet is dead?

We die. I still fail to see how it's a big deal. Everything dies eventually, including the human race. If it's because we nuke ourselves to death or destroy the environment or any of a number of other causes, we, as a species, are going to die eventually. Just like every other species and anything else that has a physical existence. Stressing about it doesn't do anything.

Edit: In addition, if/when we get to that point (and I find it highly unlikely, Nature is a tenacious fucker like that), we'll be faced with the same challenge: Adapt or Die. If we can't adapt to life in that environment, we don't deserve to live in it. Simple as that.

We're a big reason their numbers are so few in the first place, we should atleast try to save their species after doing that to them.

News flash: Life isn't fair. It's a nice sentiment, but whatever we do, unless we actually restore their environment back to whatever it was before, they'll continue to die off. And no one's willing to do that. All living things either adapt or die, and Tigers have proven (or at least given strong evidence to the theory) that they're incapable of adapting.

I would love to meet the mammal that can adapt to getting shot in the face with a rifle.

I would rather meet the mammal that adapted to build and use a rifle. Hey, cool, it's us!

Well that's one goal satisfied for today.

But anyway, humans are animals. Good ones. We're smart, we have good endurance and dexterity, and we're spread out across the globe. We beat the tigers, and we beat them so fucking well we're feeling sympathy for them.

 

['Aredor]

Allow people to farm them for pelts, meat, and whatnot. It's what saved the bison.

And there's a reason people don't farm big predators, dude.

Legalize farming of tigers for such materials and companies will fight for the tiger to survive.

You can't farm tigers.

You can't farm wolves. Do you know how expensive that would be? How much.......

*pets puppy*

Yeah, except that a little puppy has as much to do with a wolf as a little kitten has to do with a tiger or a gold fish has to do with a shark. Besides, keeping an animal as a pet and keeping an animal as livestock are two different things, there's a reason why you don't see pastures full of dozens of dogs.

Most animals go extinct.

In fact, I think most biologists would tell you, even before humanity's time here, 99% of all species that have existed on this planet have gone extinct.

Such is life :/

True, but in this case, it's caused by humans: that other species go extinct naturally has no bearing at all, it's like saying "people die all the time for quite a lot of reasons, so there's nothing wrong with me killing people - such is life"

 

[SinisterGehe]

Ok...It is a living proof of how poor people who don't have job or a farm try to get their money and food. What a bunch of assholes, right. Trying to stay alive and achieving better standard of living.
/sarcasm.

The law is the law anyone who breaks it deserves to be punished regardless of their reasons.

Yes that is true and I agree. But what forces someone to break the law?
I am not defending the people who poach these tigers, I am merely observing their reasons why this happens.
What I am trying to say is that; these people need to live, living is expensive, these people need money and it is the human nature to always survive to the next day, so for if you need money for that and this is the best or last resort for it, can we blame them for doing it.
Answer is yes, why? Because law is not moral. ( We all can agreed )
By this method of thinking we come down to the question "Is it right to steal a piece of bread if you are poor and hungry?"
Basically these poachers have no other or better income, so we who sit here in our central heated houses eating cheap food, having 6hrs workdays and lots of free time shouldn't be pointing the finger with attitude of "This is your fault".
But saying these points again.
- Law is not moral.
- They do not have other source of income/food
- We shouldn't be pointing the finger here.
- Yet if you want to point the finger, go there start a factory or something pay the people decent paycheck to buy food for their families, if they still do it then feel free to point your finger.

Yes but what happens when the tigers are gone? What will the hunters do then? Their poverty may be tragic but hunting the tigers is only prolonging the situation, not fixing it.

Don't worry, they will just find some other source of questionable income.
You think they are thinking about that "Hey, my source of income will soon stop existing, maybe I should stop using it instead of using it to the end.".

Like I said earlier, they need another source of income. But donating money to them is not the answer.
Like I said earlier, go there and give them so work and stop pointing the finger.

Poverty is the problem here, agreed. But what can YOU do about it, nothing, unless you own a big factory or something.

But again. You think these people who got a gold vein in their hands are just going to give it up if we say to them "No! You are being a bad boy!". Would you give up that gold vein?

 

[Private Custard]

Just wondering, in what way is the existence of tigers important?

I take it you understand how the food chain works, and how it helps maintain the correct balance in nature?

If not, go and read something, or watch the entire David Attenborough back-catalogue.

I know, but I'm asking for some kind of report or evidence that is more specific than "The relationships between animals and ecosystems can be mapped by a food chain."

But it really isn't more complicated than that.

Carnivores eat veg eaters. Remove predators, more veg gets eaten. Veg starts to have a problem recovering from the increased number of veggie animals, therefore starts to fall into decline.

The eco-system is very much like Jenga. Sure you can remove a few blocks without the tower falling down, but it's sure as hell a weaker tower. Eventually you remove one block too many and the tower falls down.

Same theory as deforestation in rainforest areas. You strip a few trees, the vegitation tries to recover, but the daily heavy rain won't allow the smaller vegitation to gain a firm foothold and is stripped away along with the good soil.

Just about everything the human race touches gets fucked up in a big way and it'll take a long time for the planet to recover from us.

I'm not a greenie or tree-hugger, but it's hard to ignore our impact.