Cause for extinction of other species?

[peter]

Extinction usually is a result of a combination of different factors. Before humans arrived, changing conditions affected animals. When humans arrived, speed was added. Humans have always hunted animals. There's no doubt they had something to do with the disappearance of mammoths and, much later, European bisons, but things really started to change when the number of humans grew and fire-arms were introduced.

Outside of Europe, there could have been a kind a balance between humans and the natural world for quite a long time. When the Europeans arrived in Africa, the Americas and Asia to make a few bucks (colonisation and everything connected), things changed in a few centuries only. It usually started with improved sanitary conditions, more food and a rapid growth of the population, closely followed by habitat destruction and the slaughter of wild animals. The introduction of fire-arms sealed it for many animals. In the last decades, rare animals have nearly disappeared as a result of illegal trading.

Europeans didn't respect animals one bit, but in many parts of Asia they didn't need Europeans to get rid of animals regarded as pests. It is estimated tigers probably killed and ate at least a million humans. Not a good start. The result was they were feared, hated and hunted everywhere. Without fire-arms, hunting didn't affect tiger numbers. When fire-arms and poison were introduced, however, tigers (as well as other predators) were doomed.

Read the books of European travelers and hunters who wrote about south-east Asia, China and Russia. In 'Dersu, the Trapper', published just after the turn of the 20th century, Arseniev wrote the Chinese had constructed pitfalls which stretched for many miles in the pristine forests of Primorye. They were so long (up to 20 km.), hunters often forgot to check 'm. Dersu and Arseniev estimated most animals in Primorye would disappear in a few decades. It didn't quite happen, but we came very, very close. Same story in other parts of Asia.

It is true animals featured in some local tribes and in some religions in Asia. Apart from India and Bhutan, it didn't have a significant effect. Besides, people are very pragmatic at the best of times. One of the most notorious traders in tiger bones recently died in prison in India (read the first post in the thread 'Big Cat News' started by Apollo). His four best customers lived, of all places, in Tibet and Nepal. Both countries are known for a somewhat different outlook on life. But things can rapidly change, especially when money replaces religion. Can happen everywhere. The Dalai Lama was needed to remind the people of Tibet about the meaning of life in general and that of animals and tigers in particular. Let's hope it has an effect.

To cut it short. Humans, apart from a few exceptions here and there, did and still do not respect the natural world. Too dangerous. Big predators in particular still are considered pests nearly everywhere. I agree a different approach could change things to an extent, but fear (white sharks, Australia) and neo-libralism too (everywhere, these days) are mighty opponents. I've yet to see a philosophy able to beat capitalism and survive for, say, a century.

In the days of the Greeks, some philosophers had a go at the fore-runner of capitalism when they saw commercials painted on houses (...) in what is now Izmir (western Turkey). No joke. I think it was Epicurus who warned the locals about the dangers of business, commercials, money and short-sightedness. Friendship and dignity are much more important, he tried. He was ignored and ridiculed. Later, he had to return to old Greece. Too dangerous. Never underestimate them merchants when business and money is at stake. 


  Reply