25 ms·
Borneo Lost More Than 100k Orangutans from 1999 to 2015
- TaylorAlexander 9y agoWhen people say life has generally gotten better in the last several decades, this is the kind of thing I think of. Gotten better for who? Not the Orangutans.
- paulcole 9y agoGiven the choice between a better life for myself or Orangutans, I'm picking myself every time.
- Balero 9y agoI agree to an extent. I think I would happily trade my second Lambo or private jet for them, probably even a couple of cups of coffee a week. I don't blame anyone to choosing to send their kids to school or fix their roof though.
- hackeraccount 9y agoWho exactly is making the choice about palm oil? The dude who owns the plantation? The guy who works on it? The guy running the company buying the palm oil to make Nuetella? The person buying the Nuetella? Someone is deciding it's better to have palm oil then orangutans. It's hard to value something that you'll only ever see on a screen or in a zoo. How can you even say you'll miss it? Compare that to your second lambo. Even if you never drive it you see it in driveway every day.
- nimrod0 9y agoNo one person is making the choice, that's the problem. The decision is distributed over many people and each step is only a tiny bit "rapacious" on average (meaning some steps may even be conserving), but over all, the collective decision is to kill 100k orangutans for tastier Nütella. Secondly, it's not about difficulty in valuing something that's hard to see; our markets do plenty of that and are very good at it. It's that there is no value placed on orangutans. Even if you get to see one every day, that may affect your personal decisions but it has no effect collectively because orangutans, like anything else that exists freely in nature such as unclaimed resources, are priced close to $0 in the markets. Only if someone "owned" all the orangutans, for example, then you can talk about value.
- ComputerGuru 9y agoDon’t be silly, there’s no point in making absolute statements like that. Everything needs to be qualified. If you could become an imaginary micro unit more happier but it would cost 14 orangutans their lives, does it still hold? And for people on the opposite side, if saving one orangutan was guaranteed to cost a human their life - or perhaps their eyesight or a limb - would it still be worth it? We’re not living in a 20s silent film, there are shades of gray in this world.
- paulcole 9y ago>If you could become an imaginary micro unit more happier but it would cost 14 orangutans their lives, does it still hold? And for people on the opposite side, if saving one orangutan was guaranteed to cost a human their life - or perhaps their eyesight or a limb - would it still be worth it? Neither of those situations exist.
- TaylorAlexander 9y agoNeither does your false premise. We do not have to choose between the well being of orangutans and the well being of people.
- ajmurmann 9y agoActually it does. I can buy cheaper food because Palm oil and orangutans die. I'd rather pay extra and leave them alone.
- mc32 9y agoIn that vein, it's definitely gotten harder for pathogens. When people talk about life getting better they generally mean human welfare, not wildlife welfare. Never the less, without progress in science and industry, I'm sure wildlife would be even worse off. Imagine if most people still burnt non petroleum resources for cooking and heating.... Trivia: Orang orang = people, orang utan = forest people.
- goatlover 9y agoThere probably wouldn't be 7.4 billion people either. People burnt non petroleum resources in that part of the world for a very long time.
- mc32 9y agoI'll give you that but I think it likely without advances, we'd've exhausted forests with 3bill subsistence level humans.
- pishpash 9y agoSubsistence level humans don't get to 3 billion. They'll get periodically wiped out by idiosyncratic events.
- mc32 9y agoDepends what you mean by subsistence. I meant like the farming we had in America in the 1900s, or Rural Mexico, rural Kenya in the 70s, Russia 1920s. You can sustain a lot of people --but it requires clearcutting, and burning. Lots of inefficiency and waste.
- CalRobert 9y agoWithout progress in science and industry, there wouldn't be 7.4 billion people - those pathogens you refer to, and all that.
- arthurcolle 9y agothat's a whole lot of orangutans
- pboutros 9y agonot sure why you're being downvoted. I agree, that is a LOT of orangutans. Too many, IMO. (disclaimer: am not an expert)
- ASalazarMX 9y agoAgreed. If they were humans, that would be entire towns lost.
- IntronExon 9y agoI don’t know for sure, but while the sentiment is something we probably all agree with, the comment itself seems insubstantial and obvious in a way thst isn’t compatible with HN guidelines.
- justboxing 9y agoTL;DR: Poaching. EDIT: It's not even that, people are just straight up killing these poor orangutans. > “Worryingly, however, the largest number of orangutans were lost from areas that remained forested during the study period. This implies a large role of killing.” > In February, Indonesian police arrested two rubber plantation workers in Borneo, accusing them of shooting an orangutan multiple times, decapitating it and then throwing its body into a river. The men claimed they were acting in self-defense, according to local media reports. > So, in addition to protection of forests, we need to focus on addressing the underlying causes of orangutan killing. The latter requires public awareness and education, more effective law enforcement, and also more studies as to why people kill orangutans in the first place,” he said. Source: OP
- loverofthings 9y agoPoaching for what? It's palm oil, the delicious Lays.
- JustAnotherPat 9y agoIt's comfortable to blame poaching because it makes westerners feel less complicit. But that's not at all what the article states: >“The decline in population density was most severe in areas that were deforested or transformed for industrial agriculture, as orangutans struggle to live outside forest areas,” said a lead researcher for the study, Maria Voigt of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany.
- justboxing 9y agoYou conveniently cherry picked 1 quote that talks about deforestation. See 3 other quotes that blames even the mostly densely forested areas are seeing large numbers of orangutans being killed, almost all attributed to humans.
- namelost 9y agoIt's not quite so straightforward, the deforestation enables humans to access more of the island than they otherwise would be able to.
- oldcynic 9y agoThat's OK so long as we can plant more palm oil. </s> I really wonder at what point we decide we've destroyed enough of the natural world. It looks like we're not going to stop at all. Which is rather depressing.
- loverofthings 9y agoNothing better than palm oil and legume-fed beef, pork, chicken and fish.
- fludlight 9y agoNutella is also palm oil based.
- slededit 9y agoSince about 2003 or so world forest cover has been growing - not decreasing. So the answer is we've already decided. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/globe-debate/we-are-making-the-globe-greener/article26147272/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/glo...
- oldcynic 9y agoWe're still losing vast amounts of ancient tropical rainforest whilst we've started to increase temperate and mostly boreal forest (coniferous). It's not a fair trade and of no help to the species under threat.
- pishpash 9y agoAs long as unchecked capitalism thrives, human nature will ensure the world is destroyed. This is 100% certain.
- marnett 9y agoI wouldn't necessarily say this is 'human nature.' There were plenty of civilizations whose nature was very intertwined with nature. Perhaps more appropriate phrasing is western nature; and it was western nature that killed them all off.
- fludlight 9y agoFull text of the study cited: http://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/S0960-9822(18)30086-1.pdf http://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/S0960-9822(18)30086-...
- mdb333 9y agoIts definitely sad to see in person where bordering on pristine primary rainforest are miles of palm plantations encroaching closer every day. Of course, don't forget all the problems caused by the farmers slash & burn tactics too. Need to boycott companies and products that use palm oil! Make sure you read labels when you buy foods and choose more sustainable options.
- deusum 9y agoPalm oil production is also a major detriment to elephants. It shows up subtly in a lot of processed products. There are some responsible producers, and if you check the packaging they'll typically label it proudly.
- oldcynic 9y agoNow so much food is a brand in a portfolio of a multi-national I don't think boycotts really work. How many tens of thousands need to join a boycott for Nestle to even notice? How many more for them to care enough to change? Back in the days of national companies, most making just a few fairly closely related products, seems like a boycott could achieve much more.
- jeromegv 9y agoEach brand within a portfolio still has a team of people for marketing, sales, etc including analysts that can surely tell if the brand is selling more or less. P&G has a huge portfolio of products but they still have people dedicated to Head & Shoulder, this isn't just bundled up all together where nobody knows what's happening with each product line. As for how many people need to join a boycott to make it worthwhile, well this is the same argument as voting. One at at time might not seem huge but once more people know and change their habits, this does have an effect on the market. See organic food, that did start very small but there has been a slow but gradual switch in consumer behaviors.
- WalterSear 9y agoFYI: Palm oil is, in my experience, a bigger deal for vegans - a group that has grown from 1 to 6% since 2014. https://www.reportbuyer.com/product/4959853/top-trends-in-prepared-foods-2017-exploring-trends-in-meat-fish-and-seafood-pasta-noodles-and-rice-prepared-meals-savory-deli-food-soup-and-meat-substitutes.html https://www.reportbuyer.com/product/4959853/top-trends-in-pr... So, I'd argue there are already tens of thousands of people boycotting palm products and palm using companies, and a bunch more will be arriving soon. Even disregarding the network effect that cause beliefs held by minority larger than 10% to rapidly get adopted by the majority https://phys.org/news/2011-07-minority-scientists-ideas.html https://phys.org/news/2011-07-minority-scientists-ideas.html , it's only a matter of a short while before the group starts weilding actual power for social change. The rate of growth is already dominating food marketing and packaging news and research.
- newnewpdro 9y agoIt doesn't even stop there. There are numerous reports of Orangutans being exploited as sex slaves in the midst of this palm plantation induced destruction of their habitats. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=orangutan+prostitution https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=orangutan+prost... It's probably insignificant, but I am now very careful when purchasing any manufactured goods, stuff like peanut butter. If Palm oil is an ingredient, I'm not buying it, full stop. Not sure what else an individual can do to combat this disgusting situation.
- diogenescynic 9y agoThe only solutions is to somehow find jobs or alternatives that pay more than these destructive actions. The problem is this is simply the best option they have. We can’t save the animals without helping the humans first. Jane Goodall basically says the same thing in her lectures now.
- ComputerGuru 9y agoI’m not sure it’s that simple, though. There’s an inelastic demand for some of these things. For example, no matter how many other opportunities you provide lion and elephant poachers in Kenya, for every poacher you take away that will drive up the cost of a pelt or tusk, making it more lucrative once more. It would certainly go a long way to help, though.
- matt4077 9y agoIt helps to think of poaching vs preservation not as actions of individuals, but of communities. In Africa, for example, tourism has become a major economic force in many rural areas, with rare animals being central to the attraction. Since those communities are as tight-knit as they are in small villages anywhere, they have both the incentives and the means to stop individuals from undermining the local economy.
- newnewpdro 9y agoI think it becomes a whole lot easier for the people doing this to rationalize it when surrounded by the destruction being meted out by these huge corporations buying the palm oil. Like a case of broken windows [1]. One could argue if such wanton destruction of the Orangutan habitats wasn't occurring in the first place, then there'd be significantly less incidence of Orangutan prostitution. The destruction is not only precipitating Orangutans destined for premature death available to the sex traffickers, it's also setting an example of total disregard for their lives on a massive scale. What harm is there in exploiting them briefly for profit before they die? (Not my position, but I can easily imagine that thought process being real for the traffickers.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory
- pishpash 9y agoHumans are too dumb to save themselves. I welcome robots to enforce a hard resource limit within which free enterprise can do its work. Just one overarching resource limit that still leaves a buffer for the rest of the world. And robots can shoot to kill and engage in warfare to enforce that limit.
- IntronExon 9y agoYou understand human fallibility and limitations, but somehow trust us to create perfect and impartial robots?
- Mizza 9y agoFuture generations will see this as genocide.
- thriftwy 9y agoCould they send some money our way so that we would do what they want? They only will if their sense of entitlement is larger than thei physical body.
- totalZero 9y agoI've never been fond of this line of argument, because (A) the concurring opinion of a future person is not a definitive source of authority, and (B) there is no way to verify or falsify such a prediction about opinions in the future. Not saying I disagree with the overall point, and I personally would not feel comfortable murdering a fellow primate. Just saying I see this "future generations..." line of persuasive reasoning often and it usually jostles me in an unwelcome way.
- kristofferR 9y agoI hope they find them
- indescions_2018 9y agoRepresents an urgent call to action for citizen scientists everywhere. Cataloguing of biodiversity is now possible on an historic scale. Contribution of citizen science towards international biodiversity monitoring https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320716303639?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000632071... The documentary footage from the original National Geographic Bornean Orangutan expedition in the early 1970s really tells the tale. Remarkable how "unstressed" they seem in their ancient lush jungle habitat. Both mothers and babies playfully cavorting with Dr. Biruté Mary Galdikas! Search for the Great Apes: Part 1 -- Orangutans https://archive.org/details/searchforthegreatapespart1orangutans https://archive.org/details/searchforthegreatapespart1orangu...
- mesozoic 9y agoWhere did you last see the Orangutans? Have you tried looking in the couch cushions? Sorry
- mirimir 9y agoThat amounts to ~50% of the ~2000 population :(
- dodyg 9y agoI come from North Kalimantan. Palm Oil plantation is very productive. Every single part of the fruit can be used. Nothing is thrown away. We just need to manage the expansion of the plantation properly. It's getting better now under the Jokowi administration but we shall see if he gets elected the second time.
- dodyg 9y agoIndonesia had a revolution in 1998. We got a democracy as a result but also decentralization of governance. In the first and half decade of decentralization the level of corruptions simply spike (from already a high level). You see the aggressive expansion of land grabbing for palm oil. The only way to resolve this issue is to push for better governance in Indonesia.
- fg8qfg8fg8 9y agoDoes anyone have recommendations for charities that protect Orangutans ?
- fellellor 9y ago>In February, Indonesian police arrested two rubber plantation workers in Borneo, accusing them of shooting an orangutan multiple times, decapitating it and then throwing its body into a river. This is just fucked up. Human cruelty knows no bounds. Disturbed individuals who eventually become serial killers, start by torturing animals before graduating to humans. Maybe the near human appearance and mannerisms of these apes, make them an attractive target for such individuals.
- kaybe 9y agohttps://lebenswald.org/ https://lebenswald.org/ If you are looking to do something, here is a charity that takes care of orphan apes, buys land for the species to live on and lobbies for their protection.
- evincarofautumn 9y agoI recently learned that this is yet another reason to avoid banning kratom in the US. It’s an understory crop—growers work within the existing jungle ecosystem, because clear-cutting is not just unnecessary but counterproductive. The US consumes a large fraction (~25%) of the world’s kratom, and there’s almost no local cultivation. So if we were to outlaw it, not only would we lose what I believe is a key lifeline in combating the opioid crisis, but also many growers in Southeast Asia would be forced to switch to plantation crops such as oil palm and rubber. These result in deforestation, loss of habitat for orangutans, tigers, and other species, increased risk of fire, and worsening human rights conditions.