5 ms·

Would it not make sense to instead of restrict all extraction put a number < what is extract up for sale each year at an exorbitant price in a highly regulated

Would it not make sense to instead of restrict all extraction put a number < what is extract up for sale each year at an exorbitant price in a highly regulated market? Then you can fund conservation. It would create an economic incentive for protection, since all parties would want to keep the cash cow alive (instead of this being more of a PR issue, which is how conservation is treated) In the US, much of national conservation came from hunting. Bullet taxes pay for it. It's a shame conversations about cold hard realities are driven by ideals and feelings and not trade offs.

aphextron 8y ago
This is exactly how African game reserves work. It’s a fantastic system which provides life changing income to the locals, ensures a large thriving population of animals through conservation funding, cuts down on poaching, and lets trophy hunters partake in their sport legally and ethically. Yet Western animal rights activists lose their minds when Cecil the Lion is killed because they grew up watching Disney movies and have no conception of reality when it comes to conservation. In a perfect world of course we would want to provide funds to protect these animals without the need for killing. But the simple fact is that without managing them like a natural renewable resource akin to forestry, they simply would not exist. The number one way to ensure the survival of an animal species is to make its’ existence financially viable.
- sametmax 8y ago
  Yeah, like paying protection for your restaurant from time to time to the mobsters instead of being totally burnt down. This way the local economy can rake off knowing you are safe. Win-win.
- 4ntonius8lock 8y ago
  Like with nuclear energy, we are stuck with bad options because most people see two options with pros and cons and decide to ignore all cons of one option, and all pros of another. There is nothing without pros and cons. It's just a matter of picking your poising. Most people don't want to think about that. So we get ruthless manipulators to sway masses. The masses meanwhile are adamant about making decisions and having a voice... while completely ignoring the reality out there. They want decisions made from the vantage point of what they feel with no real care about the real world consequences of what they choose.
kevingadd 8y ago
Hunting also occasionally wipes out species or unbalances local ecosystems, which is pretty unfortunate. We need to be absolutely certain we can control for that before letting people just show up with a rifle and have a good time. "Keep the cash cow alive" is indeed a good incentive but we have many historical examples of businesses valuing short-term income or success over long-term reliability. You need look no further than Facebook Games (where the big players basically destroyed the viability of a genre entirely, and knowingly did so - there are quotes from high-level Zynga leads on this) or the dust bowl to realize how short-sighted people can be. It would be great if this could be executed in a way that helps the local economy and preserves the ecosystem, though.
- 4ntonius8lock 8y ago
  Actually, you only need to compare one option to another. There are plenty of countries that have implemented this successfully. My post says: we have two options (ideals or pragmatism) and a bunch of people focusing on ideals while the world burns. To hear a response focus on ideals proves that for most emotions < real life. There are real world options, being used right now. With pros and cons. That are known. But it means taking a cold hard look at things, not feeling good about 'protecting' in an ineffective manner.

aphextron 8y ago

This is exactly how African game reserves work. It’s a fantastic system which provides life changing income to the locals, ensures a large thriving population of animals through conservation funding, cuts down on poaching, and lets trophy hunters partake in their sport legally and ethically. Yet Western animal rights activists lose their minds when Cecil the Lion is killed because they grew up watching Disney movies and have no conception of reality when it comes to conservation. In a perfect world of course we would want to provide funds to protect these animals without the need for killing. But the simple fact is that without managing them like a natural renewable resource akin to forestry, they simply would not exist. The number one way to ensure the survival of an animal species is to make its’ existence financially viable.

sametmax 8y ago
Yeah, like paying protection for your restaurant from time to time to the mobsters instead of being totally burnt down. This way the local economy can rake off knowing you are safe. Win-win.
4ntonius8lock 8y ago
Like with nuclear energy, we are stuck with bad options because most people see two options with pros and cons and decide to ignore all cons of one option, and all pros of another. There is nothing without pros and cons. It's just a matter of picking your poising. Most people don't want to think about that. So we get ruthless manipulators to sway masses. The masses meanwhile are adamant about making decisions and having a voice... while completely ignoring the reality out there. They want decisions made from the vantage point of what they feel with no real care about the real world consequences of what they choose.

kevingadd 8y ago

Hunting also occasionally wipes out species or unbalances local ecosystems, which is pretty unfortunate. We need to be absolutely certain we can control for that before letting people just show up with a rifle and have a good time. "Keep the cash cow alive" is indeed a good incentive but we have many historical examples of businesses valuing short-term income or success over long-term reliability. You need look no further than Facebook Games (where the big players basically destroyed the viability of a genre entirely, and knowingly did so - there are quotes from high-level Zynga leads on this) or the dust bowl to realize how short-sighted people can be. It would be great if this could be executed in a way that helps the local economy and preserves the ecosystem, though.

4ntonius8lock 8y ago
Actually, you only need to compare one option to another. There are plenty of countries that have implemented this successfully. My post says: we have two options (ideals or pragmatism) and a bunch of people focusing on ideals while the world burns. To hear a response focus on ideals proves that for most emotions < real life. There are real world options, being used right now. With pros and cons. That are known. But it means taking a cold hard look at things, not feeling good about 'protecting' in an ineffective manner.