115
submitted 5 months ago by cyu@sh.itjust.works to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

Europeans have a stake in Botswana's elephants as humans same as Botswanans have a stake in, say, the Parthenon or Stonehenge: as humans, as a shared human heritage.

Europe had its elephants too. Lions once lived in southern Europe, and wolves in Britain. Aurochs roamed all of Europe except Scandinavia. Wonder where all that shared heritage went.

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

That's a silly argument. Lions for example haven't lived in southern Europe since antiquity. If you're going to ask pointed accusatory questions of the Greeks for the fate of lions, go and ask the same of the indigenous people of North America about the fate of giant sloths. The concept of managed biodiversity conservation is a modern one.

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works -5 points 5 months ago

I'm not blaming the ancient Greeks or the ancient Americans. They, as you said, knew no better. I'm blaming the modern Europeans (and North Americans) for not re-introducing these animals to their lands, and expecting Africans to do everything.

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 months ago

I'm sure the elephants would be thrilled to have their biome arbitrarily swapped out from under their feet ๐Ÿ™„

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago

I'm sure they'd be overjoyed to go to a place where thich cares so much about them! (Also, what about the Botswanans you're asking to move out of their ancestral lands?)

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago

Just for the record, nowhere did I argue for moving Botswanans out of their land.

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

Fair. But Botswana is facing a water crisis, so unless something is done there is going to be a conflict.

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 months ago

Yes. Which is why I'm arguing for the global north to subsidize the global south.

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

That would be better than nothing, yes. And maybe Botswana will agree to that. But when you're hit with a drought, there's only so much money can do. Botswana is land-locked, and their neighbours (except South Africa to some extent) are also quite arid. Maybe they can eventually transition their economy to something that uses less water, but transitioning a national economy takes decades, and till then they're screwed.

[-] BluesF@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

The Europeans of today do not have any way to influence what the Europeans of the past did.

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago

No, but they do have the power to set aside land for the conservation of megafauna. Not doing that and asking poorer countries to do it for them is just hypocrisy.

[-] BluesF@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Very true! Although to be fair there are many conservation-focused nature preserved in Europe where a variety of animals live. Outside of their natural habitat some degree of human intervention is necessary to keep them alive so perhaps just having elephants roaming the Czech countryside isn't practical... Or perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about and they'd love it!

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago

there are many conservation-focused nature preserved in Europe where a variety of animals live.

Yes, but none with elephants or lions. Even wolves are controversial, despite being far less dangerous than either.

just having elephants roaming the Czech countryside isn't practical

But elephants roaming the Botswanan countryside is?

[-] BluesF@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

My point is the elephants already live in Botswana, releasing them into Europe without a managed environment wouldn't necessarily be good for the elephants.

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago

Managed in what way? Elephants (different species, similar ecology) historically lived in Europe, so they can definitely thrive there. There will need to be some changes in vegetation, landscape, etc., but elephants can alter the landscape and vegetation to their requirement.

[-] BluesF@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The last time elephants naturally lived in Europe was thousands of years ago. The climate was very different and there wasn't the same level of human occupation. Yes the vegetation and landscape would need to change, and I'm not sure why on earth you think the elephants would do it?? There aren't a lot of elephant ecologists as far as I'm aware. Plus the effects of releasing elephants would go beyond the effects on the elephants themselves, there would need to be management of other species that may be impacted by moving elephants in to avoid other damage to the ecosystem.

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago

I'm not sure why on earth you think the elephants would do it?

Elephants, like beavers, are ecosystem engineers. They can change the vegetation community, as well as make the terrain elephant-navigable by removing obstacles.

there wasn't the same level of human occupation. there would need to be management of other species that may be impacted by moving elephants

And these problems would not arise in Botswana?

[-] BluesF@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Yes, but that doesn't mean they would be able to entirely make a new habitat habitable for them. You can't dump a beaver in the Sahara and expect it to survive. Even if they did, like I said the impact on the preexisting ecosystem also needs to be managed or you just trade one problem for another.

You don't have to do this in Botswana because the elephants are already in Botswana...

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

You can't dump a beaver in the Sahara and expect it to survive.

Of course not. But beavers had also gone extinct in most of Europe (though not for as long), and have since been reintroduced to most of the continent. From an ecological perspective, the same can definitely be done for other species. And yet, there is a strange silence whenever the question is raised.

You don't have to do this in Botswana because the elephants are already in Botswana ...

There are a couple of problems. First, Botswana is a very dry country. About three-fourths of the land is desert, and the rest depends on a single river system. And global warming will make this worse. Second, the country is transitioning from a mining and tourism based economy to one based on agriculture and animal herding.

The combined effect is that there is going to be a water crisis. Guess what elephants do when their usual water sources dry up? Oh, and did I mention that Botswana has over 50,000 elephants? Either other countries have to take up some of them, or the elephants will have to be culled. This is the problem.

this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
115 points (92.6% liked)

World News

32082 readers
837 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS