Jun 7 2012: I agree with you Nathan, the main role of zoos in conservation should be educational. I think that educating children and adults about how the animals interact with other organisms and their habitat is important but they could also put a conservational spin on all of it so that the Visitors are learning about the animals and it could also be oblivious to them what they an do individually to help.
Jun 7 2012: I agree with Em, in that a new and very effective type of zoo would have very large exhibits. I can see it functioning as a mini ecosystem, showing the numerous ecosystem services and symbioses between species, which would be a great educational tool. Having a mini ecosystem at work would also probably make conservation of species and maintenance easier with the health of the exhibit being basically self sustaining. As for what the zoo's role should be in conservation in the first place, I think that zoos do play a very important role in preserving species as Derek mentioned, but zoos can really only do so much, usually using captive breeding to keep the species' population significant. But the population will need its natural habitat to live in once the species can sustain itself, which takes efforts of preserving whole habitats. This is usually done on a large scale by federal agencies, and it seems a bit of a stretch to expect it of a zoo.
Jun 6 2012: I completely agree, educating our young is possibly one of the most important things we can do to make a huge difference in environmental movements. With this we will have a whole generation, and all succeeding generations know what they can do to make a difference. Issues mentioned earlier about teaching global warming being controversial, can be solved by simply presenting the facts to the students. Teachers do not need to infer about what is causing what (which is basically known anyways), but they can present the issue's cause as evolution is taught today (or at least when I was a child). Teachers can present it as the best scientific explanation we have for the rapid climate change we are experiencing. And as for everything else, at the simple level that would be taught to children, most of the other issues are not controversial at all- there is a problem, here is something you can do, or do less of to help solve it. We just need a way to show public support for the implementation of these topics being taught in schools.
Jun 5 2012: I absolutely agree with you Bre. I have had that same thought since I first came to study environmental science at a University. Before I came here and got my job for the campus recycling, I had no clue what recyclables went where, and what is recyclable or compostable in general. I look back at my previous education in disappointment. To me, it seems ridiculous that I was never taught by anyone how to do these things and the importance of them. It seems that the only way to learn these things are through your own research or interest, or the benefit of your parent's research. If our governments claim to care in the slightest about reducing human impact on the environment, we need an environmental education program for minors, however simple and general, to truly change the way we live and impact the world around us.
May 31 2012: I feel that using extreme tactics in environmentalism results in the movement becoming even more powerless because of the negativity attached to these actions. Most people would not want to support a cause that is associated with violence and such dramatizations.
May 31 2012: I think extremist tactics are often what drives many of the negative views on certain advocate groups like environmentalists. And if they don't already, they certainly will, if we begin more extreme approaches to get what we want done. I also think that in regards to making political changes such as environmental progress, violence almost never works.
Extreme acts like the examples Amanda points out are reasons that the government or policy makers would not want to consider the extreme environmentalists' wants. As a parent, you don't give your child what they want if they are screaming and crying about not getting it. If you do, it sets a precedent that that kind of behavior is what needs to be done to get what they want. And as children, we learned that that is not how you get things that you want or feel strongly about. Extreme and violent actions, even if they are done for a good cause makes the people doing them look like whiny children.
May 31 2012: This is a very good point and great idea. There are usually multiple ways of implementing things like this and the options are usually the stick or the carrot. Offering something motivational seems like a more likable change, rather than something that will make businesses comply but simultaneously piss them off.
May 26 2012: I think this would be a good idea. Why shouldn't all fishing policy be the same or at least similar? Many countries have systems resembling cap and trade for fishing that are put into place through purchasing permits for the amount of fish that one wishes to catch. The permits are basically a percentage of the total allowable catch that is set each year after scientific input on what would be acceptable for the fish populations. Obviously, if a species that is being fished is threatened or endangered, there should be policies in place that protect it and its habitat, similar to those in place here in the US.
May 24 2012: I agree, that this issue need to be approached from all angles (political, educational, and economically), however, we need to start somewhere, and that usually begins with education and policy. Of course it would be great if we could create a policy that would accomplish all of the suggestions you mentioned, but it is very unlikely.
Usually the specific components that reassert and instill the values that the policy was intended to encompass are added to the the law as policy makers and citizens witness the actual impacts of the original policy. From there, people can see what needs to be fixed or emphasized and can be added or changed. Like I said, we need to start somewhere, simply demanding all of these important components in one policy change, and if its not everything we wanted, supporting no policy at all, will be ineffective in the long-run.
May 22 2012: I agree with Mike that I would be happy if something finally slowed the development and expansion of our cities. I also think this is a very innovative idea and am excited to see similar innovations.
In looking at this question though, we also need to consider that as Kimberly said, buildings can save 75% of energy used in the summer. If businesses took these savings into account it could result in perhaps more new development, and also changing of existing buildings. It would be nice to see something like this required of existing buildings as well, because we shouldn’t be expanding our populations or cities in the first place, but we should be focusing on changing the way we live now, not just in the future.
TEDCred score: +0.20 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Conversation: Do zoos help biodiversity conservation?
A comment on Conversation: Do zoos help biodiversity conservation?
A reply on Conversation: From ivory tower to prison cell: How can we bring conservation efforts to the public?
A reply on Conversation: From ivory tower to prison cell: How can we bring conservation efforts to the public?
A reply on Conversation: Do extremist tactics push environmentalism forwards or backwards?
A comment on Conversation: Do extremist tactics push environmentalism forwards or backwards?
Extreme acts like the examples Amanda points out are reasons that the government or policy makers would not want to consider the extreme environmentalists' wants. As a parent, you don't give your child what they want if they are screaming and crying about not getting it. If you do, it sets a precedent that that kind of behavior is what needs to be done to get what they want. And as children, we learned that that is not how you get things that you want or feel strongly about. Extreme and violent actions, even if they are done for a good cause makes the people doing them look like whiny children.
A reply on Conversation: If green roofs were mandatory in cities would there be less development and building?
A reply on Conversation: Should shark fishing be banned?
A reply on Conversation: Should shark fishing be banned?
Usually the specific components that reassert and instill the values that the policy was intended to encompass are added to the the law as policy makers and citizens witness the actual impacts of the original policy. From there, people can see what needs to be fixed or emphasized and can be added or changed. Like I said, we need to start somewhere, simply demanding all of these important components in one policy change, and if its not everything we wanted, supporting no policy at all, will be ineffective in the long-run.
A comment on Conversation: If green roofs were mandatory in cities would there be less development and building?
In looking at this question though, we also need to consider that as Kimberly said, buildings can save 75% of energy used in the summer. If businesses took these savings into account it could result in perhaps more new development, and also changing of existing buildings. It would be nice to see something like this required of existing buildings as well, because we shouldn’t be expanding our populations or cities in the first place, but we should be focusing on changing the way we live now, not just in the future.