Logan Hein

Eugene, OR, United States

Someone is shy

Logan hasn't completed a profile. Should we look for some other people?

Comments & conversations

157510
Logan Hein
Posted about 2 years ago
Do zoos help biodiversity conservation?
Kinda intresting to think as to why those few animals get so much popularity and attention. There's lots of animals I think are way cooler than Lions or Pandas or God forbid Koala's(they sleep like 18 hours a day!). I suppose in the end it mostly comes down to good PR, so to speak. That and people really seem to like big, powerful animals like lions, elephants, crocadiles, and orcas for some reason(ties in with the whole bigger is beter steriotype we have in modern days I suppose) and there are only so many of those still left arround.
157510
Logan Hein
Posted about 2 years ago
From ivory tower to prison cell: How can we bring conservation efforts to the public?
Oh wow! I watched Rocko's modern life as a kid as well. I had totaly forgotten about that episode! Very strange to see something like that in a show like Rocko that almost never tryed to be educational in any way. Mabey it's more effective that way; if a show that never trys to teach you anything suddenly trys to teach something to you, that usualy implies it's pretty important.
157510
Logan Hein
Posted about 2 years ago
From ivory tower to prison cell: How can we bring conservation efforts to the public?
Since people are discussing how to make environmentalism cool and how we should introduce children to environmentalism, I'm going to talk about Captain Planet. That's right, Captain planet. Sure, it has a terrible case of early 90s, and watching it as an adult it is very silly, but as a kid I'll be damned if I didn't think it was the coolest thing ever, and it's the only exposure to environmentalism I had as a kid that I still remember to this day(well, except for Amazing Animals). Way more effective than anything I learned in school. I think a problem a lot of educational groups have is that they think because conservation is a serious issue, it needs to be taught to children in a very straight, serious manner. These people do not understand children. If you want something to stick with children, make it fun, make it crazy, give it a catchy theme song, but mix in your message so they're learning as they go. Captain planet also had the advantage that you could use the dramatic and emotional tension inherent in an action cartoon to give the issues at hand emotional weight for young viewers. I've heard people argue that Captain Planet undermines serious issues because they could just call a super hero and he would solve the problem. My reaction as a kid was "holy crap pollution’s such a big problem it needs its own SUPERMAN! That's gotta put it on the same level as alien invasions, evil armies, natural disasters, and dark Gods!". But maybe I'm just weird. He didn't even always win; sometimes the problems were just too big for Captain Planet to resolve. What I'm getting at here is that the best way to get kid invested into something is to terms they can understand, and that there seems to be this idea that serious issues need to be taught in a serious manner, but they don't. The issues need to be given substantial WEIGHT, but that can still be done while conveying things in a palatable manner. Captain planet did that and we need more shows that hit for that angle.
157510
Logan Hein
Posted about 2 years ago
From ivory tower to prison cell: How can we bring conservation efforts to the public?
One problem, from what I've seen anyway is that hippies are clearly defined as a counter culture, and it is /very/ popular for people outside of a counter culture to make fun of/hate on the people within, and everything associated with them tends to suffer in the public image as a result. For instance there are a lot of "emo" bands that I think could have achieved mainstream popularity, but people didn't want to listen to them because "that’s music emos listen to!", which is apparently a problem. In the same way, environmentalism suffers from its association with the hippie counterculture, even though the hippie movement and the environmentalist movement are completely different movements that just happen to have a few things in common. They act as if planting a tree will make them spontaneously start smoking weed, stop bathing and start complaining about the government, man(which are unfair stereotypes about hippies anyways, but I digress). So I think the problem is less about people thinking tree hugging is stupid, and more to do with people thinking tree hugging is something hippies do, and hippies are stupid. Which is terrible logic on a countless number of levels, and terribly detrimental to the environmentalist movement.
157510
Logan Hein
Posted about 2 years ago
Do zoos help biodiversity conservation?
I agree that the importance of zoos as place for research is being underemphasized. There was a conversation on here a little while ago about the use of chimps as research animals, and the consensus was that using research animals is O.K. as long as they were raised up from a captive population instead of in the wild. Zoos tend to be a source of a lot of such animals. They also allow researchers to constantly and closely observe animals through their entire lifespan, to a degree that's not possible with animals in the wild.
157510
Logan Hein
Posted about 2 years ago
Do zoos help biodiversity conservation?
A lot of people have been mentioning the idea of zoos more different from each other in what animals they keep, and how it would be probably be a better idea from a conservation standpoint. I think it's worth looking at the idea from a consumer standpoint, too. I've been to four zoos in my time (Portland, Chicago, San Diego, and...some other zoo in California) and various other zoo-like animal parks, and it's kind of disappointing that a lot of animals in each zoo have been the same. It's the few excluive animals that always interest me the most. But if someone's never been to a zoo before and they don't get to see a lion or something, they're probably going to be disappointed, and I really can't see a zoo with only local animals or something like people have suggested thriving. Therefore I think it's best to establish a small list of "critical" animals that most zoo have to have, while devoting the rest of the zoo to unusual and/or local animals. Maybe even divide the zoo into a "big hitters" section, a local section, and a "rarely found in zoos!" section. That way you keep the zoo attractive to both newcomers and to people who have been to other zoos, maybe encourage people on vacation that it's worth going to the local zoo even though they have a bigger zoo back home. And from a "raise awareness" angle, you're drawing people in with animals everyone knows, but exposing them to animals they probably didn't know about while they're there And it helps encourage biodiversity as a consequence, of course. The difficult part is how to balance the number of crucial animals vs. the number of rare animals to maximize consumer interest.
157510
Logan Hein
Posted about 2 years ago
Do extremist tactics push environmentalism forwards or backwards?
I don't have an opinion on this topic but I do have an observation. As a massive geek I've spent unreasonable amounts of time on forums and such discussing the morals of various fictional characters, and comparing those to conversations like this one, people are far more likely to support extremists in fiction, even if they're villains and clearly portrayed as such. Now the obvious answer as to why is that there's a big difference between fiction and real life and that undoubtedly does play a part, but these character discussions are serious discussions and people are at least trying to think of things from a real world perspective. So, what are the reasons for this discrepancy? Is it because in fiction we are given a chance to know the extremists, as opposed to in real life they are often little more than a name or a face? Does it have to do with the way writers tend to frame situations and issues, as opposed to how, say, the media does? Is it simply a difference in view between the type of people who usually talk about real world issues and people who usually discuss fiction? Going back to the difference between fiction and real life, does our detachment from friction prevent us from looking at it logically? Or conversely, does our investment in the real world prevent us from looking at /it/ logically? If so, is that a good or bad thing? Just some food for thought.
157510
Logan Hein
Posted about 2 years ago
Do extremist tactics push environmentalism forwards or backwards?
Well PETA is a very interesting example. Their problem lies less with how extreme they are and more with how crazy they are. I mean certainly if they were merely extremist in their methods they would attract a lot of opposition and backlash, but not as bad as what they've been getting. They aren't just disagreeable, they're funny. If someone told me that some of the actions PETA has taken were actually by another group trying to parody PETA, I'd say that makes more sense than the truth. And a lot of the time they display a understanding of what they're fighting for so terrible it borders on comical. My point here is not that PETA is a bad example of an extremist group but rather that they are perhaps an example of one of the problems with extremist groups; they sometimes tend to attract those who are somewhat unhinged and/or have a poor grasp of the situation. I don't by any means mean this is true for every extremist group but it does make sense that brash individuals would be the first to seek extreme solutions. I don't know whether or not extremist movements can be effective, but I do know they would need incredibly smart leadership, and I think that's something they're lacking. Certainly PETA is.
157510
Logan Hein
Posted about 2 years ago
Should shark fishing be banned?
This is a very good point. The amount of energy efficiency lost in the process of going from plants to a top predator is huge. Attempting to "mass produce" something like sharks would require much more biomass than raising herbivores like cows and some people already complain that the energy lost going from grass to cow is a waste. Therefore farming of sharks would be difficult to justify both from a financial standpoint and from and a conservational standpoint (because you'd have to expend tons of biomass to keep the sharks fed).