Jun 8 2012: I really like your idea of regional zoos. It would ensure that zoo animals are local, and therefore habitat for those animals is easier to maintain and could be open air rather then having them pent up in small enclosures in a building. It would also help educate people on their local and regional ecosystems and animals and how they are interconnected and how it relates to them as a person. Granted a zoo in Minnesota compared to a Zoo in Florida might not be super exciting but it would give people an idea of what they can do to turn what's outside the zoo facilities into what's inside the zoo facilities by helping to preserve and protect their natural surroundings.
Jun 8 2012: Why not do both? It seems to me that most zoos today do try and do their fare share of conservation and captive breeding, but what I want to see is zoos that are doing breeding programs that are solely based on releasing those animals back into the wild. This however is a tricky process, contact with humans and the babying of animals we see in zoos often makes it so animals can never been introduced to their natural habitat. For instance, how could you go about releasing a small pride of lions back into the wild when they have never had to actually hunt for food? I guess the logical answer to that is you would have to let them act as they would in the wild and give them something to hunt. It's like in Jurassic Park when they said "T-Rex doesn't want to be fed. T-Rex wants to hunt." So I think because of this intensive less human friendly approach zoos have little incentive to carry out such programs, which is a real shame.
Jun 8 2012: I totally agree that education and awareness are the first things that should happen to advocate for pro environmentalism habits. But at the same time we run into the issue, "Well now that I know what to do, why should I do it? What's in it for me?" What we run into are people learning about it and then turning a blind eye to the issue all together because it "doesn't affect them." I am saying that it needs to be brought on to a level for the average greedy American to see eye to eye with. A hard task when most of our noses are turned up so high.
Jun 7 2012: One thing that I thin could greatly help get people involved is offering them an incentive other then pure pride that they have done their part to save the planet. People require something more tangible. Perhaps offering tax credits for those involved with local programs or something along those lines. If they have something to get out of it that they can use or that has high value in society then people will want to get involved.
Jun 4 2012: I agree with you Matt in that our measures to ensure the stability and restoration of our ecosystems and climate are not drastic enough. However, at what point do these drastic measures become too drastic? Do we draw the line at the popular TV show that destroys property and potentially endangers human lives, or do we draw it somewhere more towards the moderate end? I think it's important for us to have extremists simply because they do what no one else wants to do, but what do we do when they go too far?
May 28 2012: What we're running into in this fight to protect one of the greatest apex predators of the ocean is that this is not just a culinary aspect of Asian cultures. Shark fin also like many things in Chinese and other Asian cultures has deeply seeded roots in traditional medicine. The practice of traditional medicine is something that most of Asian cultures partake in and has been established for in some cases 5000 years. Not so easy to do demolish for the sake of biodiversity. My main question would be, how can we change the perceptions of these cultures and societies to have them better understand how important preservation is to them? As incredibly vain creatures people don't really care about anything unless it directly affects them.
May 28 2012: I agree whole heartedly with this comment. I have often thought about this issue not as one that can simply become a non-issue due to the deeply rooted cultural traditions in Asian societies. The only solution to this issue that I see as a current and effective choice is that of regulation as you suggested. I firmly support regulation programs to ensure that sharks are protected and allowed to thrive. In addition to your well thought out plan I would add that times of year that shark can be harvested should also be taken into consideration. For instance, it seems highly unethical to practice shark fishing during breeding season if there is one. Not allowing fishing during this crucial time would allow populations to regain some gumption and biomass. Eventually it could be possible to eliminate the practice all together but that is not a near future. There has been however a lot of newly founded preservation of nature and biodiversity in Asia and China specifically so I firmly believe that there is hope.
May 22 2012: I personally think that green roofs are a fantastic idea. I would however have questions about the durability and lasting power of these roofs. Also, how might this roof design system limit architecture in terms of what shapes we can create with buildings? Overall it's a wonderful solution to a long time issue of combing an environmentally conscious design and one that effectively protects us from the elements. As far as making it a mandatory part of building design, I think it would be most effective to implement something like this in large metropolitan regions such as los angeles and new york where air pollution is high and extreme heat pockets in summer can kill residents. Not to mention they are just so visually appealing.
May 22 2012: I completely agree with you Lisa. If we take a look at this issue in a broader less medical context there is great potential to make a lot of money via taxation and regulation. I also agree that with it's already known sources of medicinal value further research should be done on plants that belong to the same family as cannabis to see if any of these other plants hold as much potential. I would also find it interesting that since a couple other quite infamous drugs are also derived directly from plants or fungi, if research on possible medicinal properties they might have as well.
May 5 2012: In my opinion the responsibility to protect our environment from these harmful pharmaceuticals falls on both the consumer and the companies. Why not just companies? We cannot sit idly by and assume that companies will take the initiative to help create more environmentally procedures in disposing of these drugs. Also, as consumers we do our fare share of drug dumping into our ecosystems. We are all equally responsible as this is not an issue of where to point the finger but an issue of how to solve the problem as whole cohesive unit. If we cant come together to find a solution then we risk the situation getting even more critical.
TEDCred score: +0.30 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 comment 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 reply on Conversation: Should shark fishing be banned?
A reply on Conversation: Should shark fishing be banned?
A comment on Conversation: If green roofs were mandatory in cities would there be less development and building?
A reply on Conversation: Should Cannabis be legalized as a medicine?
A comment on Conversation: What is more important: Our drugs or our ecosystems?