Tiger relocation

[arsenal]

This is a wonderful idea and the benefits are many including increased tourism to Cambodia and an increase in the population of wild tigers. However, it will be completely useless unless it is accompanied by a clampdown on the poaching and trafficking of animals/parts. The majority of this finds its market in China. A combination of education for those wealthy but peasant like superstitious Chinese consumers and long prison sentences to those found guilty of both crimes.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-36051629

[FarangRuMak]

Something drastic needs to be done to save the African lions also.
It's reported that there are only 15000 wild lions left.

[Moses]

>>>>>increased tourism to Cambodia and an increase in the population of wild tigers

don't you think what it will decrease Khmer population?

[arsenal]

I think they're talking a dozen or so Moses. Not 1000s. But a few reserves with wild tigers will give tourists something else to do other than traipse around 'oh so boring' Angkor Wat.

[christianpfc]

I have a different approach. I think due to various developments (climate change, overpopulation, food and water shortages, failing states) those animals (tigers, lions, elephants) are going to die out in the wild anyway. Why spend a lot of money and energy to slow down what is inevitable? Let them die out in the wild and keep populations in zoos where they are much better protected. One would need a large gene pool to avoid inbreeding. And some time in the distant future, when conditions have stabilized (all countries democracies, all countries developed, nobody goes hungry) introduce them back to their native habitats.

[arsenal]

There won't be anywhere to return them to Christian. Once the animals have gone the land will be developed for farms, hotels, roads, gay foamy massage parlours with sex shows and money exchanges offering huge exchange rates etc etc.

[cdnmatt]

I have a different approach. I think due to various developments (climate change, overpopulation, food and water shortages, failing states) those animals (tigers, lions, elephants) are going to die out in the wild anyway. Why spend a lot of money and energy to slow down what is inevitable? Let them die out in the wild and keep populations in zoos where they are much better protected. One would need a large gene pool to avoid inbreeding. And some time in the distant future, when conditions have stabilized (all countries democracies, all countries developed, nobody goes hungry) introduce them back to their native habitats.

What? So your plan is to pull a modern day Noah's Ark? Grab some of each species, let the wildlife die off, then in a few generations send the animals we kept in zoos back into the wild?

Ummm, yeah.... that won't work, at all.

[cdnmatt]

There won't be anywhere to return them to Christian. Once the animals have gone the land will be developed for farms, hotels, roads, gay foamy massage parlours with sex shows and money exchanges offering huge exchange rates etc etc.


Not to mention, having a healthy ecosystem on this planet is always kind of neat.

Kind of reminds me of the one interview Trump did a good while back. They were talking about climate change, and Trump pipes up with, "well, we can leave a little bit of the environment, but we can't hurt jobs".

We can leave a little bit???

[frequent]

Not to mention, having a healthy ecosystem on this planet is always kind of neat.A book reviewer once described Jonathon Livingstone Seagull as "deep thought for the under-fives". I think Matt's comment falls into the same category

[FarangRuMak]

A book reviewer once described Jonathon Livingstone Seagull as "deep thought for the under-fives". I think Matt's comment falls into the same category
That quote can be perfectly applied to the utterings of the present POTUS.