What role if any do you think people should play in preserving those regions threatened by human encroachment How should the interests of competing groups be balanced?

Answer 1

I think that people should play many different roles in preserving those regions threatened by human infringement.

A major problem leading towards endangerment and extinction of many species from the smallest insects to the largest mammals is destruction of their habitat to make room for more and more of us. We crowd many species giving other species no place to live, eat, and raise their young. Some are forced to become accustomed to humans just to find food. As building continues, destruction of entire ecological systems occurs. There is no consideration given to the species that live there as building continues. I think that since humans are the most intelligent on this planet, which they should automatically take full responsibility to taking care of the planet we inhabit. Without humans caring for the planet we live on, the ecosystems would be thrown out of balance, and we could parish away. If we were to lighten up on overfishing, our planet would soon be without many of the fish that are on the endangered lists.

Understandably certain things that can damage the environment can help the economy, such as drilling for oil. However, it is not east to balance every being's interest. I believe that if we continue to destroy the environment then we will all suffer; not just animals and their habitat. We should consider the long-term effects of every choice made and only do necessary damage when there is no other choice. What about when the habitat is not within the U.S. borders? Many international conservation groups are working to save the rainforest-what rights do people have to interfere with how another sovereign nation chooses to manage its lands? If the government of Bolivia is willing to allow millions of acres of jungle to be destroyed to promote the logging industry (which provides employment to their citizens), should people intervene? Why or why not? Many people take a global approach to large ecosystems, because everybody owns the earth and the destruction of the rainforest is the destruction of an ecosystem that is a global regulator. People live everywhere and have affected environments long since. When national parks and nature reserves are set aside there are nearly always native peoples who are displaced from their traditional homes. Rather we should speak of regions to protect from capitalist encroachment and exploitation. Again, this is a thorny issue because whatever we do, it is bound to be unacceptable to some group or other. The real question is who we feel we can ignore?

What role, if any, do you think people should play in preserving those regions threatened by human encroachment?

I feel that as people we all have a responsibility to preserve regions that are facing human encroachment. A major problem leading towards endangerment and extinction of many species from the smallest insects to the largest mammals is destruction of their habitat to make room for more and more of us. We crowd many species giving other species no place to live, eat, and raise their young. Some are forced to become accustomed to humans just to find food. As building continues, destruction of entire ecological systems occurs. There is no consideration given to the species that live there as building continues

How should the interests of competing groups be balanced?

Understandably certain things that can damage the environment can help the economy, such as drilling for oil. However, it is not east to balance every being's interest. I believe that if we continue to destroy the environment then we will all suffer; not just animals and their habitat. We should consider the long term effects of every choice made and only do necessary damage when there is no other choice.

What about when the habitat is not within the U.S. borders? Many internationalconservation groups are working to save the rainforest-what rights do people have to interfere with how another sovereign nation chooses to manage its lands? If the government of Bolivia is willing to allow millions of acres of jungle to be destroyed to promote the logging industry (which provides employment to their citizens), should people intervene? Why or why not?

Many people take a global approach to large ecosystems, because the earth is owned by everybody and the destruction of the rainforest is the destruction of an ecosystem that is a global regulator. Organizations purchase parcels of the rainforest for the price that the government would get by logging it. Thus the government gets money and the land is saved. I feel that everyone has the right to their opinion and trying to help. Alternatives need to be presented outside of U.S. borders because people deserve jobs, and the land needs protection.

What role, if any, do you think people should play in preserving those regions threatened by human encroachment?

I feel that as people we all have a responsibility to preserve regions that are facing human encroachment. A major problem leading towards endangerment and extinction of many species from the smallest insects to the largest mammals is destruction of their habitat to make room for more and more of us. We crowd many species giving other species no place to live, eat, and raise their young. Some are forced to become accustomed to humans just to find food. As building continues, destruction of entire ecological systems occurs. There is no consideration given to the species that live there as building continues

How should the interests of competing groups be balanced?

Understandably certain things that can damage the environment can help the economy, such as drilling for oil. However, it is not east to balance every being's interest. I believe that if we continue to destroy the environment then we will all suffer; not just animals and their habitat. We should consider the long term effects of every choice made and only do necessary damage when there is no other choice.

What about when the habitat is not within the U.S. borders? Many internationalconservation groups are working to save the rainforest-what rights do people have to interfere with how another sovereign nation chooses to manage its lands? If the government of Bolivia is willing to allow millions of acres of jungle to be destroyed to promote the logging industry (which provides employment to their citizens), should people intervene? Why or why not?

Many people take a global approach to large ecosystems, because the earth is owned by everybody and the destruction of the rainforest is the destruction of an ecosystem that is a global regulator. Organizations purchase parcels of the rainforest for the price that the government would get by logging it. Thus the government gets money and the land is saved. I feel that everyone has the right to their opinion and trying to help. Alternatives need to be presented outside of U.S. borders because people deserve jobs, and the land needs protection.