[“The poverty debate could do more to recognize the powerful effects of rejection on a person’s self-confidence and stamina. Applying for an apartment or job and being turned down ten, twenty, forty times—it can wear you out. Theories about neighborhood selection or joblessness often assume low-income people are more or less “rational actors” who recognize trade-offs and make clear choices. The reality is that many are “exhausted settlers” who accept poor housing in a disadvantaged neighborhood or a dead-end or illicit job after becoming depleted and disheartened from trying and trying and failing and failing. The shame of rejection not only can pressure people to accept undesirable circumstances today; it can also discourage them from striving for something better tomorrow.”]
matthew desmond, from evicted: poverty and profit in the american city, 2016
It *is* a problem that charismatic species are often focused on for conservation at the expense of less charismatic but important species, but threatened species that are the subject of a lot of public outreach and education are also typically strategically selected.
I suspect that monarch butterflies are an example of this. Milkweed is a highly valuable plant for pollinators and a host plant for like. 400+ insect species. Getting people to plant it to save monarchs is funny because you’re essentially finessing people into saving a ton of other insects that they wouldn’t ordinarily care about
“Save the bees” isn’t misguided, it’s just the version of the truth you would tell a 5 year old. If a small kid asks about the colors of the rainbow you don’t start explaining that visible light has wavelengths of 400-700 nanometers
A lot of people don’t even know that there are different types of bees. things like planting native flowers, stopping using insecticides, etc, benefit all bees and all insects generally
ALSO
it’s actually a GOOD thing to have lots of conservation efforts focusing on “Charismatic megafauna,” especially apex predators
Because big animals like tigers need a LOT of space
So creating a preserve to save tigers…saves thousands of other species, because the tigers need miles and miles of habitat to live on, and that habitat needs to be healthy to support the tigers
They’re called “umbrella species” and they’re a great thing.
This is exactly why pandas are great for conservation, and whining about them is myopic childish foot-stamping*. An adult panda needs a 2km square range. A viable population needs many of those joined together into a very big protected area. And if you have that, you also have the habitat for hundreds of thousands if not millions of invertebrate species that are never in their wildest dreams going to get that level of protection afforded to them otherwise
*Also pandas don’t stop having intrinsic value just because you personally decide they’re ‘overhyped’ or 'don’t contribute much to the ecosystem’. Ethically, that is a species that deserves to exist regardless of how 'useful’ it is (side note, absolutely FUCK that capitalist bullshit), and also, if humans are why it’s going extinct, it’s on humans to bring it back. And if they aren’t readily breeding in captivity, the question to ask is 'What aren’t we providing in their environment that they need?’**, not the whiny temper tantrum of 'But why won’t they meet us halfway? They won’t help themselves! I am very smart.’
**It’s a tall tree to climb. This is emerging research but it looks like a vital part of panda mate selection is watching a male climb a tree to show off his tree climbing genes. We have not been including these in panda enclosures, so the females have been looking at these males sitting around and going 'Tch. Pathetic.’
