Tuesday, February 28, 2006
A Role for Government?
I am throwing this question out there. Is there a government role in protecting the beluga whale from extinction? Why or why not?
Comments:
<< Home
nah. they aren't even going extinct! there's plenty of them elsewhere. if they don't want to live in inlet's anymore, that's their perogative.
# posted by 
: 11:19 PM
: 11:19 PM 
I knew someone would read far enough in to see that they exist in other areas, but ignore the fact the inlet beluga is genetically distinct. And you dodged the question. Nice try.
geez- you caught me. i still say no. as someone who works in philanthropy, i know there's a TON of money given to environmentalist causes every year. a nonprofit organization could take up the cause to figure out how to preserve the GENETICALLY DISTINCT inlet beluga.
so there!
so there!
# posted by : 1:42 PM
: 1:42 PM
As in the case of philanthropy, I don't see throwing "tons" of money at a problem a viable solution. While a philanthropist, James Carter threw "oodles" of money into housing and was still an abject failure.
On to the question! There is already a government role in the protection of the genetically distinct beluga whale: hunting restrictions. Only the native Alaskan subsistence hunters are allowed to kill the whales. They seem to do it for food. I think that in more ancient times, the subsistence hunter would have hunted out this inlet and moved to another to survive.
As it sits, if I were to go to a zoo and look at two tanks side by side; one with the genetically distinct beluga from Cook Inlet and one of the 35-40K other whales, I couldn't tell the difference. As a matter of fact, I could consider the 35-40K other whales also genetically distinct; from that of the Cook Inlet whale.
All said, I think that if the whale is being stamped out by means other than hunting (that is to say oil spills, noise, etc.) as suggested by the article, perhaps the government needs to take a closer look at what is causing this. Not necessarily for the propagation of the species of whale, but for the propagation of the subsistence hunter who indeed has a symbiotic relationship with this animal.
Post a Comment
On to the question! There is already a government role in the protection of the genetically distinct beluga whale: hunting restrictions. Only the native Alaskan subsistence hunters are allowed to kill the whales. They seem to do it for food. I think that in more ancient times, the subsistence hunter would have hunted out this inlet and moved to another to survive.
As it sits, if I were to go to a zoo and look at two tanks side by side; one with the genetically distinct beluga from Cook Inlet and one of the 35-40K other whales, I couldn't tell the difference. As a matter of fact, I could consider the 35-40K other whales also genetically distinct; from that of the Cook Inlet whale.
All said, I think that if the whale is being stamped out by means other than hunting (that is to say oil spills, noise, etc.) as suggested by the article, perhaps the government needs to take a closer look at what is causing this. Not necessarily for the propagation of the species of whale, but for the propagation of the subsistence hunter who indeed has a symbiotic relationship with this animal.
<< Home
