6 thoughts on “Polar bears ‘may need to be fed by humans to survive’ — or we need to kill them”
Predators often have large population swings related to their prey populations. Unless humans actually set out to eliminate wolves or bears again, they will almost certainly get along as they did for millenia, sometimes in plenty and sometimes in dearth. The weakest species die out, at least in the wild, whether humans try to “help” them or not. Pandas are Exhibit A.
How is it that the people at The Guardian seem to be completely unaware of how foolish the look?
I swear when I first saw that headline I read: Polar bears ‘may need to be fed humans to survive’.
Since global warming killed all of the penguins, the polar bears don’t have anything to eat. 😉
Homo sapiens, the climax predator and most potent force in the environment due to its ability to rapidly alter the environment to suit its own needs, has for millennia been expanding its habitat, converting ‘wild’ lands into ‘cultivated’ lands, with practically no reversals.
Once humans become established in a region, they tend to stay forever. The animals which are assured survival in a human-dominated region are those which can, in whatever manner, adapt to coexist with humans. This is why no domestic animals or covert nuisance animals are endangered, but those such as eagles or wolves which compete with humans for food resources such as chickens or sheep are in more trouble. The pythons of the Florida Everglades will thrive as long as people do not take over the swamp. Polar bears will cease to be a threat if they learn to stay ‘cute’ and allow humans to feed and domesticate them.
Ingenious solutions to non-existent problem.
Leave a Reply
Discover more from JunkScience.com
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
Predators often have large population swings related to their prey populations. Unless humans actually set out to eliminate wolves or bears again, they will almost certainly get along as they did for millenia, sometimes in plenty and sometimes in dearth. The weakest species die out, at least in the wild, whether humans try to “help” them or not. Pandas are Exhibit A.
How is it that the people at The Guardian seem to be completely unaware of how foolish the look?
I swear when I first saw that headline I read: Polar bears ‘may need to be fed humans to survive’.
Since global warming killed all of the penguins, the polar bears don’t have anything to eat. 😉
Homo sapiens, the climax predator and most potent force in the environment due to its ability to rapidly alter the environment to suit its own needs, has for millennia been expanding its habitat, converting ‘wild’ lands into ‘cultivated’ lands, with practically no reversals.
Once humans become established in a region, they tend to stay forever. The animals which are assured survival in a human-dominated region are those which can, in whatever manner, adapt to coexist with humans. This is why no domestic animals or covert nuisance animals are endangered, but those such as eagles or wolves which compete with humans for food resources such as chickens or sheep are in more trouble. The pythons of the Florida Everglades will thrive as long as people do not take over the swamp. Polar bears will cease to be a threat if they learn to stay ‘cute’ and allow humans to feed and domesticate them.
Ingenious solutions to non-existent problem.