Posted on 05/01/2023 5:22:22 PM PDT by Borges
Congratulations on your new panda cub, Washington! You’re prolonging the existence of a hopeless and wasteful species the world should’ve given up on long ago.
I understand the impulse. Some people find them cute. Pandas don’t have much of a habitat left in the wild, thanks to heedless human development. And zoos imagine they’re doing the right thing, pulling in some extra visitors while helping conservation efforts.
But the first test of a species’ worthiness for conservation should be some instinct for self-preservation. And pandas fail objectively.
First, their breeding habits don’t suggest a species brimming with vitality. Pandas at a research center in Chengdu were so disinclined to mate that workers there subjected the poor things to Viagra and videos of other bears procreating, hoping they’d get the idea. Zoos, including in Washington, more often resort to artificial insemination. In the wild, where birthrates aren’t much better, pandas are prone to inbreeding. Females only ovulate for a few days each year, and if a mother does manage to have more than one cub, she abandons the weakling. That’s fine; nature’s mean. But don’t whine when a species with such habits falls into inexorable decline.
Second, although blessed with a bear’s predatory teeth, the lethargic beasts eat almost nothing but bamboo — a plant that’s nearly devoid of nutritional value and disappearing in the wild. Pandas consume 40 pounds of it a day, eating constantly, speeding their own demise.
“Here’s a species that of its own accord has gone down an evolutionary cul-de-sac,” Chris Packham, a British author and wildlife activist, said in 2009. He argues that “the panda is possibly one of the grossest wastes of conservation money in the last half-century.”
He’s right. The economics of protecting this doomed species are simply unjustifiable. Canada last year spent $10 million renting the creatures from China while cutting government spending elsewhere. American zoos typically pay the Chinese government $1 million annually for a single panda (subject to negotiation). If they have cubs? That’s another $600,000. Taking care of them — supplying them with a habitat, staff and all that bamboo — costs five times what it costs for elephants, the next most expensive zoo animal. And zoos typically find that the cost overtakes the benefits in added attendance after about three years.
Lu Zhi, a panda expert from Beijing University, has said that trying to reintroduce pandas to the wild is as “pointless as taking off the pants in order to fart.” Yet the Chinese government — which sees pandas as a source of national pride — spares no expense on them. That includes funding the Hetaoping Research and Conservation Center for the Giant Panda, where researchers dress up in preposterous panda costumes (I’m really not joking about this) hoping to fool cubs into thinking they’re a relative.
This in a country where roughly 160 million people still live in extreme poverty. And all to protect about 1,600 dim herbivores that are debasing the word “bear,” which otherwise applies to noble beasts that manage to find plenty to eat in the wild.
Look, Darwinism isn’t for crybabies. And conservation requires making tough choices. Pandas had a pretty good run for 3 million years. All that money is better spent on preserving diverse habitats rather than on a single hopeless species.
Surprised they haven’t eaten them into extinction decades ago.
Hmm, I wonder what they taste like
Probably better than bat. 🦇
All they need mow is the entrepreneurs.
Naw, bat taste like squirrel. I bet Panda taste like bear, which is a little sweet for my tastes. I’d have to try Panda to be sure tho. 😂
Its a good article and one that is made more accurate by changing the word in the final sentence from diverse to dinner.
They keep saying that endangered animals are parts of a tangled web in the ecosystem and that their extinction would cause the whole web to unravel. Then you have animals like the panda who’s survival depends upon the interposition of man and their disappearance would not be noticed by nature.
This is always used as an excuse by leftists to justify funneling more taxpayer money to useless couch sitters instead of things that benefit mankind. Space program? Look at all that money that could help those below the poverty line!! Scientific research? We could be spending that on the children of unwed mothers!!
We're to the point now where we spend about half our budget on welfare programs to keep the dredges of society in booze, pot, free housing, and off work so they can reproduce in order to supply us with the next generation of parasites. I'd much rather spend it on the pandas than any of our 160 million welfare bums, at least the pandas are cute and don't carjack me at a stop light.
So tasty that there was a rule that only emperors could eat them. The foot pads were quite the delicacy.
We don’t take kindly to pandas around here. Best Southpark episode ever. Well, maybe except for the two tacos and a soda pop episode about Jennifer Lopez.
Can you imagine any liberal fascist Marxist who would make a cute children's plush animal?
BEST post of the thread!
Also to keep them from rebelling.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.