mean or just me?

[Bartman]

i was watching the animal channel on my satalite and there was a show about turtles. They were taking footage of the turtles hatching and running down to the water to begin there life. As the, hundred or so, turtles run down the beach there are like 10 birds landing and as the camera man is photographing the birds start eating the baby turtles..when i saw this i figured even if this goes on for the show they could have atleast helped the turtles get to the shore and scare away the birds or somthing..instead of letting the turtle be torn to pieces by the birds..i figured this was a little mean..what do you guys think?

[ohh_kristina]

they are not allowed to mess with the turtles. they are endangered species (if you are talking about sea turtles) and will get fined severely for doing ANYTHING to them.

[jaybox_reptiles]

Well i no that that can be desterbing but that is how the sea turtle is very few actually make it and i belive if we just start taking them all the it could change the natuarl histaory.... But yea it is very disturbing but as the saying gose " dont mess with nature" hope that helps


Jay

[bob_thesnowman]

well yes as bad as it seems,there is predator and prey,the predators need to eat to survive,these people have to let nature take it's course,if the animal survives fine,if it gets eaten,it happens and they can't interfere with it

[Bartman]

but if there endangered wouldnt they atleast want to give them a little extra help and let them atleast get to the ocean?

[ohh_kristina]

it would seem that way, but..no.

[Brock]

That's the typical distorted view of reality that North Americans have, and we are unfortunately more idealistic than realistic. It's called survival of the fittest and population control, just like AIDS and cancer. The turtles have evolved over the millenia to have just enough offspring to survive predation and come back the following years and reproduce again and again and the birds will eat the few that cannot make it again and again, we have evolved over the years to develop medical treatment for AIDS and cancer. All in all, it would be stupid of us to take that away from the way they have evolved to survive in healthy populations, regardless if they are endangered or not, they will find a way to survive. Next thing you'd know is we would have a surplus of turtles eating all the fish and then fishermen would be inclined to kill them off anyways, just like the otters here on the west coast were nearly hunted to extinction because they were competition to the fishermen. Same thing can be said about wild fires. I do not think we should fight fires. Now the average American would say I'm a sadistic *******, but that's just because the average American is stupid. Fires are nature's way of cleansing and recycling. They destroy all the dead and excess growth, keep populations of animals in check, and some conifers (trees) cannot germinate unless their cones are broken open from the heat of a fire (think popcorn). The only problem with this are the fires influenced by man, such as cigarettes, that would cause excess fires and things would be f'ed up. Either way, Homo sapiens are rather dumb.

-Brock

[lilyskip]

point being, nature has its own logic. those shooting footage of the turtles couldn't disturb the natural order. Who the heck are humans to interfere with nature? I think it's a different story when you start talking about paving the rainforest to build a shopping mall, or whatever situation is caused by humans as predators. but natural predators like birds, sharks, etc. have got to do their thing.

[Zoe]

i figured this was a little mean. It isn't mean, it's just the way things are. Turtles lay so many eggs for a reason - so many babies don't even make it to shore. It's all a perfect cycle, when you think about it (were it not for human involvement): the turtles lay 100s of eggs, the eggs hatch, the birds get a feast, and the survivors go on to lay more eggs. If all the babies survived, we'd be overrun with turtles!

I do, of course, believe that we should help any animal that is being threatened by humans.

Zoe

[skinheaddave]

There was actualy a study done a while ago using a stage-based population analysis that would indicate that the maximum effect on loggerhead populations would be gained by focusing on the protection of larger individuals rather than the babies. Anyhow, I know there are protected beaches in place that attempt to deal with human intervention with the eggs/young but obviously don't try to interfere with natural predators.

Cheers,
Dave

[Bartman]

true..you have changed my mind :)

[crazyboy]

its just you. people should let nature take its course.

[Linds]

Originally posted by Bartman
..i figured this was a little mean..what do you guys think?

I don't think there is anything mean about it. It's the food chain, its how nature works. That's the same as saying it isn't fair to allow snakes to feed on rodent nests and that sort.

Originally posted by Brock
The turtles have evolved over the millenia to have just enough offspring to survive predation and come back the following years and reproduce again and again

They have evolved to survive natural predation, machines and meatmarkets are not included unfortunately... hence these animals are now endangered. Same with sharks, they do not reproduce like crazy, being apex predators it would most definitely go completely out of control if they did... if it weren't for the fact that we came along and hunted many to, or near, extinction. Animals are not prepared for our interferences as such, so in some cases (definitely not all) it is ok to intervene in an effort to correct the mistakes.

Originally posted by Bartman
but if there endangered wouldnt they atleast want to give them a little extra help and let them atleast get to the ocean?

There are several replacement programs for sea turtles underway. Though many of the turtles raised and released will still not make it, better some than none, right? They take them right out to sea when they are realeased to the beds for shelter and food.
Even if they do get them to the ocean, the chances aren't much better they will get pegged off. The most critical stage of the journey is from next until they get to deeper waters where they can hide and feed in the floating seaweed beds.

[MistyDaze]

Yes, but there is a reason why these animals are endangered. They don't just jump on the endangered list themselves. And in a situation like this human intervention may be necessary if the species is to survive. There are protected beaches and programs where the eggs are removed and incubated elsewhere as well as other initiatives such as netting beaches etc. The poor little creatures don't just get pegged on the beach either they have to deal with predators in the ocean as well. In a situation where large populations of turtles return to the same beach or stretch of coast to lay year after year birds cause wholesale slaughter and human intervention at this point can be a way of balancing out the reasons these animals are endangered to begin with. So although we cannot stop the slaughter of these turtles in other areas (the areas that cause most problems) by allowing more hatchlings to actually reach water at this stage, thus prehaps allowing more turtles to reach adulthood could possibly ease the problem in other areas. Myself I beleive that nature should be able to run it's course but we as humans have altered the course of nature and must compensate or we will continue to loose species after species.

[Cas]

Part of it is also simply because it is a documentary........ that's sort of a strict "no interference" thing. They're trying to show the life history of an animal in all its sometimes-gory detail. There wouldn't be much point to documentaries if every other scene was "and here's some more people going in and saving the animal from nature".

BTW, I feel the same way when watching cheetah documentaries where cubs get killed by lions - cheetahs have a hard enough time even breeding anymore, I can't imagine just sittting there while they get killed by another predator for no good reason.


Dawn

[sapphire_moon]

It isn't mean, thats life.

Personally I would have to leave because I couldn't just sit by and watch them get killed. But on the stretch of beach they will be on (most likely anywhere from 4-6 miles long) the most 1 person could probably "save" would be maybe MAYBE 100, even then they would probably be eaten by the sharks and whales or whatever eats them when they get in the water.....so I would just have to leave..........


Brock: Not all North Americans are like that,

[marisa]

What's next, African wildlife movie makers stopping cheetahs from killing gazelles? lol no really though they can't do anything for them, and its really no interruption when making documentaries. its standard. nothing your supposed to do. :)

marisa