Lähde: Wikipedia
On käynyt ilmi, että Richard Branson on uusi idea; pelastaa rengas-pyrstö lisko (Lisko catta) kirjoittaja tuoda ne yksityiselle Brittiläiselle Neitsytsaarelleen. Koska artikkeli toteaa Branson käyttänyt miljoonia puntia ja vuosien työ kääntää saaresta “maailman ekologisesti ystävällisin saari”. Mutta näyttää siltä, että herra Branson on päättänyt luopua luonnonsuojelutieteistä ja kirjoittaa sen uudelleen PR-ystävällisemmällä tavalla. Mukaan tulee lemurit huolimatta hänen oman ekologisen arvioinnin varoituksista, koska hän haluaa “…toisen saaren elinympäristön luomiseen ja Moskiton olosuhteet ovat täydelliset.” Ehkä Bransonilla on outo maailmansanakirja, jossa on sana täydellinen määritelmä “jotain täysin erilaista kuin alkuperäinen”.
OK toki, aluksi idea kuulostaa hyvältä – lemurit ovat uhanalaisia, miksi et yrittäisi tarjota heille toista villiä turvapaikkaa? Hyvin, Tohtori James Lazell luonnonsuojeluvirastosta on ollut 31 vuoden kokemus Neitsytsaarilta ja on huomauttanut siitä “Lemurit ovat ketteriä, taitava, aggressiivinen, kaikkiruokaiset eläimet, joilla voi olla haitallinen vaikutus näihin yksinkertaisiin saariekologioihin. He syövät aivan kaikkea - liskoja, hedelmää, juuret, ötökät, lintuja’ munat.” Voi mutta älä huoli, mitään pahaa ei voi tapahtua, kun esittelet kädelliset saarelle (esille tulleet kädelliset tuhoavat Florida Keyn). Branson tietää, että lemurit vain “ota outo gekko” (kuten harvinainen endeeminen kääpiögekko Sphaerodactylus parthenopion), puhumattakaan siitä, että ne eivät todennäköisesti leviä muille saarille sen jälkeen “vihaan uimista” (rengashäntälemurin uinti).
Joten miksi sitten rengaspyrstö? Ei siksi, että se olisi uhanalaisin (siellä on paljon muista uhanalaisia limureita), vaan koska se on ikonisin. Tämä on se, mikä todella ajaa minut seinään tästä naurettavasta ajatuksesta. Hän ei ainoastaan tuo naiivisti mahdollisesti invasiivista lajia herkälle saaren elinympäristölle – vaan koska hän levittää väärää suojeluviestiä. Kuten hidas lapsi, Branson on ryntänyt rengaspyrstölle pelastaakseen sen, vaikka hän puuttuu kokonaan suojelun takana olevasta ideasta.. Rengashäntä on lippulaivalaji, joka kiinnittää huomion Madagaskarilla tapahtuvaan tuhoon. Yksi suloinen pehmoeläin edustamaan kotimaansa hämmästyttävän ainutlaatuisia ja monipuolisia elinympäristöjä. Mutta ei, jos Richard Bransonilla on siitä jotain sanottavaa. Miksi vaivautua suojelemaan Madagaskaria, kun voit hyökätä sisään ja luoda uuden kodin kädelliselle, jota kaikki rakastavat? Huh huh, kriisi vältetty. Richard viuluttaa Madagaskarin palaessa.
Epäilen, että tämä kummallinen saarieläintarha naamioituu luonnonsuojelualueeksi ja todellinen kannustin sen takana on kaupallinen. Muutaman seuraavan vuoden aikana niitä tulee olemaan kourallinen “ylellisyyttä, saarelle rakennettuja hiilineutraaleja koteja”. Melko loistava järjestelmä kannustaa ostamaan asuntoja, jotka varmasti maksavat kymmeniä miljoonia dollareita kukin – ja voit teeskennellä, että sinusta tuntuu hyvältä suojella maailmaa samalla kun teet sen. Loppujen lopuksi Neitsytsaarilta puuttuu karismaattista luontoa; luonto tekee varmasti kauheaa työtä luodakseen miljardöörien ihmemaan. Mitä saaren viereen tulee?
Voi olla… vain ehkä… Bransonilla on Dr. Moreau muuttaa sisään ensin.
I have heard similar ideas uttered as potentially good conservation efforts by professional primatologists, in full seriousness. Do you think there is a (negative) correlation between understanding of the environment and the charisma of one’s study organisms?
Not at all. There are lots of fantastic scientists who work on very charismatic species. The only downside is you get people who know nothing about them messing things up (like butterflies!). I think Branson is misguided here – he is going against the scientific advice in this particular instance. It just rings more of media stunt than honest conservation effort (they are even neutering all of the lemurs!)
Personally I don’t see the point of conserving a species if the native habitat is gone. If we can’t restore the habitat in the first place then why screw up another habitat just to protect the first species? Thats what zoos are for…
Vakavasti? How is there any conservation value if they will all be neutered? Sounds like he just wants his own private lemur island. And I thought John Varty was ridiculous for trying to establish a bengal tiger population in South Africa. At least that plan is just likely to fail and be a waste of money rather than possibly introduce a species that would cause drastic ecological problems… Sigh
You’re dealing with someone who operates inside a powerful reality-distortion field. This is a man who consumed vast amounts of energy and resources to carve a mansion into an island ecosystem, which he flies his private jet to visit, all while calling it “ecologically friendly.” Clearly, science and logic do not apply to Sir Richard.
It’s not so much the idea that is bad, but the how of it (but no one seems definitely sure of what his actual plans are, and in truth, they probably morph on a daily basis at this “pre-rendezvous” point). I think his initial idea was that he was going to release 3 species of lemurs: ringtails (which are tough, and generally hardy, and will eat pretty much anything, they don’t get sick as easily as other species); red-ruffed lemurs (finicky, and have done so-so in captivity, and in some places they have actually died prematurely; and sifakas (which are extremely hard to manage in captivity, they are fragile and die easily in captivity — sifakas are definitely a terrible idea). His idea was just to release them on the islands and let them have free reign of the islands. That’s all well and good for them (or not, depending), but what about the endemic biota? There are several species of endangered lizards and geckos on the island, and the ringtails will eat those up, for sure. True, lots of people have lemurs as pets (now that’s a really terrible idea, for many reasons), and in some ways this is no different than that.
But we are talking about letting a whole bunch of these “pets” run free all over one or two islands. True, lemurs cannot swim (the photos of a ringtail swimming show him right next to land) so they won’t be going over to other islands; that’s almost certainly not an issue. But Branson has a responsibility to take extremely good care of these animals, especially if they are left to run free all over the island (which everyone who knows these animals thinks is a very bad plan.) They need to have a crew of vets on site 24/7 to monitor the animals and make sure they are well cared for, not sick, getting enough to eat, jne. Maybe even have a research team of people who are working on PhDs in primatology to follow the groups of lemurs and report on them. If poorly executed, Branson’s plan could doom many of the lemurs to deaths that could have been prevented. There is no data to show whether or not there are new pathogens that they will be exposed to that will be harmful for them — or the possibiity they may bring other pathogens into the islands. If Branson is dead-set on the plan, the best way would be to build large enclosures for the animals, and provide adequate (and costly vet care), and make all the colony or colonies are well-monitored.
Every single person I’ve spoken to (in a well-connected network of lemur specialists & conservationists) has said, in effect, “why on earth doesn’t he use his billions to help out poor old Madagascar so that the lemurs can stay there?” That’s a very good question. Perhaps he should do some of both — provide for some lemurs on this island AND help the reserves in Madagascar where the lemurs are under fire. There are lots of ways he could do this, and Madagascar definitely needs the help.
I hadn’t heard that they are neutering the lemurs in question … that doesn’t make any sense to me, as it seems part of the point of this would be to have a breeding, sustainable colony. Toisaalta, maybe he only wants to neuter the first batch, and so how “the experiment” works out with hardier adults (no infants.)
Dear Moth,
Could you disagree with someone and not call him an idiot? No doubt Richard has his commercial reasons for being philantrophical but you really dont need to drag yourself into the mud for doubting his sincerity? Why dont you save the lemurs instead? And then not choose to spend your pocket money for global advertising in a hypocritical way?
Thank you for reading this since your time is so precious.
Harry.
Of course, I can respectfully disagree with you. You might be correct, I could be wrong in doubting his sincerity. And if anything that makes him less of an idiot for knowing how to spin the PR on his island zoo of neutered lemurs. But if he is sincere, I suggest that he sticks to the industry he better understands.
And that would be commercial space travel from a poor county in New Mexico.