ಮೂಲ: ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯ
ಇದು ರಿಚರ್ಡ್ ಬ್ರಾನ್ಸನ್ ಹೊಸ ಕಲ್ಪನೆ ಹೊಂದಿರುವ ತಿರುಗಿದರೆ; ರಿಂಗ್ ಬಾಲದ ರಾತ್ರಿ ವೇಳೆ ಸಂಚರಿಸುವ ಉಳಿಸಲು (ರಾತ್ರಿ ವೇಳೆ ಸಂಚರಿಸುವ catta) ಮೂಲಕ ತನ್ನ ಖಾಸಗಿ ಬ್ರಿಟಿಷ್ ವರ್ಜಿನ್ ದ್ವೀಪ ಅವರನ್ನು ಆಮದು. ಲೇಖನ ಸೂಚಿಸುತ್ತಾರೆ ಬ್ರಾನ್ಸನ್ ಆಗಿ ದ್ವೀಪದ ಮಾಡಲು ಲಕ್ಷಾಂತರ ಪೌಂಡ್ಗಳನ್ನು ಮತ್ತು ಪ್ರಯತ್ನದ ವರ್ಷಗಳ ಕಾಲ “ವಿಶ್ವದ ಅತ್ಯಂತ ಪರಿಸರ ಸ್ನೇಹಿ ದ್ವೀಪದ”. ಆದರೆ ಶ್ರೀ ಬ್ರಾನ್ಸನ್ ಕಾಣಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತದೆ ಸಂರಕ್ಷಣಾ ವಿಜ್ಞಾನ ಉಪಯೋಗಿಸದೆ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಸಾರ್ವಜನಿಕ ಸಂಪರ್ಕ ಸ್ನೇಹಿ ರೀತಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಅದನ್ನು ಬದಲಾಯಿಸಲು ನಿರ್ಧರಿಸಿದೆ. ಅವರು ಬಯಸುತ್ತಾರೆ ಏಕೆಂದರೆ ತನ್ನ ಸ್ವಂತ ಪರಿಸರ ನಿರ್ಧಾರಣೆಯ ಎಚ್ಚರಿಸಿದೆ ಹೊರತಾಗಿಯೂ ಲೆಮ್ಯೂರ್ಗಳು ಬಂದು “…ಎರಡನೇ ದ್ವೀಪದ ಆವಾಸಸ್ಥಾನ ರಚಿಸಲು ಮತ್ತು Moskito ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿಗಳು ಸಂಪೂರ್ಣ.” ಪದ ಪರಿಪೂರ್ಣ ವ್ಯಾಖ್ಯಾನವನ್ನು ಅಲ್ಲಿ ಬಹುಶಃ ಬ್ರಾನ್ಸನ್ ಒಂದು ಬಿಝಾರೋ ವಿಶ್ವದ ನಿಘಂಟು ಹೊಂದಿದೆ “ಮೂಲ ಸಂಪೂರ್ಣವಾಗಿ ಹೋಲಿಕೆಯಿಲ್ಲದಂತಿವೆಯೆಂದರೆ ಏನೋ”.
ಸರಿ ಖಚಿತವಾಗಿ, ದಂಡ ರೀತಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಮೊದಲು ಕಲ್ಪನೆಯನ್ನು ಶಬ್ದಗಳ ನಲ್ಲಿ – ಲೆಮ್ಯೂರ್ಗಳು ಅಪಾಯವನ್ನು ಎದುರಿಸುತ್ತಿವೆ, ಏಕೆ ಅವರನ್ನು ಎರಡನೇ ಕಾಡು ಆಶ್ರಯ ನೀಡಲು ಪ್ರಯತ್ನಿಸಿ? ಬಾವಿ, ಸಂರಕ್ಷಣಾ ಏಜೆನ್ಸಿಯ ಡಾ ಜೇಮ್ಸ್ Lazell ಬೀರಿದೆ 31 ವರ್ಷಗಳ ವರ್ಜಿನ್ ದ್ವೀಪಗಳು ಅನುಭವಿಸಲು ಸೂಚಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ “ಲೆಮ್ಯೂರ್ಗಳು ಚುರುಕಾಗಿರುತ್ತವೆ, ಡೆಕ್ಸ್ಟೆರಿಯಸ್, ಆಕ್ರಮಣಕಾರಿ, ಸರ್ವಭಕ್ಷಕ ಪ್ರಾಣಿಗಳ ಈ ಸರಳ ದ್ವೀಪದ ಪರಿಸರ ವ್ಯವಸ್ಥೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಮೇಲೆ ಹಾನಿಕರ ಪರಿಣಾಮ ಎಂದು. ಅವರು ಸಂಪೂರ್ಣವಾಗಿ ಎಲ್ಲವನ್ನೂ ತಿನ್ನುತ್ತವೆ - ಹಲ್ಲಿಗಳು, ಹಣ್ಣು, ಬೇರುಗಳು, ಕೀಟಗಳು, ಪಕ್ಷಿಗಳು’ ಮೊಟ್ಟೆಗಳು.” ಓಹ್ ಆದರೆ ಚಿಂತಿಸಬೇಡಿ, ನೀವು ದ್ವೀಪಕ್ಕೆ ಸಸ್ತನಿ ಪರಿಚಯಿಸಲು ಏನೂ ಕೆಟ್ಟ ಸಂಭವಿಸಬಹುದು (ಪರಿಚಯಿಸಿತು ಸಸ್ತನಿ ಫ್ಲೋರಿಡಾ ಕೀ ಧ್ವಂಸ). ಬ್ರಾನ್ಸನ್ ಆ ಲೆಮ್ಯೂರ್ಗಳು ತಿನ್ನುವೆ ಕೇವಲ ತಿಳಿದಿದೆ “ಬೆಸ ಹಲ್ಲಿ ತೆಗೆದುಕೊಳ್ಳಲು” (ಅಪರೂಪದ ಸ್ಥಳೀಯ ಡ್ವಾರ್ಫ್-ಹಲ್ಲಿ ನಂತಹ Sphaerodactylus parthenopion), ಅವರು ಬಹುಶಃ ಅವರು ಏಕೆಂದರೆ ಇತರ ದ್ವೀಪಗಳಿಗೆ ಹರಡುವುದಿಲ್ಲ ನಮೂದಿಸುವುದನ್ನು ಅಲ್ಲ “ದ್ವೇಷ ಈಜು” (ರಿಂಗ್ ಬಾಲದ ರಾತ್ರಿ ವೇಳೆ ಸಂಚರಿಸುವ ಈಜು).
ನಂತರ ಏಕೆ ರಿಂಗ್ ಬಾಲದ ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ? ಇದು ಅತ್ಯಂತ ಅಪಾಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಸಿಲುಕುತ್ತದೆ ಏಕೆಂದರೆ (ಇವೆ ಸಾಕಷ್ಟು ಇತರ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಅಳಿವಿನಂಚಿನಲ್ಲಿರುವ ಲೆಮ್ಯೂರ್ಗಳು), ಆದರೆ ಅತ್ಯಂತ ಸಾಂಪ್ರದಾಯಿಕ ಏಕೆಂದರೆ. ನಿಜಕ್ಕೂ ಈ ಹಾಸ್ಯಾಸ್ಪದ ಕಲ್ಪನೆ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ನನಗೆ ಗೋಡೆಯ ಡ್ರೈವ್ಗಳು ಏನು. ಮಾತ್ರ ಅವರು ನಿಷ್ಕಪಟವಾಗಿ ಒಂದು ಸೂಕ್ಷ್ಮ ದ್ವೀಪದ ವಾಸಸ್ಥಾನ ಒಳಗೆ ಒಂದು ಬಹುಶಃ ಆಕ್ರಮಣಶೀಲ ಜಾತಿಯ ಪರಿಚಯಿಸುತ್ತಿದೆ ಮಾಡಿಲ್ಲ – ಆದರೆ ಸಂರಕ್ಷಣೆಯ ತಪ್ಪು ಸಂದೇಶವನ್ನು ಹರಡುವ ಏಕೆಂದರೆ. ನಿಧಾನಗತಿಯ ಮಗುವಿನ ಹಾಗೆ ಬ್ರಾನ್ಸನ್ ರಿಂಗ್ ಬಾಲದ ಸಂಪೂರ್ಣವಾಗಿ ಸಂರಕ್ಷಣಾ ಹಿಂದಿರುವ ಸಂಪೂರ್ಣ ಕಲ್ಪನೆಯನ್ನು ಕಾಣೆಯಾಗಿದೆ ಅದು ಉಳಿಸಲು ಧಾವಿಸಿ. ರಿಂಗ್ ಬಾಲದ ಒಂದು ಪತಾಕೆನಾವೆ, ಮಡಗಾಸ್ಕರ್ ಸಂಭವಿಸುವ ಎಂದು ದುರಂತಕ್ಕೆ ಗಮನ ಸೆಳೆಯುತ್ತದೆ ಒಂದು. ಒಂದು ಮುದ್ದಾದ ಮುದ್ದಾದ ಪ್ರಾಣಿಗಳ ಅದರ ತಾಯ್ನಾಡಿನ, staggeringly ಅನನ್ಯ ಮತ್ತು ವೈವಿಧ್ಯಮಯ ಆವಾಸಸ್ಥಾನಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಪ್ರತಿನಿಧಿಸಲು. ಆದರೆ ರಿಚರ್ಡ್ ಬ್ರಾನ್ಸನ್ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಹೇಳಲು ಏನು ಹೊಂದಿದೆ ವೇಳೆ. ನೀವು ಅಪಹರಣ ಮತ್ತು ಪ್ರೈಮೇಟ್ ಎಲ್ಲರೂ ಪ್ರೀತಿಯ ಹೊಸ ನೆಲೆ ನಿರ್ಮಿಸುವ ಯಾವಾಗ ಏಕೆ ರಕ್ಷಿಸು ಮಡಗಾಸ್ಕರ್ ಚಿಂತೆ? ಥೂ, ಬಿಕ್ಕಟ್ಟಿನ ನಿವಾರಣೆಯಾಯಿತು. ಮಡಗಾಸ್ಕರ್ ಬರ್ನ್ಸ್ ಸಂದರ್ಭದಲ್ಲಿ ರಿಚರ್ಡ್ ಪಿಟೀಲು.
I suspect this freakish island zoo is simply masquerading as conservation and the real incentive behind it is commercial. Over the next few years there will be a handful of “luxury, carbon-neutral homes built on the island”. A pretty brilliant scheme to incentivize the purchase of homes that undoubtedly will cost tens of millions of dollars each – and you can pretend to feel good about protecting the world while you do it. After all the Virgin Islands lack any charismatic wildlife; nature sure does a terrible job of creating a billionaires wonderland. What comes next to the island?
Maybe… just maybe… Branson has Dr. Moreau moving in first.
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…
ಗಂಭೀರವಾಗಿ? 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, ಇತ್ಯಾದಿ. 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. ಮತ್ತೊಂದೆಡೆ, 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.
ಖಂಡಿತವಾಗಿ, 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.