Can people be persuaded that other species do matter?

[thunder]

Originally Posted by Wild-Woman

There will always be those that aren't at all interested- but that's their loss. Don't write off most folks though, they just need someone to give them the awe and wonder thing that they may have missed out on in their formative years.

Exactly! As a friend says "How can anyone NOT be interested in natural history?"

All it needs is for someone to point out the wonders all around us.

henrya

[DoraMac]

Originally Posted by thunder

Exactly! As a friend says "How can anyone NOT be interested in natural history?"


henrya

That is my question too.

My sister and I, same parents, same educational, social and travel opportunities etc are completely divergent in our interests.

She, in fact, is dismissive of most things connected to natural history.

I don't know what experiences trigger the interest. Wish I did.

[wanlock dod]

Hi Deb,

I think that everything, including wildlife/nature reserves, are predominantly for the benefit of people. I doubt that there is much, if any, of the UK countryside which has not been engineered for mans benefit in some way. We will occasionally hear about the need to protect meadows, but one could question whether or not they are truly a natural habitat. Capercallies are endangered, but only by virtue of the management practices that have been applied to the "wild places" that they inhabit. Indeed, one might even suggest that your desire to protect and provide habitats for wild creatures provides you with a degree of satisfaction, and hence what you do is for your own benefit, as well as the wild creatures.

We often tend to focus on particular species, whether thay be a flower, bat, bird, or insect, and to my mind this disjointed view of ecosystems does not aid your cause to preserve things for nature. I am sure that there are often instances where management of carried out specifically for the benefit of a single species, rather than for the well being of the ecosystem as a whole. The reason that I mention this is that we can also view ecosystems as providing services to society. These services would include amenity (which can have important implications for both mental and physical health), pollination, waste removal, nitrification, water purification to name but a few. By helping people to understand what services these ecosystems are providing for them, and the implications of not having them pehaps people would be more accepting of what you are trying to achieve.

It's not just about bees, or orchids, or bats, or whatever other individual species has been identfied as being "needy" in some way, it is surely more about ecosystems being able to maintain themselves such that they continue to be able to provide these services to society long into the future. Perhaps if people had an appreciation of this then they would be more accepting of the inherent value of ecosystems.

I'm afraid that I can't resist suggesting that one of the groups that you really should be encouraging to make use of such spaces are teenagers. You seem to have suggested that they should be kept out, yet treating them in this way might not be the best way to encourage them to respect the environment and it's associated wildlife and ecosystems. Surely encouraging responsible use of such an area will be to the greater good of both society and the wider environment in the long term, although it might result in some deterioration of one small piece of woodland. Why not try to get some of them involved, so that they can feel an element of ownership? They might then spread a little greater repect amongst their peers. I can only imagine that the attitude of "this place is not for you, and you are not welcome here" would make the situation worse.

Cheers,

Dod

[Deb London]

Hi Dod,

I have to address one of the concerns you have right away. I have at no point suggested that teenagers be discouraged from using the wood in their spare time, assuming that they are not amongst the vandals and addicts (which should be addressed, especially as these activities impact on society as a whole). It might surprise you to learn that we work with one or more teenager(s) every week. That's all I have to say on this matter as it is not the point of the thread.

Selling ecosystems is surely even harder than selling "sexy" species that people recognise. Especially ones with eyes. Eyes seem very important to people. And fur. Saying that there were might be badgers there got a lot of people's interest for some reason.

I like your idea of the ecosystem as an amenity though. I think I can work on that one for those with the open-mindedness to listen to what I might say.

I could write a book on my needs and whether they are selfish. The conclusion of this epic tome would be that it matters not one jot if I am being selfish or not, so long as the effect was mutually beneficial. Also, I'm into conservation and to a lesser extent, increasing possibilities. Not introductions. I have too little time to waste on trying to introduce things. Gawd, there is a still a heck of a lot of bramble to cut etc. I hope you get what I am saying because it is hard to explain in a few words.

I will read your post again later as I must dash. Just wanted to clarify the teenager thing but one thing led to another.

Thanks for an interesting post.

D