Yangtze dolphin extinct

[Aardvark]

The Yangtze dolphin is now considered extinct.

 

We all saw it coming, it was predicted and then observed as the 3 Gorges dam and increased river traffic wiped them out.

 

Yet another beautiful species lost as we watch. 20 million years on this planet and then gone to add a percentage onto GDP.

 

http://www.wwf.fi/wwf/www/uploads/images/delfiini_baiji_uhanalaiset_109642.jpg

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6179407.stm

 

 

I'm angry. People whitter about Iraq or social security whilst this planets priceless and irreplaceable treasures are lost forever.

 

Too many humans.

[ecoli]

It's a tradeoff. China is the second largest carbon dioxide emitor from fossil fuels, which the three gorges damn was able to reduce. Not saying it's ethically right, but it's the truth.

[CPL.Luke]

of course its ethical the yangtze floods and kills thousands every decade, the three gorges dam is going to stop that and save thousands, not to mention that its going to dramatically increase the ability of company's to invest in the region and build farms (because they don't have to worry about flooding, and there's a major waterway whereby they can ferry goods).

 

so of course its ethical, while there should have been more of a coservation effort to protect the dolphins, I wouldn't trade human lives for theirs

 

 

(that last bit is going to cause an argument isn't it?)

[herpguy]

It's a tradeoff. China is the second largest carbon dioxide emitor from fossil fuels, which the three gorges damn was able to reduce. Not saying it's ethically right, but it's the truth.

Why couldn't/could they find another way?

 

(that last bit is going to cause an argument isn't it?)

This isn't a good place to argue about it.

[ecoli]

Why couldn't/could they find another way?

 

Hydro power produces a lot of electricity. Just look at Las Vegas.

[AzurePhoenix]

of course its ethical the yangtze floods and kills thousands every decade, the three gorges dam is going to stop that and save thousands, not to mention that its going to dramatically increase the ability of company's to invest in the region and build farms (because they don't have to worry about flooding, and there's a major waterway whereby they can ferry goods).

 

so of course its ethical, while there should have been more of a coservation effort to protect the dolphins, I wouldn't trade human lives for theirs

Yearly flooding is an important ecological part of riverside ecosystems. Take it away, and alot of environments are adversely affected. On top of that, now you have more farms spreading out and developing the environment that's left. To do what? Feed more humans and help support an even larger population of people? Which is exactly what cause the whole mess in the first place.

 

The ONLY good that comes out of this is the reduced emissions, but I would in no way say that that makes up for killing off a possibly sentient species (if the dams are indeed the primary factor in the dolphin's ultimate extinction, which may or may not be the case, we very well likely would have killed them off eventually anyway), each individual dolphin a conscious and aware being as deserving of life as any human (and before you contend that and say that they're certainly less intelligent than a human, which they are, think about whether or not a retarded child is worth less than any highly intelligent human). If it were the case of a fish or sea snail it might be more... "acceptable," to stretch the term, but not a potentially aware species to which the same moral considerations applied to humans should be given.

 

Then again, it's futile to pretend that there might have been a better way. In the practical, capitalistic quest for human progress and success it was unavoidable, if only to keep up with the growth of the population. It was gonna happen, no ifs ands or buts about it. But that doesn't make it right by any means.

[Aardvark]

of course its ethical the yangtze floods and kills thousands every decade, the three gorges dam is going to stop that and save thousands,

 

The flooding deposits fertile silt on farmland. The silt maintains the Yangtze delta. The dam stops that and so impoverishs the already poor Chinese peasants and causes a large delta to be rapidly eroded away by the sea.

 

 

not to mention that its going to dramatically increase the ability of company's to invest in the region and build farms (because they don't have to worry about flooding, and there's a major waterway whereby they can ferry goods).,

 

 

Build farms? perhaps you haven't noticed that the dam has flooded huge areas of farmland leading tens of thousands of peasants to become homeless and destitute.

 

 

so of course its ethical, while there should have been more of a coservation effort to protect the dolphins, I wouldn't trade human lives for theirs

 

Firstly, it isn't a trade between human lives and dolphins.

 

Secondly, the dam is bad for a lot of humans as well as the poor bloody dolphins.

 

 

This dam will be gone in a few hundred years, its artifical lake will be silted up, its hydro power obsolete. For the sake of a temporary, highly questionable advantage, a species that has swum those waters for 20 million years is lost forever.

 

If you think that is ethical, then screw your ethics.

[CPL.Luke]

actually part of the construction involved building new homes for everyone who was discplaced by the dam, these new towns had running water and electricity, and all the other amenities of modern living that the people who were discplaced never had.

 

furthermore entire temples were deconstructed and moved uphill in order to decrease the impact on the culture of the region.

 

As for more farm land, yes there wil be more, because now there is an easy way of irrigating the land. Now there's an easy way of transporting those goods to the larger markets in western china, opening the door to impoverished farmers to begin to make an actual living, one with which they can send their kids to get educated and give them a choice as to whether or not they want to be farmers.

 

as for the floods helping to keep the land fresh, the same thing can be done with fertilizers, and I dare a single person here to say to a child who lost their father in the floods the previous year that the dolphins are more important than them.

[Aardvark]

actually part of the construction involved building new homes for everyone who was discplaced by the dam, these new towns had running water and electricity, and all the other amenities of modern living that the people who were discplaced never had

 

Actually, many of the displaced people have been left homeless. Those lovely new towns haven't provided enough replacement homes and large sums of compensation and reconstruction money has simply gone missing.

 

 

furthermore entire temples were deconstructed and moved uphill in order to decrease the impact on the culture of the region.

 

And a lot of highly important archaeological sites have been lost.

 

As for more farm land, yes there wil be more, because now there is an easy way of irrigating the land. .

 

Wrong.

 

Large areas of flat fertile valley bottom land which does not need irrigation has been flooded. Peasants have been relocated to sloping land which can not be easily irrigated and which is significantly less fertile.

 

The dam has led to a loss of farmland, not the opening up of new land.

 

Now there's an easy way of transporting those goods to the larger markets in western china, opening the door to impoverished farmers to begin to make an actual living, one with which they can send their kids to get educated and give them a choice as to whether or not they want to be farmers.

 

Actually, the effects of the dam have been to further impoverish the already poor population of the area. Driven off their land and home, losing their livelyhoods and been given derisory compensation at best.

 

as for the floods helping to keep the land fresh, the same thing can be done with fertilizers,

 

Expensive chemical fertizers which the poor farmers can ill afford when previously it was done for free. That's not a good swap.

 

and I dare a single person here to say to a child who lost their father in the floods the previous year that the dolphins are more important than them.

 

Ridiculous emotive attempt to evade the isssue.

 

The dam has been bad for the local people and bad (!) for the dolphins.

 

I don't know what propaganda booklet you've swallowed about the glorious benefits of this dam. But check the facts. It's a case of thousands of peasants losing their land. Of corrupt officialdom conniving in stealing from the poorest people.

 

You talk of irrigation. This is not an area that needs it. You talk of navigation. That was already easy. You talk of new homes. And yet thousands of displaced peasants are homeless.

 

Put aside your rose tinted spectacles and look at the actual reality, not some pleasant daydream of development and prosperity for all.

[bascule]

The deaths resulting from dam failure following Typhoon Nina can be considered possibly the worst engineering disaster in human history.

 

I don't know if it can be argued either way whether Three Gorges is helpful or not in this respect. Like many Chinese Projects it was of such a grandiose scale that it was horribly mismanaged and practically robbed blind by corruption. Shortly after it was constructed, the dam began to crack. That's sure not a good sign. It's displacing millions of people, moving them from prime farmland onto crappier soil, and it's forced many of them into poverty.