Here’s something close to my heart: the question of which animal species we choose to get all riled up about saving, and which ones we conveniently overlook! Conservationists and “activists” building their brands on charismatic megafauna such as dolphins, sharks (lately) and whales (latterly) frequently invoke our admiration for the beauty and majesty of these creatures while attempting to justify why they should be saved from extinction.
An article (focused on mammals rather than marine life) from Nautilus magazine reveals that our conservation choices are heavily influenced by aesthetics:
According to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), there are over 1,200 threatened mammalian species in the world, and over 300 are near threatened. But only 80 species are used by conservation organizations to raise funds and nearly all of them can be described as large, furry, and cute, according to a 2012 analysis by Bob Smith at the University of Kent in the United Kingdom.
It turns out that we can’t actually help ourselves from being drawn to cute-looking creatures – it’s wired into our brains. But challenging our thinking on the issue can do no harm. I’ve pondered the question of why we should save sharks before, and found it refreshing.
Ready to be challenged? Read the Nautilus article here.
(Hagfish aren’t in any danger of extinction, I don’t think, but they are probably the poster child for ugly marine species, hence my choice of featured photo!)
