Pulling the Plug on the Panda?

At the forefront of conservation efforts around the world, the giant panda has been a major flagship species. The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) has used the giant panda as their logo since their founding in 1961 and the panda has attracted a lot of the publics’ attention due to its charismatic and fluffy disposition. Although being rare, some naturalists have said the pandas should be left alone to face their extinction.

            In a controversial interview with Radio Times magazine, Chris Packham, a respectable naturalist and presenter of Autumnwatch on BBC, stated the money spent on the giant panda should be used on “stronger” species.

            "Here's a species that, of its own accord, has gone down an evolutionary cul-de-sac. It's not a strong species. Unfortunately it's big and cute and it's a symbol of the WWF, and we pour millions of pounds into panda conservation. I reckon we should pull the plug. Let them go, with a degree of dignity," said Packham.

            Packham considers the giant panda as a weak species for many reasons: the panda has chosen a rather unreliable food source with low nutritional value. The panda is also susceptible to several diseases and has developed a sporadic breeding style that is incredibly hard to replicate in captivity. Millions are being spent on an animal that seems to be ecologically doomed.

Since one of the major causes of extinction is habitat loss, Packham suggests purchasing rainforests and biodiversity hotspots would be a more effective use of the millions spent on panda conservation. Instead of singular campaigns focusing on a single species like Save the Pandas; Save the Rainforests would be better.

            Of course, this idea spurred some backlash. Dr. Mark Wright, a conservation scientist at WWF, states that the panda has adapted to life in a narrowly defined habitat. There are many other species on the planet that have adapted to living in specific environments as well. Why does the giant panda not deserve to be conserved? Wright argues that if it were not for human populations encroaching on and destroying the panda’s habitats they would survive just fine.

            The giant panda also shares its environment with several other species in need of preservation; for example the red panda, the endangered golden monkey, and many endemic bird species. So, preserving the habitat for this extremely popular animal will in turn help the not as well-known animal species.

            Since conservation has limited resources to tackle all the species on the planet, should we only focus on flagship species that people find attractive, and then hope they protect the “unpopular” species in return? Or should we think more broadly and use campaigns focusing on whole ecosystems? The conservation efforts of the panda aren’t likely to change due to their overwhelming popularity, but this topic does bring up some good questions regarding worldwide conservation practices and whether or not they should change.

Pic from: http://blog.malaysiajao.com/2012/06/pandas-new-tourism-product.html