Will the “green movement” be the death of endangered species?

Green Hypocrisy

It’ all about the money. It always has been and always will be. The cash cow of the “green movement” and its singular focus on climate change has birthed a monster that is bilking billions from the public.

It is also directly taking funds that might otherwise do things that can be tangibly measured like purchase South America rainforest to save it from commercial ranching and link habitat corridors to establish safe travel ways for tigers in Asia.

Does anyone really think any of the money going toward “climate change” is making a difference or ever will?

Rhinoceros_in_South_Africa_adjusted
All species of rhinoceros are headed the way of the Dodo bird. (Public Domain Photo)

Even if America were to acquiesce to even the strongest emissions standards do you really think China and other developing countries will?

Really!?

When is the last time (other than two paragraphs ago) you heard anything about saving the rainforest?

It was the thing to save 25 years ago.

And it is even more endangered now as are its inhabitants but public interest waned and the corporate environmental saviors in various charities and governments around the world found something more lucrative: climate change.

Ironically the rainforest loss is linked to climate change but you can’t get poor countries in South America to pay billions for protecting forest. You can however syphon billions out of the western world for the grandiose idea of reducing carbon emissions.

Remember-it’s all about the money.

We are allowing animals like all subspecies of tigers, all varieties of rhinoceros, the vaquita porpoise and a host of other highly vulnerable animals to slip into extinction with little or no mainstream interest in funding their protection.

And if the so-called “green movement” people who constantly say they care about wildlife and the environment had been watching these situations more closely species like the vaquita would not be down to 30 specimens. Their problem is poaching and if someone had jumped on the issue 20 years ago things would be radically different.

But that was about the time focus shifted from the rainforest to “global warming” which has now morphed into “climate change”.

That way if they find out temperatures are actually decreasing in areas they can save face. “Climate change” gives them a lot of leeway.

I have nothing against trying to reduce carbon emissions. It needs to happen across the board.

I do have a problem with some of the rarest animals, plants and habitats disappearing when just a fraction of the funds fattening the pockets of the climate change hierarchy would make a radical difference in their survival.

Stop being naive.

We will not make a dent in actual carbon emissions but many of you will have a dent in your pocketbook because you believed the sales pitch of people with agendas other than true conservation.

I highly advise investing in small conservation projects that are directly saving habitat from destruction, aiding anti-poaching crusades and funding research that could save endangered species.

Aim small, miss small is a key tenet of shooting.

It’s also a good way to think about efforts to save the planet’s rarest animals and habitats.

Chester Moore, Jr.

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *