A Burden to Bear

News & Analysis
In the News Gristmill Blog Muckraker Features

Columns
Ask Umbra Victual Reality Weekly Recipes The Bottom Line From A to Green The Grist List

Support nonprofit, independent environmental journalism.
Donate to Grist.

ADVERTISING POLICY

[Advanced]

Read more about: China | endangered species | news | wildlife | all of these topics

Tools: print | email | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS

Captive pandas survive China earthquake

Posted at 12:56 PM on 13 May 2008

With 12,000 people dead from the earthquake that struck China's Sichuan province on Monday -- and the death toll expected to climb significantly -- the survival of 144 endangered pandas is small comfort. But survive they did: all of the pandas living in three research centers in the earthquake zone have been reported safe. Three-quarters of China's wild pandas live in the Sichuan province, but the wild ones can "sense things," says Suzanne Braden of Pandas International: "I'm sure they moved to higher terrain."

sources: Xinhua, Associated Press

ADVERTISING POLICY

< Previous | Next >

Comments: (3 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

LARGE Comfort To Me & The Rest Of The Earth

I wish Grist would quit with the anthropocentric crap. It's far more than "small comfort" that members of a species that's been made virtually extinct by humans survived a major earthquake.

by Wolverine at 4:45 PM on 13 May 2008

Look At Percentages, Not Raw Numbers

Aside from anthropocentrism, one reason for thinking that the fate of 144 pandas is "small" compared to that of tens of thousands of humans is the bad habit of overvaluing raw numbers instead of considering percentages.

The 144 pandas that survived are 5-10% of the total wild population. That would be equivalent to approximately 300-650 MILLION people. Again, the survival of that large a percentage of the panda population is definitely far more than "small comfort."

by Wolverine at 9:59 AM on 14 May 2008

"small comfort"

The intention of the expression was NOT that the survival of the pandas counts for nothing, in view of the great loss of human life. Rather, it was probably supposed to mean that the safety of a few score will matter much less, relatively, in view of the death of many thousands.

With regard to environmentalist ethics, of a certain sort, it is in a way true, that the smaller the number of breeding individuals there is in any species, the greater is the "value" of any individual. So Wolverine is thus far correct, that 144 pandas, being as many as 10% of all extant pandas, are "equivalent" to 667 millions of people.

From the perspective of animal-rights ethics, we should of course be happy that the 144 pandas survived (and by the way, the trustworthiness of Xinhua as a news source is unclear). The current problems for the region are transportation and food supply; and so a new ethical question arises: How much attention should be given to making sure the pandas are fed, if that means reducing attention to human survivors of the earthquake?

We should always remember that animals in our care are totally dependent on us, and we who have chosen to have them living under our protection have a responsibility to maintain them in good health.

In Myanmar/Burma, many domesticated animals, especially water buffalo, perished during the recent cyclone. Could they have saved themselves, had they been free to leave their confinement?

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

by caniscandida at 11:07 AM on 14 May 2008

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?