Search Results
6/10/2025, 7:21:12 PM
What is the fanatical obsession with Natives over "invasives"?
In lots of ecosystems, they were already massively changed by humans for millennia or centuries, so a lot of the "natives" were wiped out, and the ecosystem has largely been fucked due to it, like the loss of Megafauna pretty much everywhere, but then returning modern megafauna, like cows or camels or whatever is frowned upon, despite largely playing the same role ancient Megafauna had.
In lot of areas as well, they've been fucked due to sudden climate shifts, which destroy an entire layer of the ecosystem and because the climate shift was so sudden (say end of ice age or whatever), nothing really evolved to take the place, and again, "invasives" can work just as well there to fill in roles long gone.
Shouldn't ecosystems function on roles? If there is no real functional ecosystem there, due to past human or natural events, what is the problem with using "invasives" to fill those niches that are lost?
In lots of ecosystems, they were already massively changed by humans for millennia or centuries, so a lot of the "natives" were wiped out, and the ecosystem has largely been fucked due to it, like the loss of Megafauna pretty much everywhere, but then returning modern megafauna, like cows or camels or whatever is frowned upon, despite largely playing the same role ancient Megafauna had.
In lot of areas as well, they've been fucked due to sudden climate shifts, which destroy an entire layer of the ecosystem and because the climate shift was so sudden (say end of ice age or whatever), nothing really evolved to take the place, and again, "invasives" can work just as well there to fill in roles long gone.
Shouldn't ecosystems function on roles? If there is no real functional ecosystem there, due to past human or natural events, what is the problem with using "invasives" to fill those niches that are lost?
Page 1