Error
Unrecognized LW server error:
Field "fmCrosspost" of type "CrosspostOutput" must have a selection of subfields. Did you mean "fmCrosspost { ... }"?Unrecognized LW server error:
Field "fmCrosspost" of type "CrosspostOutput" must have a selection of subfields. Did you mean "fmCrosspost { ... }"?
Interesting idea! Thanks for sharing it :)
I realised that there are some points in this reasoning that are not clear to me:
How would protecting large herbivores reduce the population of animals with high reproduction rates?
What would be the impact on insects?
small herbivorous animals with high reproduction rates compete for food with large herbivores. A large herbivore captures more of the plant biomass than a small animal, and consequently large herbivores prevent large populations of small herbivores.
Good question: it is unsure. Problem with large animals is that they more likely accidentally kill (trample) small insects. That might be a good thing is the reproduction rates of insects are so high that they have net-negative welfare levels. The large herbivore reduces the population sizes of the insects that have lives not worth living. An advantage of the large animals in grasslands, is that their manure attracts dung beetles, and the flowers in the grassland attract bees. Now, dung beetles and bees are the best, kindest or nicest kinds of insects: they do not hunt and kill other insects, they are not parasites, they do not compete much for food with other animals, they fertilize the soil and the plants which means more food for other animals, they are highly intelligent and sentient. If you want to help insects, I’d say prioritize helping bees and dung beetles.
Very interesting post, as is often the case with you. Insightful and pragmatic. However, I feel like a closer investigation on charities that effectively ensure that large herbivores are helped. It’s plausible that broader conservationist initiatives which have only part of their focus on wild herbivores could still have a larger effects than smaller charities that seem to work mostly at the individual level. In any case, I think it’s likely that you’re right, and if you are, it would be very interesting to see where donations are most likely to effectively increase the population of large herbivores. Do you currently have any idea of the potential effectiveness of those organizations ?
Good question! I have no idea.
A problem with broader conservationist initiatives is that they more likely support interventions that could increase wild animal suffering, e.g. by helping predator species or species with high reproduction rates.