Back from the dead: One third of 'extinct' animals turn up again

[Fresh]

Back from the dead: One third of 'extinct' animals turn up again

Conservationists are overestimating the number of species that have been driven to extinction, scientists have said.

A study has found that a third of all mammal species declared extinct in the past few centuries have turned up alive and well.

Some of the more reclusive creatures managed to hide from sight for 80 years only to reappear within four years of being officially named extinct in the wild.

The shy okapi ? which resembles a cross between a zebra and a giraffe ? was first discovered in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 1901.

After increasingly rarer sightings, it vanished from the wildlife radar for decades from 1959, prompting fears that it had died out.

But five years ago researchers working for the WWF found okapi tracks in the wild.

Other mammals ?back from the dead? include the rat-like Cuban solenodon, the Christmas Island shrew, the Vanikoro Flying Fox of the Solomon Islands, the Australian central rock rat and the Talaud Flying Fox of Indonesia.

The revelations come as the world?s leading conservationists prepare for a major United Nations summit on biodiversity in Nagoya, Japan, next month.

Many scientists believe the world is going through a new ?mass extinction? fuelled by mankind ? and that more species are disappearing now than at any time since the dinosaurs vanished 65million years ago.

According to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, 22 per cent of the world?s mammals are at risk of extinction. In Britain, more than two plant and animal species are being wiped out each year.

But while the report does not play down the threat from deforestation, overfishing or habitat destruction, it raises questions about the way species are classified as extinct.

Dr Diana Fisher, of the University of Queensland, Australia, compiled a list of all mammals declared extinct since the 16th century or which were flagged up as missing in scientific papers.

?We identified 187 mammal species that have been missing since 1500,? she wrote in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

?In the complete data-set, 67 species that were once missing have been rediscovered.

More than a third of mammal species that have been classified as extinct or possibly extinct, or flagged as missing, have been rediscovered.?

Mammals that suffered from loss of habitat were the most likely to have been declared extinct and then rediscovered, she said.

Species spread out over larger areas were also more likely to be wrongly classified as extinct.

The mistakes cannot be blamed on primitive technology or old fashioned scientific methods.

?Mammals missing in the 20th century were nearly three times as likely to be rediscovered as those that disappeared in the 19th century,? Dr Fisher added.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1315964/One-extinct-animals-turn-again.html#ixzz119ib02JU

Does this actually surprise anyone?

[IceBreakerG]

Not really. People aren't really as smart as they think they are.

[Hum]

I know -- that teradactyl nearly hit my car ! :woot:

[Memphis]

I know -- that teradactyl nearly hit my car ! :woot:

:laugh: A diplodocus has been living in my backyard for a while!

[Lazure]

I kinda wouldn't mind a few dinosaurs coming back, you know, the more smaller and less harmful kind. Not the Tyrannosauruses and Velociraptors that Jurassic Park tried to revive.

At this rate, it might very well be possible, given all the genetic work being done,cloning, stem cells, etc etc etc...

[Memphis]

I kinda wouldn't mind a few dinosaurs coming back, you know, the more smaller and less harmful kind. Not the Tyrannosauruses and Velociraptors that Jurassic Park tried to revive.

At this rate, it might very well be possible, given all the genetic work being done,cloning, stem cells, etc etc etc...

Well soft tissue has been found from dinosaurs, but their wasn't even a fragment of salvageable DNA in them. Even if we had the best genetic technology we are missing the genome. We are much more likely to bring back the Mammoth.

[McCordRm]

A T-rex would be awesome!

[jakem1]

So what's the point of this post or the Daily Fail article? Are you trying to say that humans aren't having a devastating impact on the environment? That we're not wiping out ecosystems or habitats as we concrete over more and more land or eliminate more and more forests for farmland? That climate change isn't real?

I'm sure everyone will be pleased to hear that we haven't lost as many species as we thought but that doesn't mean that we can continue destroying the environment.

[Lazure]

So what's the point of this post or the Daily Fail article? Are you trying to say that humans aren't having a devastating impact on the environment? That we're not wiping out ecosystems or habitats as we concrete over more and more land or eliminate more and more forests for farmland? That climate change isn't real?

I'm sure everyone will be pleased to hear that we haven't lost as many species as we thought but that doesn't mean that we can continue destroying the environment.

Whatever you say, Al Gore.

[Growled Member]

Conservationists are overestimating the number of species that have been driven to extinction, scientists have said.

Overestimating is a good way to get extra money and attention for their causes.

[TrueMonolith]

Overestimating is a good way to get extra money and attention for their causes.

I have to agree.

If you read the CRU leaked emails, theres a few emails from a WWF representative to Tom Wrigley asking him for "more dramatic statistics". This didn't make the news though cause it actually makes Tom Wrigley and the CRU look like they're doing their job.

But its been known for a while that the left hijacked the environment...thats why we call em watermelons.

[jakem1]

I have to agree.

If you read the CRU leaked emails, theres a few emails from a WWF representative to Tom Wrigley asking him for "more dramatic statistics". This didn't make the news though cause it actually makes Tom Wrigley and the CRU look like they're doing their job.

But its been known for a while that the left hijacked the environment...thats why we call em watermelons.

That's right, animal extinctions are all a left-wing conspiracy :rolleyes:

[Tomoko]

Whatever you say, Al Gore.

Why is he "Al Gore" for pointing out the fact that we are polluting and destroying our environment? Do you deny this or something?

By the way, the Daily Mail is a tabloid. The kind of trash that prints stories about alien abductions. Even if this story wasn't complete made up bs, that wouldn't mean that "Hey I guess cutting down all the forests and dumping pollutants everywhere is ok after all!".

[honda]

Im not sure the purpose of some animals.

The human animals for example invent stuff such as transport, communications, etc while (for example) bees collect honey from flowers which produce honey.

I mean yeah, I understand there are plants/animals for a purpose but some I dont see them neccessary in the circle of life.

[Tomoko]

Im not sure the purpose of some animals.

The human animals for example invent stuff such as transport, communications, etc while (for example) bees collect honey from flowers which produce honey.

I mean yeah, I understand there are plants/animals for a purpose but some I dont see them neccessary in the circle of life.

Why do they have to have a purpose to us? Just because an animal isn't necessary for our survival doesn't mean we shouldn't care if they all die. Besides, the beauty and diversity of nature should be purpose enough.

[Nihilus]

Im not sure the purpose of some animals.

The human animals for example invent stuff such as transport, communications, etc while (for example) bees collect honey from flowers which produce honey.

I mean yeah, I understand there are plants/animals for a purpose but some I dont see them neccessary in the circle of life.

Overspecialise and you breed in weakness.

You have a small number of animals, all adapted to living in a specific environment, and one environmental variable is irrevocably altered... A single species dies, your ecosystem collapses/changes too rapidly, more animals die... etc. It's just nice to have lots of "unnecessary" species, think of them as ecological backups.

Plus, the larger number of species, the more genetic variance and the higher the probably that one day some kind of awesome super species will evolve :D I'm hoping for a super-intelligent godzilla-esque lizard race.

But yeah, I don't really care that much about species going extinct either. It isn't as many as some people would like to think, and quite simply if they can't adapt to their changing environment then meh. New species that have adapted will take their place, just so long as we keep an eye on things to make sure we don't get any ecosystems collapsing as a result.

[Tomoko]

But yeah, I don't really care that much about species going extinct either.

That's really sad.

[Nihilus]

That's really sad.

Well obviously it's a loss, but one that there is no point concerning yourself over unless it's avoidable or a serious environmental problem.

For example species being hunted to extinction, such as tigers, that's truly saddening and something I'd support any attempts to stop. But saving grey squirrels, red ladybugs or dark coloured moths... bah, humbug.

[Tews]

Lets all hold hands and sing a round of Kumbaya... :rolf:

[Memphis]

Well obviously it's a loss, but one that there is no point concerning yourself over unless it's avoidable or a serious environmental problem.

For example species being hunted to extinction, such as tigers, that's truly saddening and something I'd support any attempts to stop. But saving grey squirrels, red ladybugs or dark coloured moths... bah, humbug.

Personally, I don't like to think about species going extinct. Its truly saddening to loose diversity in the animal kingdom. On the same note, humans must always come first. We should attempt to balance our effort to save animals with our need to advance.

[jakem1]

Personally, I don't like to think about species going extinct. Its truly saddening to loose diversity in the animal kingdom. On the same note, humans must always come first. We should attempt to balance our effort to save animals with our need to advance.

Why and how many of us are required for us to "advance"?

When animals start breeding out of control and disturbing their environment we call it a plague and take steps to reduce their numbers. Isn't it about time we did the same thing to humans, starting with those of us in the developed world who do the most harm?

[TrueMonolith]

Why and how many of us are required for us to "advance"?

When animals start breeding out of control and disturbing their environment we call it a plague and take steps to reduce their numbers. Isn't it about time we did the same thing to humans, starting with those of us in the developed world who do the most harm?

If you want animal numbers to increase...allow them to be farmed.

But humanity will allow any animal not useful to its survival to fail (this is an evolutionary trait). Also i disagree with the premise that "development" is what harms animals...its the opposite since scientific advances have increased the life spans of domesticated animals just as much as its increased the life spans of humans. Its opposition to things like GM foods and development that impacts agricultural efficiency thus increasing human expansion into wilderness areas.

The problem...as always...are the lefties. Communism kills the environment....tell your friends.

[jakem1]

If you want animal numbers to increase...allow them to be farmed.

But humanity will allow any animal not useful to its survival to fail (this is an evolutionary trait). Also i disagree with the premise that "development" is what harms animals...its the opposite since scientific advances have increased the life spans of domesticated animals just as much as its increased the life spans of humans. Its opposition to things like GM foods and development that impacts agricultural efficiency thus increasing human expansion into wilderness areas.

The problem...as always...are the lefties. Communism kills the environment....tell your friends.

I honestly wonder if you think before posting. I feel dumber after reading your "opinions". I'd recommend reading a book every once in a while and educating yourself despite the fact that that seems to contradict your book-burning political outlook.

[TrueMonolith]

I honestly wonder if you think before posting. I feel dumber after reading your "opinions". I'd recommend reading a book every once in a while and educating yourself despite the fact that that seems to contradict your book-burning political outlook.

I believe it was the communists and christians that had that feature in common.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_burning

But in all seriousness, Endangered animals come back into large numbers when they are farmed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Bison

The sooner you realise your leftism is killing the world...the sooner you evolve into a man.

[Lazure]

Why is he "Al Gore" for pointing out the fact that we are polluting and destroying our environment? Do you deny this or something?

By the way, the Daily Mail is a tabloid. The kind of trash that prints stories about alien abductions. Even if this story wasn't complete made up bs, that wouldn't mean that "Hey I guess cutting down all the forests and dumping pollutants everywhere is ok after all!".

Well, what do you suppose we do about it? Completely eliminate our way of life, and go back to living in caves with animal skins wrapped around our bodies using spears fashioned of bone or stone to survive? The point I am trying to make is, people go OH MY GOD, CLIMATE CHANGE. Climates change regardless of what we do. OH MY GOD WE CUT DOWN TREES TO MAKE ROOM FOR LIVING SPACE. Yes, we do, and what's your point? If we didn't, we wouldn't have room for people to farm so we have food to eat, or to live so we don't overcrowd in one spot. Pollution we COULD take care of in time, but we can't do it instantly-- people are STILL researching ways around this... and the governments may or may not hand out the funds needed to lay down the infrastructure for said change.

Seeing people just blabber like Al Gore does "hur hur CLIMATE CHANGE... har har us EVIL HUMANS are cutting down forests and little furry animals are paying the price" just annoys the crap out of me because it makes it sound like us humans should just give up, roll over, and die, and lose our rightful place on this planet in the name of the environment!