Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

AutoModerator t1_je63u20 wrote

Reminder: this subreddit is meant to be a place free of excessive cynicism, negativity and bitterness. Toxic attitudes are not welcome here.

All Negative comments will be removed and will possibly result in a ban.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

yellowzebrasfly t1_je6dx1z wrote

Great, now protect them. Does India have good wildlife conservation?

53

thethpunjabi OP t1_je6fgjs wrote

Replying to yellowzebrasfly (#2,457,235)

I would say so. India is doing a pretty good job in-regards to conserving megafauna species. Rhino, tiger, and lion numbers are on the rise. However, I worry about habitat destruction, fragmentation, and degradation.

115

frealfr t1_je6gb9l wrote

Wait. They were extinct. These do not exist.

276

thethpunjabi OP t1_je6gkwc wrote

Replying to frealfr (#2,457,731)

They were locally extinct (extirpation) from India but the Asiatic cheetah subspecies still survives in Iran (though their current situation is bleak and dire). These reintroduced cheetahs belong to the southeast African subspecies. They’re all cheetahs, however.

405

Outrageous_Humor_313 t1_je6m1tt wrote

Replying to yellowzebrasfly (#2,457,235)

Yea it does, fun fact there are only 5000 tigers living in the wild in entire world and 3000 happens to be in India. Back in 2000 the tiger population of India was around 782, today there are 3000 tigers. Which is almost 4 times the population growth in 2 decades. And also in case if someone tries to poach there is shoot on sight orders on poachers. So yes i think they are doing pretty good job.

89

Norwester77 t1_je6xii9 wrote

Extinction Extirpation (extinction within a particular region), but yay!

136

gorgonopsidkid t1_je7suzk wrote

The Asiatic cheetah, the animal that originally existed in the area, is still locally extinct. They still exist, mostly in Iran. These are African cheetahs. Take this how you will, I personally see it as introduction of an invasive species.

−21

thethpunjabi OP t1_je7y7xs wrote

Replying to gorgonopsidkid (#2,468,164)

They’re all the same species, Acinonyx jubatus. Just different subspecies (Acinonyx jubatus jubatus and Acinonyx jubatus venaticus) and genetic studies show a separation of only 32,000 and 67,000 years between the Asiatic subspecies and African subspecies.

Citation: Charruau, P.; Fernandes, C.; Orozco-Terwengel, P.; Peters, J.; Hunter, L.; Ziaie, H.; Jourabchian, A.; Jowkar, H.; Schaller, G. & Ostrowski, S. (2011). "Phylogeography, genetic structure and population divergence time of cheetahs in Africa and Asia: evidence for long-term geographic isolates". Molecular Ecology. 20 (4): 706–724. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04986.x. PMC 3531615. PMID 21214655.

25

zotstik t1_je842zz wrote

I absolutely love hearing that things like this are successful. however, my worry is that they're still going to be hunted?

4

TheMountainRidesElia t1_je88p0t wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,470,675)

A lot of the bad air quality is mainly in the North Indian Gangetic plain, which is surrounded by mountains thus the heavier smoke tends to settle there.

Additionally the farmers nearby also engage in burning crop stubble, which causes heavy smog in Delhi especially. The government tried to stop it with laws, but that led to... Problems.

The capital of India, Delhi, is most affected so there's a bit more bad pr there.

23

jeho22 t1_je8agxh wrote

Replying to Hillz44 (#2,470,355)

It used to be accepted that extinction of a species occurred with the death of the last member of that spices that represented a chance of reproduction in the wild. That being said, definitions of words change over time, same as trends and social norms. Things just change. And we eventually rewrite the definitions to accommodate that.

I don't think that it is particularly wrong to say an animal can be extinct in one region, while existing in another, but it it most definitly confusing to somebody who uses the traditionally accepted definition of extinct. It's much more concise to say that cheetahs disappeared entirely from the region, and only approximately 100 of their particular subspecies exist in the wild somewhere else. In fact, I would say that using the word 'extinct' in the way it is used in this post is most likely intentionally missleading- tho I appreciate that it is probably being done so to bring attention to an issue that I also believe needs to be taken more seriously be humanity on the whole.

0

jeho22 t1_je8bjmf wrote

Replying to _music_mongrel (#2,472,066)

OK... if I have an indoor cat, and an outdoor cat, and the indoor cat dies... indoor cats are now extinct in my house, yes?

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be a brat. But I feel that using this term, that has historically been used to represent the end of a species forever, in this way that focuses on regional populations instead, will only degrade the seriousness of 'extinction' to the public in general. Pushing extinction this way in social media will only dull people's reaction to it in the long run. And there's already a word for what this is trying to do anyway, extirpation. But people on social media don't know that word, so well here we are ;)

Call it regional extinction, or locally extinct, and we'll all on the same page at least.

−7

Now-it-is-1984 t1_je8o7zk wrote

They’ll be extirpated in India again by 2033. Sheesh, I have a grim outlook sometimes but in this case it’s probably warranted.

−17

Monkfich t1_je9elc9 wrote

That’s a long gestation, I can’t imagine the chances of repopulation if it’ll be like this every time.

5

dinamitad t1_jeb7tk9 wrote

Let’s wait and see how long they last…

0