Slashdot Mirror
Artificial Misting System Allows Reintroduction of Extinct Toad
terrancem writes "The Kihansi Spray Toad went extinct in the wild in 2005 when its habitat in Tanzania was destroyed by a dam. However conservationists at the Bronx Zoo managed to maintain a captive population which is now large enough to allow a bold experiment to move forward: reintroducing the toad into its old habitat. To make the once tropical gorge moist again, engineers have designed an artificial misting system that should allow toads to survive in the wild. The effort marks what may be the first time conservationists have ever re-established an 'extinct' species in a human-engineered ecosystem."
If there was a captive population all along how could the species be extinct?
Good job editors.
A bullet may have your name on it, but artillery is addressed to " Whom It May concern"
These toads are very unusual. The noise of the waterfall makes croking an impractical method of communication. They instead use hand signals to communicate.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
This is what happens when dams are built. It doesn't matter if it's meant to prevent flooding or generate electricity. Either way, animals are genocided and humans benefit. Maybe we could use less electricity so we don't need so many damn dams.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
If they have to create an "artificial" misting system?
Just sayin....
I suggest you contribute to the environment by doing your part to limit population growth.
Nature has already made extinct about a million times more species than mankind ever has, or ever will, long before we made an appearance. In fact nature made a damn good effort at finishing us off a couple of times. The difference is we can think about the consequences.
What we need is a major international effort to preserve the genetic material of as many endangered species as possible, of all sorts, in a genetic bank. When technology advances far enough both in genetics and energy production we can then recreate these species if possible. It wouldn't be a reason to act irresponsibly but maybe its the best that can be done at the moment.
A habitat for toads? Isn't that what DC is all about?
extinction is the end of an organism or of a group of organisms (taxon), normally a species.
Indangered yes, but not extinct.
foool, you are the hand toad of our futures...
I hope they keep a few captive, because otherwise they will go extinct again the first time that artificial mist breaks down (things tend to break in time, especially in the tropics).
Actually, a bit of googling told me this happened before in 2003.
Oh, another type of zoo.
"an artificial misting system that should allow toads to survive in the wild"
It's only mostly wild
Why not find somewhere close to that location that still has the same environment. A species dependent on another species technology means that when the Tea Party morons start screaming about the $1.95 out of their pockets every year to mist these frogs, the species dies to keep a bunch of idiots happy.
So they can come back and be put in a zoo
When environments are artificially sustained, we no longer call them "wild".
Unless this is some twist on humans being considered as just part of nature.
But that kind of removes the utility of the word, no?
At best this is an unbounded zoo in that without maintenance by the zoo keepers the frogs would just die off. Now if they had recreated a sustainable environment and left the frogs there (as opposed to having to continue to induce an environment) then one might be able to say they had been reintroduced 'in the wild'.
who the heck are we to play God
I'll assume for a moment that by God you mean the Judeo-Christian God: God warned Noah of a worldwide natural disaster to come in A.M. 1656 and gave him plans and several decades to build a 3-story barge to carry specimens of each kind of animal safely through this disaster. After the barge landed, God told Noah who was in charge of the animals: "Into your hand they are now given." (Genesis 9:2) So becoming good stewards of wildlife by no means contravenes what God expects of His followers.
The headline clearly states that it is extinct. The summary having the qualification "in the wild" does not excuse the misleading title. So the sarcastic "Good job, editors" is valid, stands, and I hereby second it. It's the same as if they ran a story with the headline "Apple gives away newest iPad for 1 dollar" and in the summary it qualifies the claim with "to each perspective purchasor after he or she makes a downpayment of $498.00 on the $499 device."
Basically, it's a non-story, since the toad isn't fucking extinct, an occurrance that is becoming increasingly common on Slashdot. News For Turds, Shit That Splatters indeed!
I understand the desire to re-establish the species in the wild, but why put them back there? There must be other environments where they would get the misting naturally. Right?
Seriously? Artificial misting systems for a toad? How many children died of hunger last year, 10 million?
And lets no forget that God made that disaster and killed million of innocent children.
God waited for all the other righteous people to have passed away before sending the flood. It occurred very soon after Noah's grandfather Methuselah and father Lamech had already died due to other causes. (Genesis 5:25-31) It's not in God's nature to destroy righteous people along with the wicked. --Genesis 18:22-33.
Well, not really becasue it didn't happen.
Han didn't really shoot first, Darth Vader wasn't really Luke's father, Pinocchio wasn't brought to life by the Blue Fairy, and women with sirenomelia can't really sing underwater. Those events happened in Disney movies. But craigminah introduced a character from The Bible, so I'll continue to refer to The Bible.
posting to undo moderation
Just asking.