Analysis Of Half-Earth: Our Planet's Fight For Life

833 Words2 Pages

Natural habitats used by man or tampered with tend to become unsatisfactory or unsuitable for the native wild species. As I learned in class, habitat loss is the number one threat to modern primates. Not only do primates suffer, but habitat loss is the greatest threat to various parts of life on this planet that humans have caused. Simply speaking, along with habitat destruction, ties in the extinction of diverse species. “Biodiversity as a whole forms a shield protecting each of the species that together compose it, ourselves included. What will happen if, addition to the species already extinguished by human activity, say, 10 percent of those remaining are taken away? Or 50 percent? Or 90 percent? As more and more species vanish or drop to …show more content…

Wilson proposes a solution to this problem in his book, Half-Earth: Our Planet’s Fight for Life. The message is plain and simple: In order preserve biodiversity, Wilson proposes to devote half of the Earth’s land as a human-free natural reserve. “The current conservation movement has not been able to go the distance because it is a process. It targets the most endangered habitats and species and works forward from there. Knowing that the conservation window is closing fast, it strives to add increasing amounts of protected space, faster and faster, saving as much as time and opportunity will allow” (Wilson, 2016). What I hope to cover is to highlight the pros and cons of Wilson’s proposal, what other ideas can be done to solve the problem, and why humanity should be more involved with preserving the life around them.
Can the world really set aside half of the Earth’s land to preserve both wild and plant life? The protection of wildlife is a significant importance to the quality of life, with the loss of species – there may be severe consequences. Wilson’s concern is many species being destroyed before scientists have a chance to identify them. “Humanity is losing the race between the scientific study of global diversity and the obliteration of countless still-unknown species” (Wilson, 2016). This is where I see a positive light in Wilson’s …show more content…

How would Wilson find the money to fund his idea? How much would it cost to set aside not just a small portion of land, but half of the Earth’s land? While I feel the Half-Earth proposal has its ups and downs, the idea has already begun in some ways. There are many regions of the world who have set aside land, in order to preserve wildlife. “Take a look at Namibia. In that nation, seventy-nine wildlife conservancies cover about 20 percent of the country, and 41 percent of Namibia’s land is communal. And, according to the World Bank, as of 2012, Costa Rica has placed 26.9 percent of its terrestrial area in protection” (Andrews,

Open Document