The ecology of sl.

I recently watched a utube video which showed the early stages of sl development. It included animals called ators which moved around freely feeding on bird life and reproducing.

I found this idea of independent animal life in sl - which could move around freely - rather intriguing and exciting.

I think some animal life which isn't controlled by the 'human population' of sl would be a welcome addition to sl which for all its fantastic buildings can look static and lifeless. I think its a shame this feature was abandoned.

I'd like to see birds in the air , fish in the sea and animals roaming the land.

Why was animal life in sl abandoned ?

Would other people welcome an independent ecology in sl or not ?

If you'd like to see animal life in sl - what sort ?

FairChang Resort has an independently moving dugong.

I'd love to see more free ranging animals - as long as they didn't use my prim limit.

At the risk of repeating myself my biggest desire would be to see a few regions populated with dinosaurs.

The Grendels prehistoric creatures are superb it would be fantastic if something like them could move around on their own.

I think it would be fascinating to watch pterodactyls wheel outside my sky station or risk coming face to face with a shoal of Icthyosaurs swimming in a linden sea.
Paddling through a rock pool full of trilobites or encountering mammoth herds in the ice wastes

Svarga has a cool system set up. Bugs pollinate the flowers, it rains, etc. all of it works with each other.

that sounds brilliant I'll have to go and see that ...thanks

We certainly could use some polar bears in the snow sims.

the way the ice caps are, that may be the only place we'll see them

I could don my polar bear avvy and go and grrrrr and growl abit...Im only two feet six in that form but IMMENSLEY cute.....

Another alarmist misrepresentation.

THE world’s polar bear population is on the increase despite global warming, which scientists had believed was pushing the animal towards extinction.
According to new research, the numbers of the giant predator have grown by between 15 and 25 per cent over the last decade.

Some authorities on Arctic wildlife even claim that hunting, and not global warming, has been the real cause of the decrease in polar bear numbers in areas where the species is in decline.

A leading Canadian authority on polar bears, Mitch Taylor, said: "We’re seeing an increase in bears that’s really unprecedented, and in places where we’re seeing a decrease in the population it’s from hunting, not from climate change."

Mr Taylor estimates that during the past decade, the Canadian polar bear population has increased by 25 per cent - from 12,000 to 15,000 bears.

He even suggests that global warming could actually be good for the bears, and warns that the ever-increasing proximity of the animals to local communities could mean that a cull will be required sooner rather that later if bear numbers are to be kept under control.

In the northern territories, where temperatures have risen an average of four degrees since 1950, wildlife experts such as Mr Taylor say the bears have never been healthier or more plentiful.

can life exist on granite?

Apart from the fact that other studies and sites seem to argue that

http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/bear-facts/


for one.... and I think if the human population of the earth had dropped to 15,000 there'd be more than a tad of concern - the last thing anyone would be doing would be talking about a cull of humans.

Yes, but the population was at 12,000 which then went to 15,000.

INCREASING bear numbers means MORE contact with humans. Therefore, the need for culling. The polar bear is a dangerous predator, not a cute fuzzy playtoy.

Rubbish...............

Actually, I find several areas of SL full of animals. Clubs come to mind, and public sandboxes, and welcome areas, certian poseball shops.....

Those prim attachment wearing animals aside, I would love to see life underwater in the Linden water sims. It would be so fun to go scuba diving or snorkeling and find plants and animals down there, or see dolphins and the occasional whale when out for a sail.

how about a life form that doesnt conform to the organic model in the real world.


Im thinking about that silicon life form from star trek but some people might say I horta know better....

Ah, a scientific rebuttal

Here is a scientific approach to predicting polar bear populations. It looks a major papers and efforts to date.

Its conclusion:

Based on our Internet search of the published scholarly research and on appeals to other
researchers we have been unable to locate any papers that referred to scientific procedures for
making forecasts of polar bear populations. Furthermore, a review of the references in the nine
government reports written to support the listing of polar bears under the Endangered Species Act
failed to find any papers relevant to scientific forecasting procedures.
We take no issue with the scientific work of the researchers whose work we have
reviewed as it relates to the past. Our concern is that there are currently no scientific forecasts of
the polar bear population; nor of direction or magnitude of changes. Without scientific forecasts
of a substantial decline of the polar bear population and of net benefits from feasible policies
arising from listing polar bears, a decision to list polar bears as threatened or endangered would
be irresponsible.



http://forecastingprinciples.com/Public_Policy/PolBears.pdf

for every scientific report you list I can find one that counters including one which states that in 50 years the polar bear population of earth will seriously be endangered. Something which is made clear in virtually every report heard on global warming.

Presumably going and blasting animals because the worlds population has risen by 3000 is a measured scientific response.

You may not be concerned that the worlds most magnificent predatory animal might end up alongside the stegosaur and the dodo in a picture book but I certainly am.

By the way dont presume to know how I regard polar bears simply on the basis of a few words under my avvy.

Damnit Jim!

You will not be able to list a SCIENTIFIC report, because there are none. Look through that last link I provided. It goes through every major governmental paper that touts declining population. And shows their unscientific nature.

3000 more bears is 25% growth in ten years, doesn't that strike you're sense of declining population ideas?

Here is another person of some importance and intelligence on the matter:

Testimony of Carl Portman
concerning the polar bear
population in Alaska

By Carl Portman


March 06, 2007


Testimony of Carl Portman
Deputy Director, Resource Development Council

To U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Proposed Listing of Polar Bear on Endangered Species Act
March 1, 2007
Anchorage, Alaska

Good evening. My name is Carl Portman, Deputy Director of The Resource Development Council, a statewide organization comprised of all resource development industries and their support sectors. Our purpose is to expand Alaska's economic base through the responsible development of our natural resources.

RDC and its members support ongoing polar bear research, management, and conservation. While the matter of global warming warrants continued monitoring, a proposed listing of the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act is not warranted. Our position is supported by a number of facts, including the following:


Polar bears are abundant and their population in Alaska is healthy in size and distribution.


The polar bear continues to occupy its entire historical range.


Polar bears and their habitats are well managed and protected by international and domestic agreements, conservation programs, regulatory mechanisms, and laws, including the Marine Mammal Protection Act.


There is a current lack of science demonstrating in a reliable manner that polar bears are likely to become extinct in the foreseeable future.

These facts place this species in a position where an ESA listing cannot be justified.

The proposed rule is unprecedented, in that it would invoke the ESA to list a species whose population worldwide has more than doubled over the past 40 years, a strong indication that protections in place today are effective in protecting polar bears and their habitat. Ironically, the growth of the polar bear population in Alaska has coincided with the emergence of the oil and gas industry across the North Slope, and during a trend of warming temperatures.

http://www.freedom.org/news/200703/06/portman.phtml

Testimony of Carl Portman
Deputy Director, Resource Development Council

so absolutely NOTHING UNBIASED there then....

Come on Uvas whats your vested interest in the polar bear population...its quite clear you have some agenda.

I'll openly admit mine I think this animal life of this planet is under serious threat everywhere.

Of all the animals on the planet I see polar bears as the most fantastic. Their size their power.

I do not see 15000 animals as a healthy population.

Now Uvas why do you want to see bears culled ?

Here is one less biased.

It relates an annual growth rate of 2.4% per year since the outlawing of sport hunting of polar bears by the main countries where they live.

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/fws2002_polarbear-bf.pdf

You havent answered my question as I said there are many reports stating the contrary to yours you only need to google polar bear to find em....

now whats YOUR interest ??

Are you a hunter by any chance Uvas ?