Wa-pedia Home > Japan Forum & Europe Forum
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Japan to exterminate non-natives

  1. #1
    Twirling dragon Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location
    Posts
    2,434

    Japan to exterminate non-natives

    Sorry, this is not strictly about whales, but it regards the protection of wildlife in Japan.

    Japan eyes action on threat-posing nonnative wildlife

    TOKYO ? The Environment Ministry decided Thursday to enforce stronger measures on exterminating nonnative wildlife species in Japan that pose threats to the ecosystem, including the mongoose, ministry officials said.
    Does this mean they are going to fall all non-native trees, unroot all un-native flowers and hunt down all animal species like imported dogs, cats, etc. ? That is what the article says. What's more, if you consider like me that humans are also animals, foreigners shall be aware that they will be exterminated for being non-native.

    Visit Japan for free with Wa-pedia
    See what's new on the forum ?
    Eupedia : Europe Guide & Genetics
    Maciamo & Eupedia on Twitter

    "What is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble causes and to make this muddled world a better place for those who will live in it after we are gone?", Winston Churchill.

  2. #2
    Decommissioned ex-admin thomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 14, 2002
    Posts
    212
    It's not only dogs, cats and trees. Japan seems to experience temporary "pet fads", so a lot of tropical species are illegally imported: it's fashionable to collect beetles, all kinds of reptiles, tropical fish and plants etc. Just imagine you wake up one morning and find an alligator emptied your pond full of precious koi, lol.

    Mongoose are definitely a thread since the have no natural enemy in Japan unless they decide to import large numbers of cobra snakes. How did they get to Japan anyhow?

  3. #3
    Regular Member moyashi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 15, 2002
    Location
    SonyLand
    Age
    50
    Posts
    146
    @ mongoose
    Ferrets are popular pets and will see at pet shops around town so I guess a mongoose would be wanted for similar reasons.

    @ non-natives
    Does this include Gaijin?

    @ wildlife / flora
    It does make sense in a way since an imported species could take over and kill off normally native species in turn causing troubles for the eco-system.

    I would prefer exportation for the animals but ...

    Management is a big concern for me.

    @ aligators
    hehe, they've been caught in drain ditches and what not around town. koi pond is unlikely but under your car is more of a possiblity.

    @ unwanted pets
    Many pets get dumped into parks or into the wild when the landlord finds out about them, over 90% of all rental apartments are NO PETS. But you know people, they'll still take the chance but many pets sadly find themselves out in the wild creating havoc.
    crazy gonna crazy

  4. #4
    Decommissioned ex-admin thomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 14, 2002
    Posts
    212
    @ unwanted animals

    Do they still have these "concentration camps" for stray dogs and other unwanted pets? People could just turn in their dogs anonymously to have them "exterminated".

  5. #5
    Regular Member moyashi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 15, 2002
    Location
    SonyLand
    Age
    50
    Posts
    146
    hmmm ... we have a Dobutsu Kanri Senta- (Animal management center) up in Sapporo which is like the US's SPCA.

    Hmm, Braun Ovens too? ummm, I guess so, that is if you consider the American ones to be "concentration camps" then the ones in Japan should be listed as such too.

    Don't you have them in Europe?

  6. #6
    Decommissioned ex-admin thomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 14, 2002
    Posts
    212
    We have animal asylums where stray dogs are kept for a certain period of time before being sent to the happy hunting-grounds. Nahoko told me that these places are called "hokenjo" in Japan, public health centers that also take care of stray animals. They have/had these "one-one boxes" (?) where pets could be left without questions asked.

  7. #7
    Regular Member moyashi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 15, 2002
    Location
    SonyLand
    Age
    50
    Posts
    146
    ummm, I think that's "wan wan" not "one-one"

    wan wan = bow wow / woof woof ... a dog barking.

    hokenjo = pound
    dobutsu kanri center = spcea (urggg ... what is this in America?)

    I wish more people would neuter their pets.

  8. #8
    Decommissioned ex-admin thomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 14, 2002
    Posts
    212
    Hehe, bark-bark-boxes, I was typing too fast.

  9. #9
    Twirling dragon Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location
    Posts
    2,434
    Just as a follow-up for this topic :

    37 nonnative species set to be banned

    Various Environment Ministry panels gave the green light Monday to listing 37 nonnative species that will fall under an import and breeding ban when a law on conserving native species takes effect in June
    ...
    The list includes largemouth bass, snapping turtles, raccoons and black widow spiders.

    But wildlife conservation groups, which have asked the government to list about 300 species, criticized the list, saying it favors industry and makes light of the fact that the law is supposed to prevent damage to indigenous species.

    The law will ban the importing, trading, breeding and disposing of designated alien species unless approved by the government for research or other special purposes.
    Last edited by Maciamo; Feb 3, 2005 at 20:30.

  10. #10
    Chukchi Salmon lexico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location
    Sunny South Korea
    Posts
    229

    extermination program sounds like nazi....

    I don't know what this has to do with whales.
    Whales are not imported or smuggled pets is what I understand.

    But as your title suggests, could there be a conspiracy to ban foreigners by starting with the extermination of nono-native (non-human) species?

    It would seem ridiculous, but not impossible when I think about it.
    The Ainus had eagerly abandoned their identity for fear of mistreatment.
    Looking at the track racord there is reason for concern; to what degree I don't know.

    If someone could do it legally they would. If illegally without being charged, they would still do it. Even if charged they still might do it. So the next question would be to assess the concern objectively and not as a paranoia.

    And how does the restoration of the local ecosystem fit in this cycle of intrigue ???
    Z: The fish in the water are happy.
    H: How do you know ? You're not fish.
    Z: How do you know I don't ? You're not me.
    H: True I am not you, and I cannot know. Likewise, I know you're not, therefore I know you don't.
    Z: You asked me how I knew implying you knew I knew. In fact I saw some fish, strolling down by the Hao River, all jolly and gay.

    --Zhuangzi

  11. #11
    Junior Member DoctorP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 3, 2004
    Age
    49
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by lexico
    And how does the restoration of the local ecosystem fit in this cycle of intrigue ???

    By removing all of the introduced species, they could (in theory) return the ecosystems back to their original state. In theory it makes sense what they are wanting to do, and on certain levels I can agree with the idea. But as with anything else, things could go wrong and backfire on their plan! It's best to move slowly when doing something like this.

  12. #12
    Chukchi Salmon lexico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location
    Sunny South Korea
    Posts
    229
    This is totally illogical, what I'm trying to say.
    How about do the exact opposite?
    Instead of controlling the regional ecosystems and try to restore it, why not maximize the species traffic across natural boundaries and let nature take its course?

    Would that trigger some kind of disaster? Or would it foster diversity of species by redistributing it? And thus acieving a new equilibrium that is more stable compared to what we have now?

  13. #13
    Junior Member DoctorP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 3, 2004
    Age
    49
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by lexico
    This is totally illogical, what I'm trying to say.
    How about do the exact opposite?
    Instead of controlling the regional ecosystems and try to restore it, why not maximize the species traffic across natural boundaries and let nature take its course?

    Would that trigger some kind of disaster? Or would it foster diversity of species by redistributing it? And thus acieving a new equilibrium that is more stable compared to what we have now?
    The whole purpose for trying to put things back as they were is that the introduced species tend to take over and harm the ecosystem...not always, but many times. Look at "kudzu"...it is a vine that when introduced to certain areas it completely takes over and chokes out all existing plant life. Is that maximizing anything?

    IMHO it is best for us not to play "god" by moving things around and saying wow this looks good here...only to find out it causes more harm than good!

  14. #14
    Chukchi Salmon lexico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location
    Sunny South Korea
    Posts
    229
    Quote Originally Posted by CC1
    The whole purpose for trying to put things back as they were is that the introduced species tend to take over and harm the ecosystem...not always, but many times. Look at "kudzu"...it is a vine that when introduced to certain areas it completely takes over and chokes out all existing plant life. Is that maximizing anything?

    IMHO it is best for us not to play "god" by moving things around and saying wow this looks good here...only to find out it causes more harm than good!
    I understand your logic, nevertheless, for argumentation's sake please let me add.
    By applying human standards to nature, we are already playing god.
    What is good or bad seems to be dfined by the values of the native culture.
    Furthermore, the whole human history is based on modifying nature to its needs.
    So I find it a circular syllogism to exalt nature, but then apply human values in 'protecting' nature.

    Looking at it another way, the trafficking of species is happening anyway, regardless of efforts to regularize it. With so much people and goods going back and forth, it is hardly expected that it will slow down any time soon unless the oil wells dry up. What you are proposing is a real uphill struggle that is going against everything natural and artificial in reality. Species will move about with or without us.

  15. #15
    Junior Member DoctorP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 3, 2004
    Age
    49
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by lexico
    Species will move about with or without us.
    This I agree with, but what was discussed in the articles in not the species that are moving on their own, but the ones being displaced by humans! Red eared sliders which are bought as pets, then released into the wild because the owner can't care for them. Mongoose being brought in to control snake/rat populations and then essentially taking over.

    Plantlife or micro-organisms being displaced by hitching a ride on your shoe or pants leg is one thing, but what is being discussed here is completely different! Then to apply it to possibly removing foreigners is totally assinine...IMHO

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •