By Kate Snow
Rock Center Correspondent
Who wouldn’t want to fly across the world and spend a week with giant pandas? They are undeniably cute. Everyone is obsessed with those black and white fuzzy faces. We celebrate when one is born at a zoo. We know their names. We’ll watch a YouTube video of them over and over again. This one, which shows a baby panda sneezing, has more than 150 million hits. I dare you not to click the link.
For this story, we traveled to Chengdu, China, a city of 14 million people. It’s the capital of the Sichuan province in southwest China. Chengdu is known for spicy Sichuan chili dishes that make your tongue go numb, but also for being the hometown of the giant panda. Back in 1987, when it became apparent that pandas were seriously endangered in the wild, the Chinese created the Chengdu Research Base of Giant Panda Breeding. Starting with just six pandas from the wild, they’ve successfully bred more than 100 pandas.
Here, female pandas are monitored constantly to pinpoint the one day of the year – or the few hours -- when they’ll be able to conceive. They are typically artificially inseminated. Test tubes of panda sperm are kept in vats of liquid nitrogen. Mothers stay with their babies for a while but they’re eventually put back on the breeding program so the cycle can start again.
Sarah Bexell, an American who has worked at Chengdu for 13 years, says the lives of the staff revolve around the fertility cycle of the female pandas. “When our cubs are about to arrive, some of our staff live there 24-7,” she said. She’s also a coauthor of a new book called, “Giant Pandas: Born Survivors.”
The cubs I saw on this visit were four months old and just learning to walk. Their fur was soft as silk.
Too much for one species?
The work done at Chengdu and other breeding centers costs millions of dollars a year. Experts believe more money is probably being spent to save the giant panda than any other species in the world.
But is that a good idea?
While this may sound like heresy to panda lovers, is it possible that we’re spending too much to save the giant panda?
“I think we have to make tough choices,” British wildlife expert, Chris Packham, said. “I think that, ultimately, we have to be pragmatic as well as sentimental. You know, we can't allow our heart to rule our conservation head… And if we channel this much into just one species, then many others, which could be far better helped, many other not just species, but communities and ecosystems, could be better protected at the expense of one fluffy, cuddly bear.”
Packham is in the minority here, but a growing number of scientists agree.
Bexell and her colleagues at Chengdu’s breeding center are not among them. They firmly believe the panda is worth saving. And they worry that without the panda as a symbol for the conservation movement, people might not give any money to saving any species at all.
“Where would that money go? Maybe people would go and buy a new iPod instead. You know, instead of throwing that money towards conservation,” Bexell said.
Humans pushed giant pandas to the brink of extinction, Bexell said, and it is up to us to find a way to save them.
“I think pandas are symbolic. We all love them. We all want to share the earth with them. And if we truly cannot save space for giant pandas, what does that say about us as a species? And how could we ever have hope for any of the others if we can't save the one that we profess to love the most?”
Editor's Note: Kate Snow's full report airs Fri., Feb. 22 at 10pm/9c on NBC's Rock Center with Brian Williams.
Leave a Comment:
Are pandas worth saving? No - but we as a species should be examined by how we treat and value things that are not of value to us. Pandas contribute very little value to the world's economies, but if you look in your heart and soul, there is real value in every bit of beauty or unique thing. And if we do not value that, we are no better than a machine - complex, highly functional, but with no soul.
So, YES, if we have any value, then the pandas should be saved.
Although the article states that "millions" are being paid to sustain the breeding center in question, it fails to say who is actually paying those "millions". If it is the Chinese who are paying, why then does the question of whether that's a good thing or not even come up? If the Chinese feel that the cost is sustainable--and it must be or they wouldn't be supporting it--who are foreign observers to complain about that? If there are foreign contributors involved, how much of the budget are they supporting? What exactly is the "opportunity cost" of that money, which is otherwise so vaguely alluded to in the article. Overall this is a poorly written piece that fails to give sufficient information so as to enable readers to assess that rather provocatively titled theme.
Millions in several different currencies going to one cause is ridiculous when there are PEOPLE who could benefit from it. Could you imagine where medical tech would be if 25%of that money was spent on cancer research? But no, we gotta save the fluffy cute face of the conservation movement. Wouldn't it be a more powerful face if they used an extict animal? Why don't they use the face of a dinosaur? Or even better the face of a starving child? Pandas, Condors, Whales, and even Bengal Tigers should all take a distant back seat to the needs of the human race.
emphatically disagree. our responsibilities as humans include both caring for each other and stewardship of the planet. "and behold I establish my covenant with you and with you seeds after you. and with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth."...God to noah. there is no reason why we cannot take care of the whole enchilada. take the huge amount of resources that are used for entertainment and crass consumerism and put that into the needs of the human race. no need to punish other species to save ours.
i should add skez 63 that i do respect and support your advocacy for medical research regardless of my take on how to get it done.
Do the evolution
Of course the pandas are worth saving! It's the critics who are not worth saving.
Why wouldn't this lovely creature be worth saving? Spend trillions on people in this country who won't work, trillions on outsourcing US jobs to other countries, but people think this innocent animal isn't worth it?
it'smetoo--the trillions being spent on people who don't work go to wall street execs, bankers and the rest of the "aristocracy of wealth" warned against by T Roosevelt. poor people who want to work [and that's most of them] have nothing to do with endangering the panda. Don't listen to the devisive propaganda of the media. be both human and humane. i back your support for saving the panda.
What gets me is people discussing the cost. Maybe if they stop sending our hard earned money to 3rd world dictators, who call themseleves democratic and use the money to feed their own lifestyles or personal armies and not the people it was intended for, we could use that to save these beautiful creatures. It's better to let one more living creature go away then make a concerned effort to keep them on this planet.
Can one eat Panda?
Is it lean meat?
one can eat human flesh as well as that of any other species. have some soylent green or soylent yellow, winker and chillevy. [i cant remember which is which from the charlton heston movie]. maybe you can offer yourselves as part of the menu. that was too mean--i take it back. "can we all just get along?"
I would rather take one of my many guns , shoot the dam thing, and then hang it to age for a few days before consuming. Dont get in the way Blues"Baby"man
It is unbelievable that the critics think they are Godlike. One day it's Panda's, the next it's little baby girls. No, the critics are not the important ones in this article, and I would love to volunteer my time to help. It is such a joy to see Panda's, and it was painful to hear about what these critics had to say. Critics, what are you doing to improve the environment and the economy? Do you not feel smart enough to do something that doesn't involve giving up on life? Do something actually productive and not so weak minded.
It's time that humans who have been given the privledge of being the caretakers of this planet start holding themselves accountable for their mistakes and start taking responsibility for correcting them rather than ignoreing them. They should be saved because it was us that caused them to be endangered. If you break it then you should be responsible for fixing it.
It's kind of funny that a not terribly attractive smug British guy is attacking pandas for being cute. There is no hint of jealousy at all there.
you know--if he were in trouble because of a medical condition of injury, i would try to help him regardless of his lame ideas. i would also try to help a sick panda.
what an ass!!!I hope this dicks doctor tells him the same thing when he gets cancer or really sick!!!"Sorry sir,but it costs to much to save you"!!
Since this species is native to China it is that countries people and government that needs to step up and save their own native species. I am tired of the United States being the keepers of the world whether its war, starvation, climate issues, or species preservation. Why should our country be burdened with the expenses and responsibility that most of the other countries shirk from even within their borders? Time to shut off the giving faucet.
it's a GLOBAL economy with a few rich americans gaining wealth by moving jobs to china and a few chinese getting wealthy by exploiting their own workers. In fact, if you are an earthling, you have some responsibility for the earth everywhere. so if one doesn't want to help save the panda, why not help save american polar bears?
At what cost do we save "every animal on the planet"? The American buffalo was saved due to private ownership. The countries in Africa that do not have a shortage of elephants allow private ownership of elephants. the countries where they are heavily poached do not allow private ownership. Ever wonder why there are so many cows, horses, sheep etc? Private ownership!!!
There are too much cattle causing too much pollution because it's profitable to wealthy people who steal by extorting money from you and me by grossly overpricing things like..uh...gasoline. It takes humanity not private ownership to save anything worthwhile!!!
I can't even believe this topic is being discussed! I totally believe in saving the Panda and putting whatever monetary means necessary into doing so! What is this world coming to when we can't help save animals who, because of human ignorance, are unable to save themselves?!?!?!? WE humans really are screwing things up in every aspect of life; we have become a terribly selfish "breed!" Another topic to discuss would be the deforestation of the Rain Forests and not too much being done about that!
Who are we to determine which species should die? How very arrogant and selfish people are.
I think we should invest a much smaller amount in developing a recipe for panda meat and be done with it. Nature is obviously done with the giant panda, we should honor that by having a meal with them.
How about this? Get a dozen of the Pandas, move them to Florida, and build a Disney theme park around them. The tourism alone would fund the program easily. Problem solved.
If we would have left them alone to begin with, they would not need saving. We put them in this situation, we should do all we can to get them out of it. it is called being responsible.
Whose money? If no one else contributed, the Chinese would probably go forward with this ... Pandas are their symbol first! I love articles that ask what we'd do with someone else's stuff ...