Do earth’s animals need humans to survive?

I have been thinking lately about the future of our planet with regards to nuclear annihilation, global warming and such. Then I began to wonder, about the topic for my post. Let’s just say all humans were wiped out, killed by atomic radiation, world-wide plague, abducted by aliens or lifted by resurrection.

What animal species would die? Which ones depend on mankind for their survival? I am sure the obvious comes to mind like domesticated dogs, cats and aquarium fish. My little dog could hardly survive on the occasional lizard he catches in our backyard. I suppose all the animals in the zoo would die, stuck in cages and without routine feeding. And of course, all the Shamu’s and Flippers of the world held captive in our theme parks.

All we humans do is take from the mother earth. We pollute it’s pristine air and water. We cut down it’s trees and rain forests, we decimate species until they become extinct. We develop wetlands and beaches, thereby destroying nature’s delicate ecosystems. We spill millions of gallons of crude oil and threaten thousands of creatures. We kill animals to extinction for their precious ivory, or fins or because they might be an aphrodisiac. We store our nuclear waste in mountains because we are too stupid to know what to do with it.

But what wild animal species would be adversely affected if man were gone? Seems to me they would flourish. There would be more fish in the sea, more bears, more birds, more alligators, more everything.

So my question to you all is this. What beneficial purpose does man serve on this planet with relation to the myriad of animals and wildlife which inhabit it?

< added > Would some species which is currently in check by man flourish and cause some imbalance among all the other species?

I look forward to your opinions on this and will be doing a follow topic related to this in the next few weeks.

regards....kk

[edit on 31-7-2007 by kinda kurious]

[edit on 31-7-2007 by kinda kurious]

Only domesticated animals, provided that there were still a green field to graze in. Animals aren't nearly as dependent on humans as humans are dependent on animals. For example, when you sit down tonight, I am willing to bet that you will have some kind of meat on your dinner table.

People say, "Well, there is alway vegetarianism." Yeah, but their are essential elements that a vegetarian diet doesn't provide.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
People say, "Well, there is alway vegetarianism." Yeah, but their are essential elements that a vegetarian diet doesn't provide.

That's why vitamins & supplements exist.



Anyways, to answer the question, apart from most domesticated animals, speaker's right,
animals would survive just fine, better probably without us around.

However anything that has become dependent on Corn would have to either adapt
to another food source or would die out since Corn is completely dependent
on Humans to continue growing.

Hunters by trade, scavengers by night, no they would survive.

Bipedal apes have only been around for 5 million years. animals have been around for much longer so yes they would.

only domesticated animals would have a tough time, yet even those, given that they weren't closed off in a pen, would learn rather quickly to cope.

the only animal totaly dependant on man today is actually the silk worm.

The Earth does not need humans one bit.

All we have done in the past few hundred years is destroy and maime. It seems the world would be much better off with the majority of us gone...

Speaker, 'domesticated' animals as you call them still have their wild instincts in them albeit greatly suppressed. A dog or a cat still knows how to find food when need be.

In short, we are not needed . Although living isn't too bad, I can't complain .

I'll Tell ya what we should do!!! Instead of wasting more and more money polluting the earth and creating a giant ecodumpster that will eventually wipe us out if we dont wipe our selves out.

We should take all that money to build giant rockets and maybe 2 times a year launch them at either A) the sun or B)a course for the nearest Star other than the sun. Option A is very suitable since chances are the rocket containing garbage and nuclear wast would either A)burnup before impact or B)Burn up upon Impact we would be safe.

Then we could focus on using renewable energy like 1)the sun(Solar) 2)wind 3)water 4)Geothermal 5)Magnets 6)fire 7) Gravity and lastly if worst comes to worst 8)Electric eels!!!! if all of these ideas were put to use and everyone
stopped thinking about them selves then the world would be a better place.

Think about this we could even empty jails and stop crime if we loaded the stinky rocket with killers, rapists, theives, and Corrupt people altogether and just shot em at the sun. I don't know about you but after the first 10,000 people get launched I'd not think twice to committing anything!!!

This is an idea that will not even be considered untill fianlly it's too late, Just like in the movies when the bad guy gets caught and is inches from death pleas for his life, we are all that bad guy, awaiting the coming death to finally change......

i agree with the shooting stuff at the sun idea. too bad the world hasnt evolved in such a way that it can mass produce space tech.

although the launching of criminals is a bit extreme. not that i dont want to kill them on the spot (depending on their crime and its circumstances) but i think we should keep all human "cleansing" here.

we can be the greens keepers of the Earth if we tried, rather than that guy who does donuts on the lawn in his SUV whilst drunk off his ass (which is basically where we are at at the moment).


mind you there was a time when we were at peace with the world, when we needed it and couldnt even think of damaging it because we would be killing our selves. Too bad its not how we see it now