🚀 go-pugleaf

"Keith Thomas" <iant@asiaonline.net.au> wrote in message
news:lDZa7.56$V%6.108651@news.interact.net.au...
<snip>
> I'll keep on looking, the scope of my enquiries having been narrowed by
your
> advice.
>
> Let me tell you what has set me off on this enquiry. Two things. (1) I
have
> always looked a bit askance at the cute panda logo of the WWF and the
focus
> on large mammals or other picture-postcard-perfect targets. But I have not
> thought much about it.
<snip>

The reason the panda was chosen as a logo, I believe, is because int the
early days of the conservation movement, there was global concern for the
panda's future, i.e. it was the highest profile example of an endangered
species. I suppose that it's cuddly image is also not bad from a PR point of
view.

With regard to large mammals etc receiving a lot of attention, I believe
there is a simple ecological reason for it. Tigers for example, are the top
predator in their habitat and as such rely on a healthy and thriving habitat
lower down the food chain. Population densities and overall numbers for
larger animal are also much lower than for small mammals,invertebrates etc,
and are thus much more sensitive to changes. Other species are chose because
they are useful as an indicator species, being the first to show any
ill-effects if something goes wrong with their habitat.
I have not come across any reports of the WWF choosing projects purely for
their PR value.
--
athomik

http://www.askadrian.co.uk