It's crazy that just four hippos turned into a herd of 200. The article also says that zoos and reserves won't take them because all the inbreeding has caused genetic defects.
396
TheShishkabob5 days ago
+237
Inbred hippos is such a unique problem for a nation to have to deal with. I can't imagine running on "we need to euthanize these hippos" and that actually being a real issue.
237
Drak_is_Right5 days ago
+92
Megafauna has a big impact on the landscape
92
TheyveKilledFritzz5 days ago
+43
I mean ya theyrw getting way out of control and are one of the moat dangerous and territorial animals on the planet
43
gbroon5 days ago
+11
Doesn't even need to be megafauna to cause big impacts. Just ask Australia about their rabbit problem.
11
maxdragonxiii5 days ago
+6
I think its cane toads now.
6
daemenus5 days ago
+2
Or emus, or rats, or cats...
2
Guthix_Wraith5 days ago
+4
Ahh. The great emu war
4
HirsuteHacker3 days ago
+2
Emus are megafauna
2
nativeyeast4 days ago
+1
The domestic cat has entered the chat
1
trollsong5 days ago
+7
The angel on my shoulder says yea that is for the best.
The unethical scientist in my other shoulder however wants to see how they and the nature around them will have changed in 1000 to a million years from now
7
southpaw855 days ago
+8
Probably where the whole “mega” part comes in to play
8
edgeplot4 days ago
+2
South America was full of megafauna until humans arrived.
2
Magges875 days ago
+9
Several years ago. I listened to a great podcast with a zoologist or something about giving birth control to the hippos. Apparently it really hard and I think you need a different method for males an females.
9
66stang3514 days ago
+3
veterinary equivalent of stalingrad
3
Bicentennial_Douche5 days ago
+7
"Inbred hippos"
I think I just found a name for my band!
7
JfPickups4 days ago
+3
and I found the name for my new Netflix docuseries on the Royal Family.
3
cookiemonster8u694 days ago
+1
Definitely a h******* band
1
Cioran_5 days ago
+6
This could be a metaphor for so many current events right now.
6
Override96365 days ago
+1
"When I was comin' up you'd be lucky to even have hippos. Now we got so many inbred hippos you gotta start eurthanizin' them? [Must be fuckin' nice."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oK4Q5G1asI)
1
Shiplord135 days ago
I mean shouldn't the hippos die out naturally from the continued inbreeding? That genetically will eventually become either sterile or not live long enough to reach adulthood? Like having a population crash should surely be near since they started with two breeding pairs at most.
0
NMS_Survival_Guru5 days ago
+9
Not necessarily as inbreeding doesn't always produce bad genetics
I work in livestock production where line breeding is a common practice in hopes to produce the same traits consistently but that also comes at a chance of one being born with the worst traits
It's really a problem with direct relatives like one bull can breed 20 cows and its offspring would have enough genetic diversity from their dams to be able to avoid most inbreeding complications but breeding that bull to its own offspring would increase the chances of problems
Inbreeding is far more complex than most people realize
9
Dr_thri115 days ago
+1
No if there aren't fatal recessive genes in the population they'll just have low genetic diversity. That can be a problem if there's a sudden environmental changes they aren't well adapted to or a disease they have low immunity to is spreading. But otherwise you just get a bunch of highly related hippos.
1
Reasonable-Public7963 days ago
+1
There is still randomization of genes,eventually you get enough genetic diversity
We don't think it's ethical for humans because we don't like to keep giving birth to dead babies
1
[deleted]5 days ago
-29
If they thrive so much I’m really surprised inbreeding is a problem. I’m not super knowledgeable but I would think even if you start with a population of one breeding pair, over a couple generations they’d breed with less related individuals and you’d pretty quickly have enough variety where genetic defects are minimized. But apparently not
-29
FreeUsePolyDaddy5 days ago
+27
No that is not how genetics works.
When the initial population is 4, no matter how many living individuals you have, you haven't increased the number of genetically distinct members. As they breed, some traits quickly win out and others get lost, just due to how they are placed on the chromosomes of male or female members. Think of some genes like little creatures holding a pair of scissors waiting to cut their competitors out of the gene pool.
This is why it is challenging to have pure breed dogs that conform to breed club standards but are also healthy. In the UK for example, home of the bulldog, it is estimated that there are only something like 31 or 32 genetically distinct individuals.
I've seen different numbers bounced around for how small a population can be before a lack of genetic diversity can become a source of birth defects and weakness to disease, but 10 thousand is the number that I'm recalling. It is why it is a big deal when a species is critically endangered: even if you can get the numbers back up, you don't know what negative consequences remain.
Edit: I should note that the critical threshold on number of distinct members varies by species. A few species are adapted to extremely hostile cylical environmental conditions and their threshold appears to be much lower. I won't state this as a fact, just as an hypothesis: chances are good that their genome has a lot more material to conserve its structure.
However the norm is to need a lot of diversity. The reason breed clubs dodge around that is through continual testing, and in some cases C-sections. It's a really big deal with bulldogs for example if a female can free-whelp since most cannot. So while a species might still exist with low numbers, usually its ongoing survival situation is quite precarious.
Note: bulldogs are not a distinct species. I'm using them as an example of a small isolated population within a broader species (dogs, broadly).
27
[deleted]5 days ago
Damn that 10k number is shocking (I know it’s just an estimate) as I thought you could build genetic diversity fairly quickly but your explanation makes sense.
But I’d have to think the type of animal makes a big difference. I.e. 10k would be sufficient for large mammals to avoid genetic defects, but for insects or mice it would be much lower? Or is it a universal rule for all animals?
Edit: after digesting your answer more It seems that the type of animal wouldn’t matter as genes are genes
0
FreeUsePolyDaddy5 days ago
+3
Oh, btw, no, "genes are not genes" if you were imagining them like similar-sized legos all meant to s*** uniquely into one specific role. Genes vary by total size (number of base pairs), how many copies they have, how they are positioned on chromosomes, and how they get folded up in the DNA. So in my earlier edit, when I noted that species with a lower critical threshold may have more genetic mechanisms for preserving function when inbreeding is higher, all of those potential dynamics could matter. In addition to that, epigenetic material can also come into play.
3
FreeUsePolyDaddy5 days ago
+1
Yes the type of animal matters. I was typing in an edit apparently as you were responding. Check for the added explanation.
1
willstr15 days ago
+8
Not an expert but there is a minimum initial stock needed to create stable genetic diversity. If you have less than that initial genetic diversity (or if the initial stock isn't diverse enough) then eventually the disorders will start to build up. It doesn't matter how great the environment is or how big the herd grows if you don't have that initial diversity it will eventually destabilize without an influx of external diversity (ie bringing in new animals from somewhere else), thats why zoos will often exchange animals that are involved in breeding programs, to provide that external diversity instead of having to have 100 gorillas in one zoo to maintain gorilla genetic diversity.
8
FreeUsePolyDaddy5 days ago
+1
Yes exactly. It's also why responsible dog breeders are always evaluating each other's efforts so they can identify beneficial matings that balance preserving breed characteristics yet make the most of the diversity available within that breed.
I should also stipulate that it isn't impossible to have spontaneous creation of genetic diversity, but for the majority of vertebrates that is likely a slow process. Genetic mutations, e.g. from radiation inducing a base pair alteration, can be helpful, harmful, or benign. So the mutation needs to usually not be lethal and be inherited, and have some time (measured in generations) to establish whatever impact it will have on diversity.
1
[deleted]5 days ago
+1
This brings a new question to mind… I’ve always read that it’s believed that all new world monkeys come from a single breeding pair or small group (10+ million years ago I believe). If that’s true wouldn’t all monkeys in South America have genetic defects?
1
willstr15 days ago
+3
Genetic defects in the wild are... complicated. Genetic defects are just mutations, a lot are harmful, some don't do anything, some are beneficial. In the wild evolutionary forces are still in play, survival of the fittest. So the harmful defects will be eliminated (their carriers dieing before they can reproduce) but the benign and beneficial ones will continue and in the long long arc of time those mutations become new species.
3
FreeUsePolyDaddy5 days ago
+3
Something else to note. The math of tracing common genetic roots is complex. It may be a misnomer to think of a species as originating from a single pair, as if somehow only 2 members of a species were wandering around in a vast forest of no other members of the same or closely-related species.
The 2 members had traits that were dominant over all others. They may have been a "sport" (a spontaneous mutation) whose genes were conserved during reproduction over others, and at the time they may barely have warranted a zoologist recognizing them as a sub-species. Keep in mind that the entire monkey and ape kingdom (the primate clade) are very close percentage-wise in genetic similarity. We only differ by about 1 to 4 percent from a chimpanzee, for example.
3
FreeUsePolyDaddy5 days ago
+1
10 million years provides a lot of generations for natural selection to prune out the cases where defects impact reproduction. Also during that time you would have a slow rate of naturally-appearing mutations in the genome due to things like radiation. In the hippos you are seeing a handful of generations, not a million generations.
1
dariemf19985 days ago
+2
They come from 1 male and 3 females, at some people you'll end up having children with your own grandma. That population is most likely doomed
2
FreeUsePolyDaddy5 days ago
+1
If the numbers are at all similar to humans, they are probably running in the low double digit percentages of any given birth exhibiting a significant birth defect. I think for us it is 8% for direct siblings or child vs parent, and that's for a single cross. They'll be running multiple crosses.
1
tepkel5 days ago
+8
Imagine an entire herd of Hippos with Hapsburg chins.
8
hawkwings5 days ago
+15
For many animals, zoos are full. I get the impression that they have pretty much stopped building new zoos in North and South America.
15
VeeDubBug5 days ago
+6
Even expansions are rare. The NC Zoo, which is the biggest in the world, has been working on their Asia expansion for *years*.
6
wvblocks5 days ago
+27
Yeah, and having access to some of the purest ultra-white Colombian yayo probably didn’t exactly slow things down either.
27
Vicorin5 days ago
+22
Thank you for the mental image of hippos snorting lines off each other’s asses.
22
wvblocks5 days ago
+14
Sir David Attenborough voice: "Here we see the rare coke-a-potamus in its natural habitat....as you can tell my friends, this one is absolutely zooted."
14
StampDaddy5 days ago
+1
Waiting for them to make the movie Cocaine Hippos
1
I_hate_alot_a_lot5 days ago
+6
Thanks Pablo Escobar
6
Fallouttgrrl5 days ago
Coke hippos be raunchy
0
bigcitrus804 days ago
+2
“Four hippos” conjured a VERY specific image in my head
2
Epyon2145 days ago
-17
Which is why you remove the ones with genetic defects and allow the rest to continue, eventually you'll get genetic diversity within the species again
-17
pyrhus6265 days ago
+16
A- You need a lot of generations for a small population to maybe diversify enough to carry on. Way more than they can wait.
B- Even then I doubt you could ever make a genetically stable population starting from 4 individuals.
C- The point is that they *don’t* want the hippos there. They’re not native and disrupt the local biosphere. Trying to create a stable population is beside the point. It’s only an issue because zoos and sanctuaries don’t want to have to eat the probably cost of caring for an abnormal animal or risk it breeding with healthy individuals to pass on defective genes.
16
Epyon2145 days ago
-9
You will, but management is active not something you wait much for
You can
Control the population and eliminate the population are two very different things. Hippos can't hide very well for very long
-9
AlwaysReadyGo5 days ago
+157
>Colombia's first four hippos were illegally imported in the 1980s by the late drug trafficker Pablo Escobar, who established a zoo on one of his properties. The population has since grown largely unchecked, despite some efforts by provincial environmental authorities.
It sounds like they’re cleaning up a rather odd bit of narco history too, not just dealing with an invasive species.
157
ColorlessChesspiece5 days ago
+116
It's a legit problem.
The hippos have invaded the wetlands near Escobar's old hacienda, and have been spotted in farms and roads nearby. [Attacks have been reported.](https://english.elpais.com/international/2025-12-27/pablo-escobars-hippos-a-serious-environmental-problem-40-years-on.html) It's only a matter of time before someone gets killed, either by being attacked by an hippo in their property or a public place, or by crashing into one of them in a road.
Invasive species are no joke. Hippos are no joke (they may look goofy but are gigantic and very aggressive). The fact that something is being done about them is a good thing. If anything, the question is why it hadn't been done yet (there have been hippo attacks reported as early as 2020).
116
DivinityPen5 days ago
+74
Marine bio MPS student here. Did a Coastal Policy class in my first semester of grad school, and we actually did an assignment discussing what we'd do in this situation.
Iirc at first it was just plain negligence on the Colombian government's part that led them to spread so prolifically, but eventually they tried things like boxing them in. Unfortunately the damn hippos were really good at escaping, so then they tried hunting them down.
The public didn't like that. After a certain point, the hippos inconveniently became a popular tourist attraction, meaning that there were locals who suddenly found themselves with an additional source of revenue. Which is f****** stupid, because hippos are vicious bastards, but they didn't seem to get the memo. So the government tried compromising and embarked on a sterilization campaign, so that the hippo population would just naturally die out.
Unfortunately, that turned out to be even harder. The thing about hippos is that they're ***p h a t*** bastards who're - again - hyperviolent as f***. Catching and sterilizing even *one* hippo was a *pain in the f****** ass*. Not only do you gotta isolate it long enough to sedate it - which was far easier said than done - but the issue with a hippo's gonads is that they're tucked *waaaaaaaaay* inside their body, a lot moreso compared to other animals. And if the procedure went even a *little* wrong, there was the risk of killing the animal. And the hippo could only stay sedated for so long, so if the researchers didn't work quickly enough, well... you can probably imagine what would happen.
And then there was the matter of *transporting* them. They're so absurdly heavy that it's an even bigger pain in the ass to move them anywhere by helicopter. Every inch of those b****** animals was basically engineered in a lab to be as difficult as physically possible for Colombia's environmental scientists to manage. Seems that the government finally gave up, I guess. It's unfortunate, but there's just really not a better option.
74
ThaCarter5 days ago
+41
Shooting them early and taking the heat would have saved so much trouble.
41
Soren-J4 days ago
+8
It's incredible that millionaires go to Africa to hunt them and haven't thought about Colombia.
The jungle would even add an extra layer of difficulty.
8
OhHowIMeantTo5 days ago
+4
Off topic question for you. I've long wondered what would be the ecological impact of introducing marine mammals like seals to the Great Lakes? Would they be able to help with the zebra mussels? Or would they cause more problems than good?
4
FreeUsePolyDaddy5 days ago
+17
The history of attempts to control one invasive species by introducing another species is not great.
It works best when the population of the new predator is directly proportional to the prey.
It's been experimented with on a few islands with some success. But you would never use a more omnivorous species for the predator. The best successes have been cases like introducing a predatory wasp whose only prey is the invasive species you want to control.
17
Fallouttgrrl5 days ago
+6
Honestly wild to think of it like you've got to have a NASCAR pit crew ready to castrate a hippo
6
pinewind1085 days ago
+3
It sounds like darting them with birth control drugs wasn't feasible? It worked great on wild horses (except for food chain issues with the drugs), but the difference in subcutaneous fat is dramatic.
3
DivinityPen5 days ago
+5
Pretty much. Hippos have really thick skin. The only real way to sterilize them is to actually get in there. You could probably make a dart that goes deep enough, but… well. If you miss, you REALLY miss, y’know?
5
Soren-J4 days ago
+3
I'd like to add something. Sterilizing them doesn't solve the environmental problem, since these animals live around 30 years in the wild (now imagine a paradise like Colombia), so even sterilized, they would still cause environmental damage for those 30 years.
Many endemic species in Colombia would die simply because of the animal's presence.
The solution isn't pretty, but it has to be done. What makes the difference is that hippos are popular with the public. They're not rats, they're not snakes, they're not some ugly fish... they're hippos. The only alternative is to eradicate them completely, or other species will die.
3
Zammin4 days ago
+1
No, it's a fair concern. Hippos are hugely aggressive and nothing to take lightly.
1
EagleForty5 days ago
+19
This problem has been brewing for a while. I remember reading an article years ago talking about how they were planning to euthanize them, but public outcry lead to a plan to sterilize all of them instead.
It seems like that didn't work, so back to plan A.
19
DivinityPen5 days ago
+10
They did their best, but hippos have gonads that are wedged really far inside their bodies, and are tiny compared to the rest of the animal. Unfortunately, it's *just* inconvenient enough that botching the surgery even a little could kill the animal.
And you've only got so many hours to sterilize a sedated hippo before it wakes up looking for a fight.
10
keyserdoe5 days ago
+3
I mean if you are trying to sterilize me against my will and I wake up you will also be getting a flight.
3
Embarrassed-Dust7185 days ago
+33
Ya one thing about Colombia is that hippos are in hippo heaven. In Africa theres droughts, and natural predators to keep the hippos population in control but in Colombia there’s non of that
33
Fallouttgrrl5 days ago
+22
Which is why we've got to introduce werewolves
No natural predators, so lets try supernatural
22
fleemfleemfleemfleem5 days ago
+4
Only active maybe 3 days a month, and in a fight between a hippo, one of the most dangerous animals on Earth, and a large wolf, the hippo takes it.
4
Zammin4 days ago
+1
I mean only silver can *kill* werewolves, but still. Hippos would really mess them up, you're right that it would be super one-sided in favor of the hippos. The werewolves would still be alive, but horrifically maimed.
1
lablackey274 days ago
+2
thank you for finding the clear flaw in this plan
2
Zammin4 days ago
+4
You're welcome, I do still think that the core concept of unleashing certain completely fictional monsters to deal with a real hippo infestation is a solid idea, but the specifics needed tweaking.
4
Fallouttgrrl4 days ago
+2
Right right
Thinking it's missing two things though
Most werewolf literature and lore includes the pack concept, and also incredible powers of recovery
I considered zombies but then you have the whole "hippo zombie" issue, wizards all seem busy these days, sasquatch is right out on account of having the same flaws as a werewolf but none of the benefits
Chupacabra would be more of a hassle to the locals and I'd prefer angry inbred hippos over skinwalkers any day
2
federvieh13495 days ago
+6
Natural predators? Of Hippos?
6
Embarrassed-Dust7185 days ago
+5
Yes. Nile crocs are known to feed on young hippos
5
UltraLNSS10 hr ago
+1
But who would eat the Nile crocs then?
1
federvieh13495 days ago
I highly doubt that this happens to an extend that would influence general population numbers.
0
No_Economist37885 days ago
+3
why would you highly doubt that? baby animals of all kinds are part of the food chain.
3
Embarrassed-Dust7185 days ago
+2
It happens enough that it helps control the population in Africa
2
Reasonable-Public7962 days ago
+1
It could influence reproductive behaviors making hippos hesitant to remain in one area too much or spending more time surviving compared to just breeding and eating
1
spottie_ottie5 days ago
+42
bad news for your madre
42
csfshrink5 days ago
+13
In 1910 the American Hippo bill was introduced by a LA representative to bring hippos to the bayous of LA as a source of meat. Based on this information from Colombia, it is a good thing it did not come to pass.
13
boznia5 days ago
+5
Well a couple decades later we ended up making a similar mistake by introducing nutria/coypu to Louisiana and are still paying the price.
5
KingBretwald5 days ago
+4
Sarah Gaily has entered the chat.
They wrote a book about this: The River of Teeth.
4
csfshrink5 days ago
+2
That sounds like a hoot.
2
[deleted]5 days ago
+38
[removed]
38
[deleted]5 days ago
+14
[removed]
14
hawkwings5 days ago
+5
By euthanize, do they mean shoot? It is not easy to capture a hippo and take it to a veteranarian's office.
5
Fallouttgrrl5 days ago
+5
I dunno about yours but my vet frowns on that, yeah
5
DivinityPen5 days ago
+1
Basically. They’ve tried just about everything else, but hippos are just too absurdly tough, heavy and aggressive to handle with gentler hands.
1
Soren-J4 days ago
+1
No. They isolate them, lock them up, and then, through veterinary procedures, cause their death.
1
hawkwings4 days ago
+1
Locking them up might more traumatic than just shooting them. With a paralyzing drug, an animal looks peaceful, but it might be in pain.
1
Ja_Lonley4 days ago
+6
That's not what euthanasia means. Culling, they'll be culled.
6
KittySharkWithAHat5 days ago
+6
It's definitely an invasive species and an ecological hazard.
6
FOTORABIA235 days ago
+6
Im finding this all slightly hippocritical.
6
TheGreatGamer13895 days ago
+10
Could you at least eat them or something?
10
TheGodEmperorOfChaos5 days ago
+18
No, not if the animal was euthanized. If Colombia were using rifle culling the situation would be different, but they aren’t.
The meat could be eaten only if local laws permitted it and the animal was killed using an approved humane method.
Euthanasia drugs make the meat unsafe because the chemicals stay in the tissues, remain active for months, and can poison anything that consumes them.
18
L_Cranston_Shadow5 days ago
+6
How do you rifle cull hippos, a .50 BMG?
6
MetalBawx5 days ago
+6
Big bore hunting rifles aka elephant guns.
6
Comprehensive-Ear2835 days ago
+2
Well shucks. Seems like such a waste.
2
Comprehensive-Ear2835 days ago
+4
I dunno why they wouldn't, seems like one hippo would produce a ton of meat.
4
ColorlessChesspiece5 days ago
+8
It might not even be economically viable. There's no market in Colombia for hippo meat, on account of hippos not being an animal that Colombians, or any of our predecessors, ever interacted with, until 30 years ago.
8
jpiro5 days ago
+2
I have never eaten hippo meat either, but if they were going to be culled anyway, I was assured it was safe and a restaurant was willing to prepare it…I’d damn sure try it.
2
Codfish_Smoothie5 days ago
+5
I mean, assured it was safe how? It's a feral hippo in the middle of a Colombian jungle, not an Angus steer on a feedlot.
5
Reasonable-Public7962 days ago
+1
Are you finding the concept of eating wildlife weird? Like hogs, deers, rabbits, ducks etc?
1
Codfish_Smoothie2 days ago
+1
No, I hunt and eat plenty of wildlife. But I don't expect any assurances of safety except what my own eyes and nose can give me.
1
jpiro5 days ago
-1
Test it for diseases before butchering it? Run it through a lab to look for toxins? Basic testing that’s required for anything being served in a restaurant?
-1
No_Economist37885 days ago
+2
where do you live that wild animal meat is sold in restaurants?
2
TheGreatGamer13895 days ago
+5
Hungry hungry human hungry hungry human
5
The_Grungeican5 days ago
+2
Yeah but then Colombians might get a taste for hippo, and start importing more of them.
2
spiritbearr5 days ago
+1
America tried it. Didn't work past paying money to a South African con artist who would turn into the head of the biggest Nazi Spy Ring in America.
1
alien46495 days ago
+22
So bringing young Asians is going to solve the problem?
22
MoonBasic5 days ago
+7
Yeah! What about the youth in America?
7
[deleted]5 days ago
+1
[removed]
1
StampDaddy5 days ago
+6
Took me a reread of the title to get the joke. Youth in Asia sounds like euthanasia
6
anythingall4 days ago
+1
Oh that makes more sense now.
1
SomewhereNo83785 days ago
+10
I picture them feeding the euthanasia meds in the shape of giant white balls like Hungry Hungry Hippos
10
rodbrs5 days ago
+3
They use the term "euthanasia" but they make it sound like it's actually "culling".
Are they only killing hippos that have some sort of painful existence? Or are they killing hippos to keep their numbers down?
3
midsprat1235 days ago
+5
It is culling - the hippos are non native to Colombia, and destroying their ecosystems.
No natural predators exist to balance them
All because of f****** Pablo Escobar
5
rodbrs4 days ago
+3
The degradation of language use drives me crazy.
3
aflyingsquanch4 days ago
+6
I'm surprised it didnt say they were unaliving the hippos.
6
EggCzar5 days ago
+5
Yes, killing them all seems like an effective way to control the population
5
TheBadShepherd875 days ago
+7
Hmm never thought about hippos being an invasive species.
7
Hayabusa_Blacksmith5 days ago
+11
They escaped from a drug lords estate and were not controllable 😂 im sure they regret not killing them but its quite sad all around for the local environment
11
Icantgoonillgoonn5 days ago
+5
They should sell the meat.
5
jana-meares5 days ago
+2
Pablo’s decisions live on forever.
2
JVilter5 days ago
+2
Why does this remind me of the 30 to 50 feral hogs situation?
2
edgeplot4 days ago
+2
I know they are invasive, but I'm still rooting for the hippos.
2
KenUsimi5 days ago
+6
The correct word is “culling”. Euthanasia implies the hippos want to be killed. It is a soft word for a bloody thing, and there is quite enough of that going around already, isn’t there?
6
Khwarezm5 days ago
+2
This is actually surprisingly controversial because there's an argument to be made that the Hippos might be occupying a similar role in the ecosystem that extinct animals called [Toxodonts ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxodon)may have up until about 12000 years ago, so the Hippos might not be as invasive as they first appear and could be acting as surrogates for a part of the ecosystem that used to be present until recently.
This hasn't been hammered out though, its probably the case that Toxodon was less aquatic than it was previously assumed so we can't really say for sure.
Apparently some people in Colombia want them around just in general for reasons I don't really understand, although I know that there's been animal rights controversies about culling them.
2
comradejenkens5 days ago
+3
From what I can see, Toxodon is no longer thought to be semi aquatic in the way hippos are.
There were some glyptodont species thought to be semi aquatic, but they're be much closer to pygmy hippos in size and niche.
3
eyepoker4ever5 days ago
+7
Your argument is not valid. The ecosystem was not the same 12k years ago and present day Columbia evolved without them. They are invasive. If Columbians want then around it is for tourists to gawk at.
7
Khwarezm5 days ago
+7
I'm just repeating what proper scientists have suggested, you can read this national geographic article to learn more:
[https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/colombia-cocaine-hippos-rewilding-experiment-news](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/colombia-cocaine-hippos-rewilding-experiment-news)
Something to keep in mind is that 12000 years isn't very long at all on a geological and evolutionary timescale, a lot of existing ecosystems don't have large animals that were present there until very recently and haven't really adapted to account for their disappearance, this is the argument around megafaunal rewilding in places that have had these recent extinctions. We sometimes have examples of reintroduction of certain animals that s*** surprisingly well back into the ecosystem since they were essentially missing for a period of time, an example of this is the horse in North America where Mustangs seem to be quite comfortable additions to the ecosystem since they are occupying a niche was vacated with the extinction of American horses at the end of the last Ice Age, this has implications about how they are treated in terms of land management and conservation since there's debate over whether or not they should be treated as invasive species.
7
NMS_Survival_Guru5 days ago
+1
This is something I like to argue about with people who want to eliminate cattle production
The American plains used to have millions of bison grazing until we removed 90% of that population in 250 years and then used that land for cattle and crops
Cattle aren't the biggest threat to climate change if we were to change our habits of raising them on a well managed pasture they could be carbon negative due to their grazing revitalizing the ecosystem
An ungrazed prairie is a sterile ecosystem without a large herbivore to disrupt it and promote more plant diversity and a better subsoil microbial health from trampled thatch
Proper grazing also reduces fire risks by a substantial amount
1
Soren-J3 days ago
+1
This isn't a peer-reviewed scientific article. It's simply a popular science article on a website, written by some guy who doesn't want hippos killed.
If it were truly a scientific article, it would be in a journal like Nature. National Geographic doesn't count for this kind of thing.
1
Khwarezm3 days ago
+1
National Geographic is quite a bit more prestigious and serious than most other popular science publications and don't just say things willy nilly by and large, but the people they are talking to about this have published about this in more professional settings, like this is the one that's linked to directly from that article:
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2530064417300810](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2530064417300810)
There's also this that more directly talks about the Hippos themselves and the effects they have in Colombia
[https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/oryx/article/potential-ecological-and-socioeconomic-effects-of-a-novel-megaherbivore-introduction-the-hippopotamus-in-colombia/8191CD050B5208617BA834D394145AC1](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/oryx/article/potential-ecological-and-socioeconomic-effects-of-a-novel-megaherbivore-introduction-the-hippopotamus-in-colombia/8191CD050B5208617BA834D394145AC1)
1
Soren-J3 days ago
+1
Yes, it's been resolved: they are invasive species. The entire scientific community agrees on that.
It's like saying the Panama Canal belongs to Colombia, just because the US hadn't intervened to separate them 150 years ago.
Too much time has passed, and the ecosystem is completely different now. If they weren't invasive species, they wouldn't be destroying the environment.
1
ConstantStatistician5 days ago
+1
Certainly a unique issue to deal with. Better sooner than later.
1
XMORA5 days ago
+1
It has been suggested many times in the past but animal rights activists get triggered and make the already difficult task harder.
1
admweirdbeard5 days ago
+1
This kills the hippos
1
russellomega5 days ago
+1
I think you have a typo in your title. How are the youth in Asia going to help in South America
1
NPVT4 days ago
+1
Why don't they send US senator Bernie Moreno to get them?
1
Abomb4 days ago
+1
Those youth in Asia are gonna have a hard time against those hippos.
1
Intelligent-Cry58334 days ago
+1
The way most countries control this kind of thing is opening a hunting season for the animal. Hunting controls populations and provides billions to conservation. Most dont know but all US conservation is almost wholly funded by hunting.
1
Soren-J3 days ago
Do not attempt to justify hunting for sport by humans. We are not necessary for ecosystems to regulate themselves; on the contrary, we destabilize them and harm plant and animal populations.
0
Intelligent-Cry58333 days ago
+1
For sport? Who said anything about sport? You eat what you hunt and 99% of hunters do. Without hunting conservation wouldnt exist. And hunting helps a TON with stabalizing ecosystems MAN messed up. Dont talk about what youve never researched.
1
Soren-J3 days ago
+1
Dude, we're a post-industrial society; we stopped hunting for food a long time ago.
The only hunting that regulates the ecosystem is the hunting that the ecosystem itself carries out—that is, the hunting of animals. Human hunting only destabilizes it because we're outside the ecosystem and its balance; we're more like an invasive species than anything else.
1
Intelligent-Cry58333 days ago
+1
Hunting for food as in not for sport. Hunting for sport means you hunt and then dont eat the meat and you just shot it for a mount. You must not live in the USA. Hunting is a GIANT part of the management of animals in north america. Wolf populations have to be managed, elk populations have to be managed. Hunting pays for all conservation which also helps the animals. OR you end up having the issue colombia seems to be unable to handle lol. Hunting regulates the hippo population, puts money into the habitat resources and also feeds the family whose hunter shot it. Just say you dont like hunting and also dont understand it lol.
1
Thelango995 days ago
+1
Good luck to the youth in asia.
1
fadestalker5 days ago
+1
My dyslexia kicked in an I read it as hiphop, I was thinking damn that’s a bit bloody harsh.
1
Positive_Method30225 days ago
Imagine that one day global leadership could say the same about humans
0
megacide845 days ago
"Cocaine Hippo".... Hey! that could be a prequal to "Cocaine Bear".
Especially if it's a 1980s period piece. Maybe eventually lead to a 'Bear vs. Hippo' crossover.
0
A_Nonny_Muse5 days ago
-8
I don't know what the big deal is about euthanasia.
I don't mind if they stay there or not.
-8
velvetackbar5 days ago
+5
So you have no opinion in the matter. Noted!
5
A_Nonny_Muse5 days ago
-2
whoosh.
Thats the sound of the joke going over your head.
-2
bufordt5 days ago
Youth are causing nothing but trouble in Asia, we have to youthenize people in other continents instead.
0
Pocket_Jury5 days ago
This is a weekend job for my friend, Bubba. C-mon, people.
0
FatesUrinal4 days ago
Wouldn’t this be a fine opportunity to make money off those rich bitches who hunt from helicopters? You get rid of an animal that doesn’t belong there and make money off the assholes who like big game hunting.
0
rebayona3 days ago
+1
*Donald Jr and Eric enters the chat*
1
Superb_Astronomer_595 days ago
-4
Youth in Asia? Do they have something against hippos?
-4
Troutmuffin5 days ago
-4
What are the youth of Asia gonna do? They are a good 16000 km away.
-4
Bitcoacher5 days ago
-3
How are youth in Asia going to help control the hippo population?
161 Comments