Question:
An important, but controversial argument in favour of conservation is the idea that all organisms have inherent, in-born or intrinsic value. How is this argument developed? Why is it important?

We must first have an idea of what is implied by conservation. The simplest definition of conservation is the maintenance of all living organisms and the physical environments with which they interact. Or, in other words, going through a lot of trouble to prevent species decline/extinction, and destruction of the environment. Conservation thus serves to preserve the biosphere.

Not everyone wants to conserve, mind you, despite the many arguments in favour of it. One of the conservationists's main arguments is Ethical; that all organisms have an intrinsic value.

Pretend that you are a mosquito, a female mosquito. You must zig-zag around disgusting, smelly humans, or other animals, in order to obtain blood. This blood is quite necessary for your survival, because you need such high protein in your diet if you are to produce offspring. If you can't produce offspring, you won't be able to give your boyfriend any baby mosquitoes to cheer him up when he injures himself by flying into a windshield wiper. Furthermore, the blood is readily available. What was it that Spucky Tick told you the other day? Ah yes, his research showed that approximately 2 to 10 million red blood cells are destroyed and replaced every second in the human body, in addition, 5 million red blood cells exist in a single drop of blood at any one point in time!

Yet, they consider you a pest? Why? Because of their own poor hygiene, for one thing. Had they listened to the Masked Greeny and they conscienciously covered all stagnant water, then perhaps you might've chosen a still pond instead, to raise your children. With such conditions available, it's no wonder you sometimes pick up germs. And how could they really be so audacious? The male humans try to impress their better halves with their supposed strength, yet they can't take a little nip every now and then? And they even go as far as to say that they're conservationists... concerned with little organisms, but they don't seem to care about the well-being of a little housewife-mosquito, do they.

To elaborate on the topic of strength, one must of course consider the little ants in one's backyard. Size for size, they are stronger than you. Actually, you stand no relative chance, unless you can lift ten times your body weight easily. And they're more orderly than you too. In their communist society, everyone finds himself happy. Bring Queenie a lot of food, and maybe one day you could father her babies too. Or maybe not, she isn't like some human women, now is she. When she has men, she sticks to them, and does not cheat. Guess it's a class thing.

And then comes the human. A meanie little boy runs in his background chased by mummy. "Goliath! Goliath! careful you fall and hurt yo---." Too late. He falls flat on his face into the poor ants's home, and his refusal to eat healthy, non-fattening foods ensures its flattening.

Can you really blame the ants for biting him? In that one careless move, he could've killed several ants, and injured others. Not to mention the destruction of the structure. Had the ants been given legal rights, as is available to the most pathetic of human beings, they could've considered the option of seeking compensation in a courthouse, but as they are discriminated against, they are left with their instinctive defence mechanism of biting. A little methanonoic acid with each injection simply makes it all the more rewarding.

These are just two cases of seemingly insignificant organisms being misunderstood. We can also study organisms that may seem to serve no purpose at all, such as plants. Whilst some of them have evolved the ability to walk and talk, thus being capable of locomotion and speech, most others weren't so lucky. Conservationists such as the Masked Greeny show deep interest in preserving such inhibited species, but quite often they are lured over to the dark side, and try to conquer instead. This cannot work. The aim of a true conservationist is to preserve all living organisms.

The fact of the matter is, that such "inhibited species" may have more relative importance than their animal counterparts. They, as well as certain species of bacteria, are the only organisms capable of photosynthesizing. Just in case it isn't clear, all other organisms (well, besides Bacteria... they're so often the exception) depend on Oxygen for continued survival. And for the artist in you, plants make our pwetty planet even pwettier!

And once more, they suffer from oppression at the hands of the humans! They refuse to adhere to mathematically-sound plans when extracting timber. Look at Guyana, for instance. No consideration for their green neighbours! They blame it on the struggling economy, but are wasted plant lives really worth the extra dollar?

What about the Fungi? They are the primary source of the ethanol used for Man's alcoholic beverages, and food stuff. They make yogurt for Man, they curdle milk to make cheese for Man! Does Man care about the Fungi? No. He couldn't care less about Fungi. He deprives Fungi of Oxygen when baking, forcing the little thing to respire anaerobically, then *bakes* the little thing! How cruel!

They are important decomposers. When *Man* leaves his rubbish polluting the Earth, the water, and the air of his wife's kitchen, the Fungi helps him out a bit. They convert it to more useful stuff, and essentially clean it up. How does Man repay them? By criticizing their appearance ("Gee, I guess my girlfriend's Christmas present doesn't look that good on me after all," cries the fungus, his sporangium stuck against his hyphae in distress) and destroying them.