Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

LazyG OP t1_iuwnxc1 wrote

Reply to comment by Tapprunner in New estimate of global number of rangers at 286,000: 'the global ranger workforce is outnumbered by employees working at golf courses and country clubs in the United States (380,000) and by employees in the UK hair and beauty industry (288,000)'. Nature Sustainability. by LazyG

I think you are taking a limited view of rangers and protected areas. This is globally, and outside of the first world ranger means less park tourism guide than practical worker to secure global biodiversity and prevent species loss.

If you read the paper linked it indicates that we are globally and serially understaffing protected area management which is a big deal. Apart from maybe losing iconic big and famous species, protected areas also offer incredibly valuable ecosystem services which contribute to e.g. us having clean water and sufficient oxygen.

5

Tapprunner t1_iux5wbk wrote

That's why I said we do need more rangers.

I just meant that I'm not sure what the point is of comparing two radically different industries that fill totally different needs, have totally different models, and function radically different in different societies.

I'm not at all saying that there aren't good reasons for dramatically increasing the number of rangers. We should do that.

3

Rocketgirl8097 t1_iuzrz3y wrote

Well golf courses and hair salons can be seen as unnecessary whereas land management definitely is necessary. I think thats the point.

3