The Future of a Destructive Species
Nature is often characterized as a delicate balance of plant and animal, predator and prey, land and waterway, forest and plain. While our world is probably more accurately viewed as an evolving environment, marked by constant change rather than balance, and certainly has periods of violent disruption (ice ages, etc.), for the most part, there are many long millennia between these disruptions during which Nature provides an environment of plenty for her creatures. The lion hunts the antelope, catching the slowest and weakest, and therefore culling the herd to make it stronger. The deer take what they need from the forest, leaving the forest intact to house the millions of other species which depend on its shelter. Even the lowly worm plays a part, consuming the very earth itself, and leaving behind nutrients that replenish the soil and make possible new life.
Of all of the species that have evolved on this planet, the mammals are among the most intelligent and most resourceful. While they enjoy many advantages over other species, they also have found their place in the great scheme of things, neither multiplying beyond the number their environment can support nor harming that environment in living out their lives and raising their families.
However, there is one mammal for whom this is not true. This species has developed an industriousness far beyond that of the others. Since its earliest history, this species of mammal has disrupted its environment and displaced other species, often wiping them out completely wherever it has made its home. It has destroyed forests both for the timber to build its homes and as collateral damage resulting from the expanse of its communities. It has destroyed the nesting habitats of countless endangered species of birds, interrupted the course of deer runs vital to the health of the herd, displaced fox, wolf, and squirrel, and destroyed countless ecosystems without hesitation, merely to expand its never-ending quest to subdue Nature herself in its own selfish interests.
It is long past the time to try to bring this species under some control before it succeeds in disrupting the environment any further. Its relentless need to widen its own habitat at the expense of every other species it shares a given locale with must be curbed before the earth as we know it becomes barren forever.
While some would argue that education or behavior modification could be successful in changing the habits of this ambitious species, the problem is now too urgent to wait several decades for such remedies to have an effect. A direct intervention is needed to prevent catastrophic consequences to the environment, including further deforestation, pollution of the water, and destruction of countless more ecosystems. Only the force of law can justly protect what we have left of the world we were born into.
Despite the urgent need of legislation and the immediate need to change the behavior of this species, it should be remembered that this species also has a right to exist, as long as it does not have any effect on its environment. Therefore, this new legislation must consist of just laws that will promote both the long-term sustainability of the environment and the long-term health of this species within it. Unlike so many failed efforts in the past, these laws should not amount to volumes of minute regulations that are difficult to enforce and impossible to fully understand. These new laws must represent a new way for this species to think about itself and its part in the world, and must be written so that obeying them is the only logical conclusion that a species not bent on suicide can come to. We must finally have laws written in words that this species can understand and accept.
We will need someone that can translate English into beaver.
- Tom Mullen's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 244 reads
Too cute, Tom. :)
I have to say, though... every species in this world (but one) works towards balance and harmony, and strives to make this world a better place for their young and future generations. We, as human beings, are the only species that do not. We don't work with nature, we work against it. Just a little truth behind the joke. :)
-Miss Green
"Fear not the path of truth for the lack of people walking on it."
So glad to hear from you in what might be my last days, what with armed oklahomans possibly tracking me. :) I have to respectfully disagree and point out that the article's main point was that the beaver is just one example of a species that UPSETS the "balance of nature," and in no way works toward harmony, neither with the environment in general nor with the other species around it.
I further argue that the entire idea of nature being a "harmonious balance" is completely false. THe beaver is one example, the hallowed redwoods of California are another. The redwoods have not been in California for millions or even thousands of years, but are in reality a relatively new species that moved into the area and killed off several other species of plant that were there before it. Because of this and other characteristics, the redwoods actually qualify as weeds under the definition of "weed" a botanist would use.
I submit that the idea of nature having a delicate balance that is only upset by humans is a morbid farce. Nature is a quite violent place that is constantly evolving (violently evolving) through the competition of not only animals, but plants, and the random forces of nature that produce ice ages, warming and cooling trends, and all manner of changes over time. Humans, like every other species on earth, plant or animal, exists at the expense of some other species. Sometimes, the existence of humans causes the regional or wider extinction of other species, as the redwoods caused the extinction of countless species of plants within the sphere of their influence, and as the beaver causes the total extinction or displacement of every animal around its lodge when it builds a dam.
Man's great gift is Reason (itself a product of Nature and HER greatest acheivement as well), which during the few times when it has ruled over his lower, animal instincts, has been able to free him from the violent rule of nature - both his own animal instincts to kill, conquer, and plunder, and the violent caprices of Nature herself, who is neither harmonious, balanced, nor just.
Of course, you know I still hold YOU in the highest regard, even though Mr. Green and your brother may have just stopped to load their weapons. :)
I am interested in what you think about this perspective, seriously.
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
"Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear."
-Thomas Jefferson
The lion forcefully strikes down his prey and rips it into shreds. Does this sound harmonious and balanced? No way.
Do I see it as harmonious and balanced? You bet.
Cause when that lion dies and gets decomposed by maggots and fungi, the compost will help to feed the grass, which will help feed a lion's new prey.
There is a balance even in what seems unbalanced, such as the beaver. As for the redwoods- well, survival of the fittest, no? What happened to the original inhabitants when the redwoods took over? Did they in fact become extinct, and if so, could it have been for a reason? Did they move on and evolve? How does it fit into the bigger picture?
I can also look at this and ask, "Well, what is your definition of harmony or balance?"
Either way, when I talk about species in nature working together in harmony vs. the destructive nature of humans, I'm talking more about the process of how they solve problems. Let me take an excerpt from a speech of one of my favorites, Janine Benyus: (skip forward to 8:40 until 10:40)
I hope that will clear up what I mean when I say while nature is harmonious, and we are the only upset. I do not disagree that nature seems to be a violent, chaotic place, but there is more than what the eye can see. Look at this video here to see what I mean: (skip forward to 2:45)
My main guess is that it's just a matter of how we all see things a little bit differently. :) I very much respect your input though!
-Miss Green
"Fear not the path of truth for the lack of people walking on it."
I halfway got it the first time I read it
but now I all the way get it
I guess you could call in Bill Clinton if you need someone to hunt them down
I'd really love to take your Clinton metaphor and run with it, but self-control is getting the better of me (there's a first time for everything). LOL
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
"Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear."
-Thomas Jefferson
I didn't think you got it the first time around - or you didn't read the whole thing. In either case not like you. Is everything all right? I was a little worried. :)
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
"Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear."
-Thomas Jefferson
and I just about burst out laughing when I read that last sentence. It would have been awkward.
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams
I was about to go into attack mode until I saw the last sentence. Cute story. :)
I just got back from cottage country in Canada, and can bear witness to the devastation wrought by our most evil enemy, the beaver. Why the Canadian government continues to idealize this pernicious minority is beyond me. We cannot tolerate this any longer. We must put pressure on Canada to do something about this problem before it is too late. What next? Will the moose also be allowed to run amok? If we make an example of the beaver, I'm sure all the other mammals will take note and continue to toe the line. If not, who's to say which ones might not start to get uppity. Let's start with economic sanctions, limiting all US exports of branches and twigs to Canada.
for the population reduction button, then you just ended up suggesting laws.
oh well, same argument, different conclusion
If Nature is a self correcting mechanism, won't she just shake us off when we become too much of a nuisance?
I guess we have seen some shaking off recently. I think the focus of the environmental movement needs to be about saving the humans rather than saving the earth as the earth may just pass into another stage, be it a CO2 heavy stage or a nuclear stage, that gives rise to better suited life forms.
Of course the best way to save the humans is to kill the majority of them. This is a sick idea but I have previously stated that I'd be willing to consider it if I am in charge of the selection process.
Laws written in Beaver? I think the UN mandates that after 2011.