Anna, biology very often (almost always) debunks the idea that one species can become so overabundant that human intervention is needed to save the ecosystem. (which includes other species.)
It's the kind of thing you hear over and over to support deer hunting or geese culls, and it never makes sense. Killing off enough deer to "get the population in check" means there are more resources for the deer that are left. Deer fertility is regulated, to a large degree, by the amount of available resources. More resources means more likelihood of twins and triplets being born, so you have not only a population rebound, it rebounds beyond the original "problem" numbers.
That's just one example. And there's almost always an agenda behind why the powers that be are deciding that a given population is a "problem."
Humans love to decide that the animals are doing it all wrong, but we break things when we try to fix them. Ecosystems keep themselves in check. Populations naturally follow cycles, dependent on resource availability. Introduced (i.e., non-native, aka invasive) species disrupt the established equilibrium, and that's not ideal, but it also can't be "fixed", and a new equilibrium will eventually be reached. Ecosystems are not static. Even if humans weren't mucking around with them, they'd be changing all the time.
I guess that was my long way of saying that I think no action at all should be taken. (Other than to remove human influence as much as possible.)
"
The funny/tiring thing is that the movement organizations tend to only give attention to the animals who are popular or on these special lists as well. The wolves are a great example. And I've been trying to rally the troops about the mountain lions at Kofa for coming on three years now, and aside from a small handful of close friends and maybe one or two other people who will write in to support the lions, it's a bit like biking through a foot of mud.
And the language in the kill-the-lions proposals that the Kofa NWR puts out include the fact that the sheep are special and the lions are not. I mean, they come right out and say that. (Not that the "historically significant" bighorn sheep population is safe from human hunters either; they only want to keep the sheep population safe from the lions FOR the hunters.)
I guess I expect it, to some degree, from the general public, because that is how so much of dialog in society is shaped (whether we're talking about humans or non-humans), but you'd think at least the animal rights movement would get it.
And maybe it is these organizations that are part of the problem in the percetions of society as a whole. If even the AR organizations are only going to mobilize for the "special" animals, well, as you said, "we're pretty well stating that it's OK to kill animals in general, as long as they're not special animals."
Great post Kelly!
I was shocked when I adopted my cat - she was only about 4 months old, and the shelter worker made sure I was aware of her kinked tail (birth defect, apparently). I remember feeling dread, thinking that the kinked tail was a sign of some fatal disease (why else would she bring it up, right?), but it turns out that she just wanted to make sure I knew, so I wouldn't be bringing tempest back for being "defective". (Which had already happened to her once.) It floored me.
Thanks so much for writing this article.
Thanks for the nice comments everyone. Always a pleasure to share a little piece of the magic of Poplar Spring with others!
And I didn't mention the souce in the post, but with regards to chicken cognition being equivalent to primates, that info came from "The Development of Brain and Behavior in the Chicken", which I learned from Karen Davis of UPC. In case anyone was interested! :)
Really good points. It is probably even more pronounced with fish and other sea animals - I don't think anyone ever questioned whether birds feel pain, but I'm pretty sure the new "research" and "proof" that fish feel pain as well did shock people.
Very good point that it was great that this guy was at the sanctuary, whatever the reason! And they came back later with their 3 preteen girls too.
"To me, it seems like approaching any animal with an open mind ensures that you will learn something new about yourself in the process."
Very true!
I had no idea Keith was the co-founder of FNB! No wonder the woman tabling for him when I stopped by another time was so amused when I mentioned my conversation with "that guy who was tabling before", not even remembering his name. I'm oblivious sometimes. You are so right about him exuding goodness. Now I'm bummed that I left before the Sunday plenary, I'd have loved to hear his talk, but hopefully I'll get myself down to help out with some bread baking one of these weekends.
Wow, Stephanie, this was beautiful. I fall into that trap too often as well...and you know, that's when I find myself feeling angry also. I hadn't put it concretely into words like this, but I knew, from personal observation of how others reacted to me, that what I had to say was best received when I wasn't coming from a defensive position.
That goes for more than animal rights, now that I think of it, but I'm definitely going to have this in mind from now on.
Thanks so much for posting this. Very valuable.
I knew that story reminded me of something: American Psycho.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/
|
5 Actions
|