Pollution Engineering Magazine
  Resources
  Archives
  Digital Edition Archives
  Buyers Guide
  Classified Ads
  White Papers
  Industry Links
  Market Research
  Career Center
  Resource Guide
  Current Issue
  Cover Story
  Features
  Columns
  Industry News
  PE Info
  Contact Us
  Media Kit
  About
  Online
  PE Coffeehaus
  PE Partner Blogs
  eNewsletters
  Calendar
  ePE-TV
  Webinars
  Podcast
  PE Learning Center
Search in: EditorialProductsCompanies
When is Nature Natural?
by Roy Bigham
March 10, 2010

ARTICLE TOOLS
EmailEmailPrintPrintReprintsReprintsshareShare



Wildlife officials are tracking and euthanizing sea lions that they believe eat too many fish.

Officials in Oregon believe they have tried everything to stop sea lions from eating too many endangered salmon. They have run interferences, dropped explosives, shot rubber bullets and more in an effort to deter the swift swimming sea lion from its ferocious focus to find fish for food or at least be selective in what it eats.

Officials are currently following 63 sea lions that have been observed eating Chinook salmon and are not responding to government hazing methods. Last year, it was decided that euthanasia would be the next step for these rowdy beasts and 11 animals were put down. Four more were sent to zoos.

Sea lions were placed on the endangered or protected list in 1972. However, states are allowed an exemption.

Meanwhile, it is reported that Columbia River fisheries managers are predicting that the 2010 spring salmon run will be the largest since 1938. They said ocean conditions have been great and they expect 470,000 fish to make the spawning run compared to 169,300 last year.

So, as I understand these reports, we have two species that are on the endangered list. That means they are in danger of extinction and we humans want to stop that from happening. Currently, there are so many of each of these species that they are following their natural life cycles by running up rivers in record numbers while running a gauntlet of natural predators that have been hunting for thousands of years. Meanwhile, we will spend money and resources to track these species and try to tell them what to eat, how many and when or else we will kill them.

Seems to me that nature should be allowed to do what is natural whenever it can.


Roy Bigham
roy@pollutionengineering.com
Roy D. Bigham has been the editor of Pollution Engineering since 2002. Bigham attended Eastern Michigan University where he majored in chemistry and computer science with an associates degree in mathematics. He has worked as a laboratory technician at a research laboratory, managed an electroplating operation and an associated analytical laboratory. He spent three years overseeing environmental operations of five domestic and five overseas operations for a major manufacturer in the Detroit area. He then managed a field services department for an environmental analytical laboratory before moving on to a position as an environmental engineer for a construction aggregates company.

Bigham won a design award for a waste water treatment system for a landfill in the Detroit area from the State Chamber of Commerce. He has been active in the environmental field since 1980.


|PrintEmail
  Comments (1)Post a Comment
Title: Nature versus Nurture


Since when did humankind start deciding that "nature" can have its way?

Okay, I know the answer to that: it was the Age of the Enlightenment, actually. But we've had a few good ideas since then, too, and one of them has to be scrapping this idea of the ultimate benevolence of "nature." If a river wants to overrun a town, do we move the town, or put up dikes?

Nature is something that we can attempt to find harmony with, to reach some sort of balance with. In fact, the first "American value" (pre-dating Jefferson by several millenia) was respect for nature and our place in it.

However, if you follow the course of human evolution, long before we had the brainpower to be cognizant of this fact, the mark of humanity has been our ability to shape the environment to fit our own needs. If you look at a map of the disappearance of large predators on this planet, it's the same map as that of human expansion. Sabre-toothed Tigers didn't just disappear because it was nature's will -- our forefathers slaughtered the competition so we could have the meat source to ourselves.

Much more recently, we culled the wolf populations of the Great Lakes Region because they were dangerous to human inhabitants. Because of it, states like Michigan now have no other way to control their deer population (who didn't stop reproducing at former replacement rates just because their primary predator disappeared) other than to let hunters do it for sport.

Likewise, our fishing industry, whose job, I remind you, is to provide food for people, needs to get rid of some competition, since we can't both share the same resource. We moved off other predators to increase our fish stocks, and sea lions moved into some of the hole we created.

If this was fishermen fighting off an endangered species for the last tuna, well, that would be one thing. But an organized effort to maintain balance is just being, well, human.


 

No HTML or BBCode in comments please.
 


Did you enjoy this article? Click here to subscribe to the magazine.











BNP Media
© 2010 BNP Media. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy