Taking a Closer Look at the World Around

 

My son Wyatt and I began our walk at about 11:00 am Saturday morning and the weather was pleasant. It was quite crowded and I was kind of skeptical if we would see any wildlife at all with all the human activity. Quickly after we began our hike we got hot and I started to think that perhaps we should have went earlier or later in the day to take advantage of cooler tempters. A little more than half way up on the trail that is on the back side of the mountain (the side facing away from the city), there was a park bench that over looked Jurupa Hills and the Santa Ana River. Here Wyatt and I sat and enjoyed our cool water. I also began explaining to him what it was we were doing here today and that first of all we should make a list of abiotic components of this ecosystem. I explained how abiotic things are things that aren't living and never where living. So with his help I created the following list; mountain, rocks, dirt, air, clouds, water (scant amounts in the riverbed below), power lines, sign, trash bin, and the sun that was blessing us with a warm day.

The second task was to create a list of all the biotic things. After I gave I gave Wyatt the appropriate explanation on how biotic components of an ecosystem are all the living things plant and animal. This was a little more difficult because in the first moments of observation the only animals that where apparent where humans and dogs. So our list at first was of the plant life; which was most made up of some sort of sage brush, wildflowers, weeds and cactus. There was also some species of pine trees and a cypress trees.

Then Wyatt noticed the bees and other insects that where enjoying the wild flowers. I also noticed in the distance there were a couple of hawks (I think), that were patrolling the field down near the river. After that Wyatt left the bench to explore some boulders nearby and he found this nice size lizard that was sunning himself on a rock. Shortly after that we encountered two other lizards that where in that act of .....well matting; however, I disturbed them when I was attempting to take a picture. The last thing we saw was birds eating out of a nearby trash can. This was a good example of how our human interactions are also a part of this ecosystem.

I have been here other times and have seen many jack rabbits and ground squirrels, but not on this day. Over all it was a pleasant hike(especially the part were we walk down the hill). I had hoped to observe more wildlife, but I needed to go some place more secluded.  

Environmental Science in the News

I came across an article in National Geographic today. It was entitled Killing Wildlife: The Pros and Cons of Culling Animals, written by Will James published March 5, 2014. Here’s the link. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/03/140305-culling-badgers-deer-bison-swans-ethics-conservation/?rptregcta=reg_free_np#. This article calls in to question the practice and ethics of culling animals. Just to be sure everyone understands what culling is I’m going to give a brief definition from the Merriam-Webster website. To cull is to reduce or control the size of (as a herd) by removal (as by hunting) of especially weaker animals; also:  to hunt or kill (animals) as a means of population control. In this article they are specifically talking about the culling of endangered animals such as bison in Montana, and swans, geese, and deer (whitetail) in New York.

 The practice of culling has long been used in farming to eliminate genetically inferior members of the herd to insure that only genetically superior specimens would pass on their genes to the next generation. In fact some people, like Mary Pearl, a conservationist with the City University of New York who formerly served as president of the Wildlife Trust, a nonprofit organization now called EcoHealth Alliance, would argue that culling has always gone. She asserts,

“I would say nature has been a culler, in the past, of wildlife species. It still is. If an animal becomes superabundant in a limited habitat, they're going to have either a die-off from starvation or some pathogen that will take advantage of their vulnerabilities. Then there's hunting by predators, including humans.”

In short, conservationist who are in favor of culling believe it is much more humane for a species to be culled than to be left to strangle its self through overpopulation; which will lead to starvation and dehydration for the whole herd.

There are groups that believe that it is unethical for people who call themselves “conservationist” to be killing animals for any reason. Some of these same groups also question whether the slaughter is carried out in a humane way.

My personal feeling on the whole thing, and Ms. Pearl of EcoHealth agrees, is that culling is a good thing. In fact, the fact that we are talking about culling herds of bison and whitetail (both species were near extinction), is proof that modern conservation techniques are working.  Not only are the herds larger, stronger and more vibrant but, bio-diversity of all ecosystems involved is growing. When certain species are not allowed to overpopulate it then clears the way for other species to thrive in the same ecosystem. In turn we have a larger variety of animal spices. As far as the question of the way that he slaughter is carried out; I can’t imagine anything more awful than dying of starvation and dehydration.

I trust National Geographic as an information source more than just about anything that puts out news of any kind. That being said I look at all news sources with a degree of skepticism (as we all should). I was not able to find a mission statement but, found this blerp on the about section of the National Geographic website.  

“The National Geographic Society has been inspiring people to care about the planet since 1888. It is one of the largest nonprofit scientific and educational institutions in the world. Its interests include geography, archaeology and natural science, and the promotion of environmental and historical conservation.”

That is almost 125 years of being a well-respected source for all things environmental. The article seemed well researched and the use of a well-respected authority in Mary Pearl defiantly lends credibility to the article.