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.