11/1/2017 0 Comments Monarch butterfliesThe environmental problems faced by citizens on planet earth are often 'out of anybody's sight'. That means, these problems do not directly affect a person or community. Instead, they make serious and permanent changes in ecosystems, which can be seen only over a long period. This results in a missing sense of 'urgency' when it comes to action on these issues. The impact of environmental damage is equally felt across different species and geographies. However, each species is a part of biological food chain and changes in its population would bring a change in population of other species as well.
Monarch butterflies is one such species that has seen a decline in its population, which is proven to be statistically significant, after observation for decades. Their annual migration to Mexico and return to USA during spring is a significant event for their survival. But, the scientists studying their natural life cycle found that there are barriers in this migration, clearly sprouted due to human activities. For example, the haphazard spraying of herbicides to kill wild plants in the name of 'weed', has destroyed 'milk weeds', which were an important source of food for these butterflies. On the other hand, there is increase in the temperature of mountains in Mexico, where the Monarchs reside during the fall. This change in temperature is almost certainly a result of global warming due to GHG emissions. It causes changes in their migration schedules, resulting in deaths of a large number of butterflies due to non-availability of natural conditions for their survival. The human activities are significantly causing changes in natural systems. Species dependent on these natural systems for their survival cannot adapt to these changes at the same pace as these changes are occurring. Their endangerment is a strong signal of excessive human intervention in the nature. According to some scientists, we are in the middle of the sixth biggest mass extinction on earth. We have already lost half of the world's species in last forty years. There are ways to deal with it legally as well as by collective action. For example, the 'Endangered species act' signed by President Nixon in 1973 prevents humans from harming animals in any form, one of which also includes 'habitat loss'. But proving this linkage of habitat loss with human activities and extending it additionally to 'frightened' species such as Monarch butterflies would be a lengthy process. Instead, the habitat loss for Monarch butterflies can be helped to some extent by planting milkweeds, necessary for their survival, by people in distributed areas. This is a good example of the motto, 'Think global, act local'. The problem under discussion is spread over a large area of land. It's impossible for a person to single-handedly solve this problem alone. Also, merely worrying about Monarch butterflies will not stop the loss of habitat for them. Instead, if one can start action in their own community, by identifying lands where milkweeds can be grown, also identifying the scope for reduction in the use of herbicides. It will start showing visible results and also encourage action from more number of people. Additionally, there are many other species such as Loggerhead sea turtle or Polar bear which are threatened to be wiped out from the face of earth. And the threat to their survival, even if denied by many, comes from human activities. Fitting this situation in the context of morality requires understanding the relationship between humans and nature. In a previous essay, it was concluded that caring for nature is a moral obligation due to the fact that nature itself has enabled human being's evolution, as well as development as the most powerful species on earth. It can be followed by an argument that other species too have the right to evolve and develop in their natural way without any threat by humans. In addition, if a species is becoming extinct because of a reason that is not related to human activities, concerned efforts by humans will be considered 'supererogatory' and are appreciated in moral context. This is the first point from this topic that can be tied to environmental ethics. Another point from this discussion is about comparing the cost and benefits of doing or not doing something about Monarch butterflies. To make this point clear, consider example of a farmer who is worried about infection of pests in his farm and will not have a second thought about spraying pesticides. However, overuse of those chemicals can harm ecosystem that nurtures migrating butterfly species. He would have to bear the burden of managing controlled spraying of pesticides so as not to affect habitats nearby his farms. But he is fulfilling his moral duties of saving the habitat destruction for 'frightened' species. This action on this farmer's part is obligatory in a society where environmental consideration of human activities is a collective responsibility. Building such a society is the need of today's time. The third point that logically comes across the discussion on Monarch butterflies is that of extending our understanding of ethics to other species on earth as well. The human beings, as proven by several experiments, have an inner sense of morality when it comes to their responsibilities with other humans. The same sense of 'moral responsibility' can be applied to species which may not be a part of our 'actions', but are greatly affected by the 'consequences' of our actions. Hence, inclusion of a wider circle of species on earth in our moral code is important.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorVivek loves nature. He feels one with it. He wants to share his story. ArchivesCategories |