"To have risked so much in our efforts to mold nature to our satisfaction and yet to have failed in achieving our goal would indeed be the final irony." (p. 245) is how Carson opens Chapter 15. Of course she is absolutely true. In the fifty years since the book's publication we have yet to eradicate any one species of insects. Our advances have come in control and learning how to live with the pests.
In this chapter she focuses on the dynamics of the ecosystem and the need to study how one species helps to control another in dynamic food webs. In the attempt to eliminate one particular pest we managed to remove many other species that were necessary for its natural control. If you kill the predator but not the prey, the prey will quickly grow out of control. Clearly the most important aspect of trying to control certain insects is first understanding its biology and its role in the ecosystem.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Carson quotes one expert who says that once we set our foot on the chemical treadmill, we cannot stop, because the ensuing imbalance has to keep being addressed. But disease follows in the wake of the poisons, as for example, when pesticides kill fish. Snails eat the contaminated carcasses and increase in number. They are hosts to dangerous blood flukes that go into the water and cause human and animal disease. Carson laments that most entomologists are not now looking into natural controls but researching insecticides because chemical companies are funding universities. To balance this picture she gives the example of Dr. Pickett of Nova Scotia who spent his life researching natural insect controls for apple orchards with great success.
Carson's argument in chapter 15 really resonated with me and left a lasting impression. I think that humans don't necessarily look at the big picture, and while trying to eliminate one insect, they overlook the bigger harm it will do to the ecosystem. Humans are just a small speck in earths relatively large ecosystem, yet we use a majority of it's resources. the best solution would be to learn to live with these pests which would limit the release of chemicals and toxins into the air and keep earths ecosystem in check.
In Chapter 15, Carson is very right with her opening statement of risking so much to create this perfect world we want but we've failed on many levels. But as Carson says on page 248, for us such an extreme situation is only theoretical but the results are well exemplified in the population of animals. The problem is that we are aware of the many factors that could go wrong yet we don't address them as much as they should be when first coming up with solutions. When humans try to resolve situations we really need to get better at coming up with negative effects as well as the positives and go from there. Once one thins goes wrong, you know most likely many are to follow, that's the cycle of life.
It's like the butterfly effect and any other theory of if you disturb one link in the chain, it affects the rest of the insects/animals in the food chain. One species loses a food source, and another overpopulates to the point where as Carson talks about,and then the needs for pesticides arises. It's one vicious cycle, which is why I think scientists have struggled for so long on how to fix the issue of insects and what role they play in food chains because there's no real answer, at least as it appears with research now. There's pros and cons to each living species. They each play a role. As much as spiders terrify human beings, they eat mosquitoes and other bugs like flies. They're necessary, more than we begin to understand sometimes. It's like imagine if we eliminated all the mosquitoes and spiders begun to reproduce and they were just everywhere. It would be highly more frustrating and it would disrupt the flow of nature and ecosystems as they exist today.
Throughout chapter 15, Carson explains about the domino effect species have on one another. Without certain species in the world, other species would die off and it would change the food chain. Eliminating one species completely, will alter every species that feeds off it or they feed off. With said species gone, their predators will need to find a new animal or plant to eat in place of it. All the prey of this species will now have other animals after it instead.
Carson makes a good point that people don't take into account the complex structures of their targeted insects. They underestimate an insect’s power to adapt to changes in their environment, therefore causing the pests to adapt to the chemicals and reproduce making their offspring more tolerant. Also, by killing off the predators, naturally there will be an increase of their prey. With an increase of their prey, new problems will evolve. We seem to keep trying out new chemicals and new products to rid of the pesky insects, only to find that the unbalance we are causing is only upsetting natures control process, and self-regulating system.
Carson is still talking about how pesticides are bad. We are not looking at the big picture, we try to destroy an insect species and it never destroys it. It destroys some insect of the species but the strong insects survive and reproduce. By destroying the insects it will kill off the animals that eat them. There for it will kill off the species that eat the predators of the insects. Then possibly in hundreds of years there will be no bobcats, mice, and snakes, just animals that live off the insects. The industry of pesticides are destroying the world.
Just like in my previous journals, I feel that humans almost have a set of blinders on. We cannot or refuse to look at everything around us, only the single thing we are focused on. We struggle with stepping back and looking at the big picture. We want to solve a problem right away, and want that quick fix, but in result we effect something else and then focus on fixing that. It is a never ending cycle. We need to stop and take off these blinders to see what is really happening. If we want a more permanent fix we need to slow down and stop just throwing chemicals at our problems.
Just like in my previous journals, I feel that humans almost have a set of blinders on. We cannot or refuse to look at everything around us, only the single thing we are focused on. We struggle with stepping back and looking at the big picture. We want to solve a problem right away, and want that quick fix, but in result we effect something else and then focus on fixing that. It is a never ending cycle. We need to stop and take off these blinders to see what is really happening. If we want a more permanent fix we need to slow down and stop just throwing chemicals at our problems.
It’s all about finding a balance. In the short film we watched in class, the people of Boston created a deer-hunting event to limit the amount of deer in each specific area and keep their population under control. This was intended to help, and indeed it did, but as we saw they didn’t continue hunting every year when it wasn’t necessary; they kept the event as an option when it was needed. Unlike in this scenario, it is becoming more and more common that things get out of hand and we don’t stop when we need to. Yes, it is up to decide when it’s appropriate to step in and change the course of nature, but sometimes our actions will unintentionally cause a huge imbalance later on. Since people often don’t take into account the big picture or the entirety of what they’re doing, they end up acting cruel towards nature. Insects are complex creatures capable of rapidly evolving through natural selection, and if that comes as a surprise then obviously some important factors weren’t fully being acknowledged beforehand.
If people would just study nature and truly put in the time and proper research in advance, we would all be better off. In most cases they would find that because nature is self-regulating, it is extremely able to keep itself in check and that we should trust it to take care of our surroundings. However, this can be frustrating since it takes lots of time and patience, and unfortunately, people tend to think that we need to fix everything NOW and make it all perfect. People need to realize that nature is going to be constantly making adjustments, and sometimes the balance will be a little off – that doesn’t mean that we need to be upsetting it even more. The best we can do is provide help/support when it is needed, and seize the opportunities to correct our ways when we can.
In chapter 15, Carson focuses on the domino effect with species. If you kill the predator but not the prey, the prey will quickly grow out of control. And if we got rid of some of these preys, then the predators would be affected greatly. In both of these scenerios, nothing good can come about. Once again, Carson points out that humans don't see the bigger picture that can come from any of this. New problems will arise if we get rid of predators and vice versa. The fact that she touched upon the domino effect educated humans in the hope that we can find other ways to control species.
I think this chapter relates to the common theme that as a population, we don't think about the long term effects on our short term problems. As a population, we see a problem and jump on finding a solution no questions asked. But with everything in nature and most things in life, one action has multiple effects on the world around us. Unfortunately, taking action without thinking of the consequences tends to have a worse outcome than letting nature take its course
Post a Comment