One of the lasting questions that Elizabeth Kolbert’s book The Sixth Extinction left me with was
this: Was the evolutionary tree marked to be significantly pruned with the
evolution of the large brained (shortsighted) human primates some 200,000 years ago? As I read Quammen’s The Song of the Dodo that is the subject I most ponder. Humans traveling the world in energy
efficient wind-powered boats were doing what they could to ensure they would
survive by inserting themselves into the food webs of the places they
traveled. Food must have dominated
their thoughts, traveling across the world with limited provisions, with the
prospect of potentially getting stranded out at sea by lack of wind or some
other calamity. Many of these food webs
lacked large mammalian predators, so were painfully vulnerable to the odd
sailor with a club and a growling stomach.
Their actions were largely out of ignorance of biogeography and endemism
of island species. And who could blame a
hungry person for feeding her or himself? Certainly, they had no idea of the
evolutionary tree or that they were in fact changing evolutionary history by
their actions.
As news was reported of the extinction of the northern white
rhino this spring, I could feel it in my gut, despite realizing these slow-reproducing,
large mammals with small populations were likely doomed in a world with humans,
just as the mammoths and mastodons may have been when human population was
small, but effective. Just as the
species of so many of the islands containing rare endemics are ill fated in a
world of humans. Death and destruction—“Rarity
unto Death” as Quammen puts it. Moreover,
we know that the coming months and years will bring similar stories with many
species facing the low population sizes and low genetic diversity, which precede
extinction.
The 21st century is a test of the human brain’s aptitude
to show some foresight. Five-hundred
years ago, (or even 100-150 years ago, really), we didn’t have the knowledge base
to fully understand patterns of diversity and extinction, and the extent of the
role we were playing or could play. The
knowledge base has changed, but will our actions? Given the actions we’ve seen so many of our
politicians take in the presence of abundant data, I wouldn’t bet on it; they
so often *choose* ignorance (and they are not alone, since they are serving as
the will of the voters). How can any
species willingly choose ignorance? We
have more data than we’ve ever had—enough information to know at least
generally what actions to take. But what will we do? Is it the nature of humans, like other
animals, to serve only the needs of the here and now, or do we have a greater
capacity?
No comments:
Post a Comment