Tuesday, February 25, 2014

If extinction is a natural event should we try to save endangered species?

The reasons for saving endangered species might seem obvious to many people, but many question why we should save a species from dying out.  When we save a species, we do in fact do harm in some ways. For example, recently in California, the courts ordered the state to pump less water out of the Sacramento delta because of the endangered delta smelt. Less available water of course harms society in some ways. There is less water to make our lawns green, and less available water for private swimming pools. There may also be less water to keep the golf courses green. Less water available to farmers may also mean higher prices for produce and economic hardship for some individual farmers, who may even go into bankruptcy if the cutback is severe enough. Nevertheless, droughts, crop failures and bankruptcies are all part of life. We simply cannot completely eliminate them. Even if we pump the delta dry, we may not be able to solve these problems.

Extinction, is final. Once an organism becomes extinct, it is gone forever. It may hold some biological secret that may benefit humans but we may never find out if it is gone. Therefore, it would be prudent to cut back on our destruction of the environment and try to reduce our wasteful ways. After all, if we pump too much delta water, salt water will intrude, and in future years, the water will be saltier. Salt water also ruins precious farmland. Therefore, by saving the delta smelt, we may in fact save our future water supply and farms from salt water intrusion. So, why should we just destroy our own environment and in the process endangering not only wildlife, but our own economic future at the same time?

No comments:

Post a Comment