Translate

Friday, March 14, 2014

Conservation for Utilization

My environmental economics class has made me ponder more of my values in the past two weeks than any class has in a long time. I really enjoy it because it forces me to prove to myself that what I am doing is right and worth while. The issue in class today was over fishing in fisheries and the underlying principle of conservation for utilization.

My economics teacher takes a stance that while not necessarily in opposition to mine, is decidedly different. She thinks that nature should be conserved for purposes of utilization, and that we should exploit those resources sustainably and with maximum efficiency. In support of this she showed us logistic growth functions and ways to calculate sustainable harvest and the concepts of harvest per unit of effort and how that effects the total cost and total revenue for these resources (specifically fisheries).

I believe that as much nature as possible should be preserved and conserved because we have already lost so much of it that the little bits and pieces we have left are treasures to be carefully handled and protected. Now I by no means think that this is a viable way of dealing with environmental conservation but I feel that you must have strong convictions one way or another to be able to pull support to your side in a compromise.

What made this so difficult to wrap my mind around was that I realize that her stance makes sense. Her position and evidence provide a completely secure way of proving to people that conservation matters and can provide them with some material benefit. I know that this is the case that I am going to have to use later in life to convince businessmen and companies to invest in clean energy solutions, to invest in restoration projects, or even not building a factory in a certain location. But something about only preserving our world for future use takes all the magic out of it.

We shouldn't be protecting our ocean's fishes so we can farm them in the future, we should be protecting them because they are beautiful and elegant creatures that have been exploited to collapse by humans. The ecosystems around us are so beautifully complex that we have not even begun to fully understand them. What right do we humans have to break these systems down into resources for our own use. We are the most intelligent, technologically advanced species in existence to our knowledge. With that awesome power comes awesome responsibility. We should grind down the ecosystems but rather be custodians of them. Help them grow and mature and hopefully grow and mature with them.

What I see when I am in the wilderness is the soul of this planet, our tiny biosphere amongst the vastness of space. This ship has birthed, grown, and sustained life that has finally gained the ability to contemplate itself and its place in this universe. There is something there that is bigger than us.

That is why we should halt over fishing. Not because the maximum sustainable yield is greatest at a certain effort level which reduces cost, but because it is the right thing to do. But who am I kidding, businesses never got to where they are by doing the right thing. Time to go back to money grubbing.

On a happier note, tomorrow my flatmates and I are going on a day trip up the coast to see a few cool sites and some beaches so there should be a good update on Sunday, so stay tuned!

2 comments:

  1. Sam, love the blog and I am very proud of you, as are your mom and dad.

    My husband asked me to post the following comment to you:
    Promoted by your professor is a self-destructive theory. The example you cited regarding fisheries vs fish caught in the wild is a good illustration of your point. Pacific wild salmon (prior to the Fukishima disaster) was a very healthy food product. Farmed salmon is considered, by most nutritionists, an unhealthy food product. Economists attempt to separate capitalism from humanity, as your blog post points out. If we prioritize human needs over corporate greed everyone's needs can be met - including the capitalists.

    I applaud your view, Sam. I do believe we should do things for the right reasons, not for the economic soundness necessarily. You would like to know that on our home in Arizona, 40 solar panels will soon be providing our electricity. Keep thinking, Sam; I can hardly wait to see all of the great things you will do.

    Thank you for sharing, Donna Lock

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm happy to hear about the solar panels! I wish more people would take advantage of that abundant, free resource! The only problem with these ideas is implementing them against the money of the corporations. Just got to keep on fighting!

      Delete