To Be or Not to Be: Introduced Species

I received a comment on my home page that prompted me to produce some thoughts on introduced species more thoroughly. Of course, I could dedicate many posts for this topic, analyzing each situation individually, but this summary will do for now.

Don't be fooled by this bird's innocent "walking the fence" look. He's picked sides. Yes, he's all for destroying agriculture and isn't ashamed of it.

First of all, there is a difference between and an "introduced" species and an "invasive" one. While nearly all invasives are introduced, not all introduced species are invasives. Take, for example, the starling. The starling is a little old-world bird that somehow made its way to North America as some European immigrant's idea of "a touch of home." So it is certainly an introduced species. But is it harmful, unwanted, that is, invasive? With astoundingly aggressive reproductive habits and a love for the farmer's crop, there is certainly a case to be made for that position. However, the starling has become largely stable in its new environment and, as far as I know, has not caused the extinction of any other animals (though it has contributed to the endangerment of a few warbler species--though habitat destruction is probably the primary concern for those species). So from an ecologists perspective, the starling is not particularly invasive.

The American kestrel might be the hero in the battle
against starlings.

However, a farmer will tell you quite a different story. The starling moves in massive flocks during migration and they often make purposeful stops at farmer Brown's fields. In a day, the giant flock can consume nearly everything the farm had to offer the world. So from an economical perspective, the starling is a terror. Though I may have exaggerated.
So, the question is, when do we act to remove a species and when should we simply allow things to follow a course unaltered by human intervention. Even if you don't believe that it is our God-given responsibility to care for creation, the moral obligation to do so in the case of introduced species is not diminished. It was people who introduced them in the first place (though not always purposefully) so they are clearly the peoples responsibility.
When it comes down to it, every situation must be taken on an individual basis. In the case of the starlings, they are, in every practical sense, here to stay. There is no eradicating them. So, I would say, just let them alone. However, that kind of thinking does not remove the economic problem. The reality is, the starlings cannot be removed entirely. Thus, some method of coexistence must be reached for both starlings and farmer's crops. Many solutions have been thought up to deal with this problem (nets, guns, pranks, etc.) but none are the cure-all (starlings are too smart). Perhaps the best suggestion is natural predators. As it turns out, the American kestrel, like its European relation, loves the taste of starling McNuggets. Unfortunately, because of pesticides and destruction of suitable habitat, the kestrel doesn't frequent farms. If more could be done to favour those birds, the starlings wouldn't do so well.

Many state parks put up educational signs informing the
public of the invasive species in the area to prevent spread.
This one is at Big Lagoon State Park in Florida where
exotics (tropical invasives) are a problem.

Then there is the question of killing. If you can be confident that a harmful animal will be exterminated, then go ahead and exterminate. Problems over.
However, sometimes, as in the case of the starling, you could shoot hundreds of the birds and there would still be thousands waiting to eat your crops. So, is life really worth so little that you would take it without any long-term solution? This, of course, is debatable. Killing some starlings can frighten many others away and might just be the ticket to saving your crop that year. I think in such a case it is okay to shoot some of the birds, though such a position is up for debate. Now, if it were a native bird devouring the crops, I would say killing should be out of the question. But, since it is an introduced species, we placed it there in the first place, so I suppose we can take it out. But this really is a difficult thing to give a definite answer for.
In the end, don't forget that you are responsible for the state of creation. Every human is. We have a soul and the ability to act outside of our natural bounds. So don't take invasive species lightly. Be sure to enjoy nature (don't let a starling in picture stress you out) and even enjoy the introduced species, but act when things get out of hand. Sometimes, when a very invasive species cannot be exterminated, keeping it at bay is the next best thing. If anyone has any questions about a particular introduced species just let me know. I'd be glad to answer any questions and let you know of some possible course of action for that particular species.

May 9, 2013

Columbia River Gorge, Day 1:

I find wildflowers, especially poppies, irresistible for my lens. These were in a field outside of Fort Vancouver.

Amazing how styles and preferences, even manners, change over time. Just look at the bright colours inside the room photographed below.

The interiors of these buildings
would look out of place anywhere
but a historic site. In the above
photo a beautiful wood-carved
stairway decorates the building of a
particularilly notable soldier for
which the Marshal Plan is named.

Old wood stoves used for baking.

These starlings where seen jammed
into all the nooks and crannies of the
watchtower.

The canon seems to be aimed at one of
the fort's own buildings.

It's nice to be back in the northwest. For the most part, today was a day of tourism as we visited various historic sites. Our first stop was fort Vancouver. As I stood within the large wooden walls of the fort and observed the displays that illustrated the different artifacts that could be dug up from the different eras of this region, from early emigrant artifacts of those natives who crossed over the Bearing Strait during the Ice Age to the discarded brochures lying on the modern surface. My mind turned from civilization to the starling on the wall, singing gleefully, and I thought back to those days when mammoths roamed the hills below the local glacial wall. Now the introduced and rather invasive starling is the predominant animal. I can't say I mind them, though. They have almost become a part of suburban culture and I don't mind them at all as long as they stay suburban.

The above two photos are of the
watchtowers.

We viewed some of the buildings used for military housing on the local street and then explored the fort itself with its canons and watchtowers. Despite these preparations, the fort never saw battle historically. The blacksmith told us that the place was primarily a pivotal place for the fur trade (that greedy and wasteful business that seems to have gotten North America its start). That doesn't mean it wasn't a harsh world though, as the re-enactor informed us. Every kid in the town carried a long knife and an ax with him and he was often sent alone into the forest for foraging or hunting. Those tools would come in handy if he wound up spending the night away from home in indian country.

Most food, thankfully, was harvested at the fort's European-style gardens. This too had been recreated by the volunteers at the fort and they grew various fruit, herbs, and spices. It was this practice of early colonizers that resulted in so many introduced species present in North America today. Like starlings.

There were also some native birds at the fort, including a lively sparrow near the fields of wildflowers. At first he sang, but as I crept closer for a photograph, he flitted away to a farther fence post. Still made a decent picture though (check it out on the left).

The photo on the left is of my brother demonstrating an intelligent tourist practice.

On our way to the next site, we stopped at a glorious view of the gorge. Swallows and swifts darted round the cliff below us and turkey vultures soared overhead. Someone jokingly stated that somebody must have fallen off the cliff and that is why the vultures are circling. Well, after noting how precariously some of our members stumbled around the meridians and teetered on the cliffs edge, I wonder if that saying isn't at least a little likely. Just kidding. The vultures just enjoy the updrafts from the valley below.

It's a stunning view from Beacon Rock.

One cannot have too many
wildflower photos. Even these
unobtrusive yellow ones are
delicately pretty. 

We arrived at Beacon Rock, there was a little confusion as to where the trail to the top was. We trekked out on the wrong trail for a minute before realizing that the one we really wanted was just around a bend in the rode. It proved to be an exciting hike with a good view. A great way to get used to being with the family again after a long winter. The rock itself is 848 feet above the Columbia River; a bit of a climb for the less-fit members of the family. Besides the view, a few animals were seen, including a clever Stellar's jay who was obviously used to free handouts from hikers. Some say that the blue jay is more beautiful, but I don't think so. The Stellar's jay just has that "northwest" feel

The way up was a switch-back trail that climbed up the river-facing slope of the basalt cliff. Anyone who considered stepping over the railing was in for a surprise; 800 feet of sheer drop into the forest below. At one bend in the boardwalk, I found something on a ledge. "I caught a snake!" I called, and heads spun to see. It was just a little plastic cobra toy, though.
Tomorrow, we head to Catherine Creek and there we hope to find some real snakes. Stay tuned! (anyone?)
It's so nice to be back with my family in a place I can truly call home. As nice as Florida has been for the winter, nothing beats the colourful biodiversity of the northwest.
I am looking forward to see what tomorrow brings.