We know about the deadly and painful effects from sonar on whales and dolphins. This is something we can easily remedy, but we don't do enough about it. From hemmorhages to misguided migration, these beautiful creatures are wrecks. And Alaskan Natives demand to have the right to go back to their ancient practice of hunting whales.

Just this week a report came out that in South Florida the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and National Park Service are artificially flooding tens of thousands of acres of prime residential and agricultural land next to the Everglades National Park to "provide a crucial habitat for the Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow." This action goes against nature, has forceably removed over 350 residents and thousands of other people, including scientists and students, and substitutes forced water management (which removes nutrients) from smart fire management (which produces new and healthy growth and has been the ancient and most effective way of handling the Everglades). Haven't we seen enough evidence of how we alter the ecosystem of the planet when we do such things?

I'm sure you heard about numerous lawsuits that prevented construction or removed people from their homes just to save some rodent. Why should the rodent be more important than a human? Certainly we can arrange something that's more harmonious, and that allows nature to handle its balance - and nature INCLUDES humans.

Then there is the U.S. government who has been hogging up national parks and other lands to prevent humans from being there. Just who is this helping? Soon there will be no pure land left except large cities in the U.S. and people will be so disconnected from the beauty of this planet, and the health that it provides for all life, that we will sadly perrish from misery and stress. Even though the National Park Service has gained more land, the bears and other wildlife have been moving steadily into populated areas for food. Rodents no longer have their usual nesting and feeding grounds, so they go to residential areas to infest. Where's the balance?

A group of wealthy and powerful people (including actor Harrison Ford) think they have noble intentions in this plan they concocted. They are trying to buy or convince countries to set aside large chunks of land for a corridor of land from South America to North America, and do likewise in Africa and Asia. Why? They want to create huge nature preserves that would make it possible for species to migrate over great distances "the way they used to before "we" started changing the earth." ["Nightline, July 12, 2002] Just who the "we" are and when this began isn't clear. What about the natural migration patterns of humans? According to their reasoning, maybe we should all go back to being Neanderthals and forget everything that's happened in the last few million years?

What I would like to know from these people is who is going to convince the animals and fish and birds and insects of this plan, and keep them on the trail? What about those who don't want to be on this trail? Are they going to have the monkey police issuing citations or imprisoning those apes who go their own way? I'd like to see them have a one-on-one with a pissed off rhino. Or, is it free only to those who WANT to be on that path? Are they going to post a sign that all species can read and have rules that they must obey? Don't these people think most animals know what they're doing - as long as we don't interfere? It's laughable. And, sure, let's let all of the animals take over the planet so we can become the next extinct species.

What about nature - and natural change that has little to do with humans? Nothing stays the same. Change is inevitable, whether or not humans are there. The earth goes through its natural cycles. It has endured tornados, hurricanes, landslides, volcanoes, earthquakes, bombs, tidal waves, radiation and trash. The earth can take care of itself, when left to her own devices. We have to be responsible that we don't overly burden her, though. That's the least we can do and it's in our own interest for survival. If we keep polluting the water, our precious water is lost forever and we die.

When nature provides a lightning strike which kicks off a forest fire and cleanses the land for new growth, it knows what its doing. It's keeping its own balance. Why don't people respect the intelligence in nature? When humans get too much involved in this management and don't know what they're doing or intentionally set fires for selfish reasons, what often happens? Millions of acres burn down and the balance is upset. Rain vanishes. There is a way to do it that doesn't destroy all of nature and allows life to be in harmony. But, the government and many environmental agencies don't seem to want to know it and employ it. When the rights of a snake or a moth are more important than those of a human's, something's seriously wrong.

The earth changes its magnetic fields and we are due for another flip something during the next 2,000 years. This will mean that all kinds of species will be confused for a long time until they readjust. I wonder how these specialists will figure this into their equation of protecting certain animal and plant species?

We were initially put on this planet to enjoy and use what was put here, and this included the responsibility to care for it. Now, I'm not religious, but I do feel the Old Testament has a lot of wisdom to offer us. "HaShem (God) planted a garden in Eden, to the east, and placed there the human being whom He had formed. And HaShem (Gd) caused to sprout from the ground every tree that was delightful to the sight and good for food..".[Bereshit/Genesis 2:8,9] "HaShem (God) took the human being and placed him in the Garden of Eden to cultivate it and to guard it". [Bereshit/Genesis 2:15] So, what happened?

We are supposed to be the caretakers of this garden, and if we fail to do our duty, all suffer. As said in his wonderful article entitled "Garden of Eden: FIXING THE "ORIGINAL SIN," Yosef Ben Shlomo HaKohen comments on the events which took place in the Garden of Eden: "The human being is tempted to become like G-d, and thereby decide for himself what is "good and bad." In this particular story, when the human being perceives himself as G-d, he also perceives himself as the owner and sovereign of the earth. He therefore feels free to create his own definition of good and bad, one that can enable him to exploit the earth and its creatures for his own gratification. When he viewed himself as the custodian of the earth, he understood that his purpose is to be a "giver". Now that he views himself as the owner and sovereign of the earth, he now feels free to be a "taker"."

A fine balance is required between respecting our needs and those of the rest of nature. We can all thrive - those who wish to remain here. And those species whose time is over on this planet make their own choices, too. Evolution means all of us changing together, not just singling out one thing over another. We must stop thinking we can control all of nature, or we'll be watching the destruction of Atlantis all over again. I don't think a corridor makes sense, just as I don't think the Everglades should be flooded, nor should a rodent take precedence over a human. Some brains have to come into the picture and stop this insanity now.

© Copyright 2002, Estelle Nora Harwit Amrani

JOURNAL