One cannot go visit a zoo or aquarium anymore without being inundated by certain political messages. A particular message that was repeated to my husband and I throughout our recent visit to San Diego (which included both the Zoo and the Wild Animal Park) was, "Poaching is bad."

Variations on this theme were repeated to us constantly. We were often informed that such-and-such an animal was endangered and that there were "less than 1000" left in "The Wild."

Annihilating a Species is Bad
Though I believe that humans have the right to kill animals and eat them and use other parts of them to make tools or clothing, I also believe it is inappropriate to annihilate a species.

We Americans tend to romanticize tribal cultures as some sort of simpler, "back-to-nature" sort of existence. But all cultures are not created equal. It is my conviction that a culture is "good" to the extent that it reflects God's vision for society. Each culture will have details where they vary (musical styles, dress, overall personality, etc.), but God has given instructions to which each culture is obligated to conform.

When one studies Genesis, especially the first four chapters, one sees that God did not begin history with what we typically think of as a tribal culture. The description was more one of gardening/farming than anything else. It was not until after the Deluge (during which God chose a family to preserve not only humanity but animal life as well) that man was specifically given meat to eat. At that time, God put the fear of man into the animals (Genesis 9:2-5). I presume that putting fear into the animals was a way of making sure that man did not obliterate them. It is, after all, quite simple to butcher a domesticated animal.

As early as Genesis 4 is the idea of a man having a flock mentioned. When one puts together the idea of tending a flock of sheep with the gardening and cultivation of the land mentioned in the prior three chapters of the book, the picture is one of sustainable food sources.

Man is not called to be a locust upon the earth, consuming whatever is before him and leaving a path of destruction behind. And yet, this is precisely the lifestyle of some tribal cultures (including some past Native American cultures). The tribes hunt until there are no more animals to eat. They migrate and "gather" food much in the way an elephant does (an elephant herd, we learned, can destroy an entire forest in a short amount of time)--until there is nothing left.

The Problem of Africa
It is hard to isolate the various problems of Africa, because many of them stem from a refusal to bow the knee to the Creator. The area of poaching is just such a problem. The poachers see potential value in the animals--their skins, their tusks, their meat (for food known as Bushmeat). But they do not follow the Creator's guide. They often do not cultivate the ground and tend a herd. They kill and kill until the animal population drops into what many call the "endangered" level.

So then the governments, often pressured by Americans, steps in to "save the animals." And we were astounded by the "most effective" way this has been done. We were told this by a tour guide, and I am assuming this is true. Some African governments hire poachers, arm them, and pay them to kill other poachers. That's right. Africa has chosen not to elevate man back to his position of steward of the land and life, but rather turn him on himself. And now there is a situation where a dead poacher is more valuable than a dead animal.

Problem solved, in the opinion of Africa. And the San Diego Zoological Society seems to also accept this solution. After all, they exist not to put creation back together again, but to preserve animals in the name of preserving animals. So, San Diego breeds endangered animals, ships them back to Africa, repopulates the land with fresh meat, and gets comfortable with the idea that the animals won't be killed, but the hunters will be.

And it is believed all is right with the world, when it is in fact turned upon its very head!

Comments:

Comment from: Wendell [Visitor]

Hey Brandy,

I enjoyed your post. I never cease to be amazed at the extent we go to to prevent extinction of species. Actually, I wonder why evolutionist have such a problem with it. After all, it is the survival of the fittest, and for now mankind rules the food chain.

I wonder if some species shouldn't be extinct. Panda bears (cute though they are) are notoriously poor breeders. We spend millions on a species that maybe we should allow to pass from the scene.

A big dilemma here in South Africa is what to do with an overage of elephants. Culling (ie.killing) is abhorred by most, but other options aren't as easy or economical. It becomes a real stewardship issue because they really destroy the environment when there are too many.

Just a few thoughts.

Wendell

08/14/06 @ 06:18

Comment from: Brandy [Member]

I was hoping you'd comment, Wendell, because I knew you would have an up-close perspective on things. The tour-guides in San Diego mentioned that elephants can destroy an entire forest, or drink up an entire watering hole (a negative for other animals), etc. But they never mentioned an overage. We were astounded at how there seemed to be a desire to make every animal seem endangered. It seems like the idea of having an animal in captivity is so abhorrent that they have to have an excuse like protection/endangerment. We can't just keep a few elephants around because we like to look at them!

The idea of the conflict between the Survival of the Species mantra and all the hard work of preserving a species did come up a few times during our trip. Really, it seems Christians have the most solid foundation for this sort of work because we believe God gave the animals for us to have dominion over. And yet it was all Darwin and naturalism at the zoo!

Interesting note on pandas, by the way. We saw the exhibit in San Diego, and they mentioned the millions of dollars they spend researching the animal and trying to breed it...VERY pricey.

08/14/06 @ 09:32

Comments are closed for this post.