Of biodiversity climate_change_and_law


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Of biodiversity climate_change_and_law

  1. 1. Of biodiversity, climate change and law Commentary by Bertrand Bhikarry Rough times are ahead for we who inhabit Earth, a time which requires great understanding of everyone’s needs. Yet if the voices which only represent human interests remain the loudest, it may well be that the other species will not benefit in any outcome. It’s not that the animal and plant kingdoms aren’t saying things, its only that most of us just do not understand the language. Its obvious that people giving lip service to the the topic will end up far short of a fix for urgent environmental issues. So let’s talk a bit more, one more time. Claiming love and empathy for the others who live here is a sure way to be sidelined in today’s world. True, no one is actually deemed unsound in mind for saving a tree anymore, even fish population observers can claim they do a meaningful job, right alongside those who make a living doing avian migration studies. However the real contributors to society’s progress are those who feed the mills of our economy, or add more comfort to our daily lives. You can see why we venerate the scientist who modifies living organisms to produce more food, over an environmental advocate who insists we already have enough food, but we just need to distribute it differently. Its a lifestyle and developmental paradigm that needs urgent readjustment, and in quick time, because humans are not the center of this world, even if we do make the most impact on it. The threat of Climate Change, whether it was brought about by a natural cycle of events, or was inadvertently created by our need to reinvent our surroundings is a fact of life that we must face. That it’s a threat which will deliver its blow to the next generation - our heirs actually, is the main reason not enough of us are concerned in diminishing or readjusting our usage of natures assets. The truth of the matter remains; If the expected events foretold for Climate Change were upon us now, the political will, the social conscience of entire nations would have been in alignment to face the clear and present danger.
  2. 2. So Draconian measures will have to be taken at some point to enable our masses to deal with CC, there’s no doubt about it, but until that time where we will be told what we must do, we can enjoy the civil mediums of education, consultation, and democracy. As an eye opener, here are two topics which make for good bedtime reading for the next five years at least. These are investigative peeks at what biodiversity loss will mean to Earth, and by extension, what it will mean to us humans. Another interesting theoretical journey that dovetails is the increasing use of environmental law to protect Earths other inhabitants. Granted these are broad topics to lump into a single pre-slumber article, but there is huge overlap in the topics. Let’s look at some background. We will start by ooking at those who came before us, and at those who will come after us. But it’s not too early to pity the latter group. They will in essence be suffering the pains caused by the inaction upon which we persist. It’s been stated that Ancient Man was quite good at understanding ecology, but there was a key factor for that. His nomadic lifestyle meant that he needed to be in a place of plenty in order to eat. He needed to be in a stream in order to fish. It can be argued therefore that our ancestors were better at living at one with nature, but it can be refuted that they did not have the benefit of insulated clothing and rubberized footwear as we do, so they had no choice. So that’s how the practice of agriculture developed. Man eventually learned to provide food without moving . It seems all the problems we face today has derived in some sense from this ability of man to stay in one place, and to control the ‘environment’ in which he chose to live. After agriculture, came the need for law and order, because boundaries had to be made, where before there was simply no need to demarcate one’s Place beyond temporary campsite etiquettte. Thus did the “law’ evolve to protect the owner, or those who owned the static assets, against those who had no ‘landed’ wealth. If today we wish to use a practice of Law to protect the environment, it becomes fairly obvious that the fundamentals of ownership must be reviewed. Indeed, it must be remembered the very rules of this country are based on Westminster Law, with tenets designed to protect a landholders holdings from the grasping hands of the proletariat.
  3. 3. Obviously to seek to dispossess the owners of land in these times, to take away ‘rights’ which were always held inviolable is just not a consideration that will gain traction. It takes no stretch of imagination therefore to project that in the future, only when the well-being of all humans are threatened, will such laws be rethought, or simply pushed aside. It’s happens all the time. Remember Martial Law? Two more things to bear in mind; humans will not make decisions to benefit the animal kingdom above themselves, nor does man give up property, even if he is truly at death’s door. So let’s welcome Climate Change, let’s say goodbye to mankind as we knew it. The next set of humans may survive, but there will not be anything left to them that they may thank us for. Certainly it will not be an archaic ruling that one can own and use everything left by ancestral proclamation - Especially not if it means the wider community stands to suffer. If history is an indicator, the future may belong to nomads once more, as the environment creates its own law.