Sympathy, support and prayers go out today to the people of the Japan  and the devastation suffered from yesterday's earthquake and Tsunami.   
 The true horror of (literally) earth shaking events like these are beyond  the imagination.
 And yet, despite what will undoubtedly be a high death toll, reality  is that it could be so much worse if not for the earthquake  preparedness of Japan. This is evidenced by an early  earthquake warning system and construction of buildings able to withstand  impact of an 8.9 quake.   Apparently, the people of Japan have even  been yearly drilled for quake preparedness.  
 Japan, in fact, deserves much praise and serves as model for disaster  preparedness for other countries of the world. 
 The focus of this journal is, however, animal and wildlife issues.  
 While a quake on the other side of the world might not seem relevant to the  issues faced in the states regarding our relationship to wildlife and avoidance  of bird and airline collisions, there does seem to be relevance and  questions to be raised.
 For example:  If humans are able to construct tall buildings able to  withstand the impact of powerful earthquakes, how is it that we are not able to  build planes able to safely withstand collision with a ten pound  bird?
 The question almost seems laughable and unreal.  And yet, it is an  inconvenient truth.. 
 More than once, airliners have crashed or had to emergency land after  hitting only one bird. 
 In the case of flight 1549, the airliner that landed in the Hudson (and has  served as excuse for killing thousands of Canada geese), it was only  two birds that supposedly "caused the engines to fail."  (Of  course the engines were already compromised before heading into the skies that  fateful day, but that is a whole other issue.)
 We are talking about birds as small as sea gulls or even a flock  of starlings able to literally "take down" airliners that weigh many,  many tons!  How is that even possible?
 It is truly remarkable and awe-inspiring that humans can construct  tall buildings able to withstand powerful earthquakes.
 By contrast, it is borderline disgraceful that we cannot build a plane able  to withstand collision with a bird.
 It seems to be a case of having -- or not having the will to  do something.
 Obviously, we don't have the option of altering the earth's "fault" plates  or oceans in order to avoid earthquakes or Tsumanis.
 But, we can construct better buildings.
 But, nor should we think we have the option of killing billions of  birds rather than building better planes.
 Additionally, if we have the technology to "early warn" of earthquakes, why  aren't airline industries using the available technology  (avian radar) to warn of birds passing through air space?
 Is it simply easier to shift responsibility to cities to "solve their bird  problems" rather than using and developing state of the  art radar systems to "early warn" of bird flyovers?
 I realize these questions may sound like, "Hey, if we can send a man to  the moon, why can't we cure the common cold?" but, in fact, they are  not.
 "Necessity is the mother of invention," as the saying goes. 
 We find ways to minimize human death tolls in times of natural  disasters because we can't alter weather or the earth's plates.
 And so too, should we find ways of minimizing casualties (both human  and animal) in times of conflicts with nature.
 Our "war" is not with nature itself.  
 Rather, our imperative is to seek ways to  responsibility cope with the challenges nature throws out to us whether in  the forms of storms or earthquakes -- or a flock of seagulls in the sky.   --- PCA
                                                                  ******
 
No comments:
Post a Comment