You know that old story about the kid and the starfish on the beach....

[kally]

the one where he chucks the stranded ones back in the water.

Well it just struck me tonight that all those starfish on the beach that weren't going to make it back into the water were there for a reason. Every day I walk by the shore and see the gulls with their mouths and gullets stuffed full with starfish. That is what they must be for.

Nature has a reason for everything. It is still a nice story that makes a nice point, but I see a different perspective.

[Gardenarian]

Interesting take!
Though the story is kinda corny, I often think of it.
"Made a difference to that one!'

[kally]

it is a very corny story, but the point is well taken. But I think those starfish need to be left there.

[CathyA]

That's a very good point Kally. I'm wondering if you read my post about the snake and the toad. It's the same issue.

I don't know why humans think they have to "save" everything, without thinking about the larger picture.

I know I have personally saved frogs from the mouths of snakes in my watergarden...........but it's always a dilemma for me.

I'm still feeling really badly for not saving the toad yesterday......but I just had to step back and not interfere........which can be really hard.
The snakes need to eat..........the sea gulls need to eat. I guess we humans just have to be the ones in control.

A lot of our environmental problems have been caused by our needing to control. Nature, on its own, is so perfectly balanced.

[kally]

That's a very good point Kally. I'm wondering if you read my post about the snake and the toad. It's the same issue.

I don't know why humans think they have to "save" everything, without thinking about the larger picture.

I know I have personally saved frogs from the mouths of snakes in my watergarden...........but it's always a dilemma for me.

I'm still feeling really badly for not saving the toad yesterday......but I just had to step back and not interfere........which can be really hard.
The snakes need to eat..........the sea gulls need to eat. I guess we humans just have to be the ones in control.

A lot of our environmental problems have been caused by our needing to control. Nature, on its own, is so perfectly balanced.

I did read about the frog and snake. It is a dilemma. I know if I try to rescue a bird from a cat it is mostly a lost cause and the bird dies a slow death. What strikes me as funny is that the starfish story is used so much. I think there might be a better analogy somewhere else. Those gulls gotta eat.

[kib]

Some of it comes down to what is natural and what is man-made circumstance in nature. I saved a small brown thrasher from my cats. One of them had brought him into the house and they'd succeeded in taking off a few tail feathers but he'd wisely taken refuge in the bookcase and was determined to defend his little cubbyhole. My cats do not need to eat birds, that's not a sustainable dynamic and it's my fault. So Thrash got released and flew away apparently still able to survive. We've also made a mess of wild balance. I mean who knows, maybe if you 'save' a starfish and starve a gull, you make room for an endangered bird the gulls compete with for nesting space. I think "let it be" is wiser, unintended consequences abound with human beings, but we are losing species daily...

[kally]

it is a complicated thing. Is that what the prime directive on Star Trek meant?

[Rogar]

The original story is by Loren Eiseley. He has almost faded into obscurity and his writing has become little dated, but he wrote some very nice scientifically based essays on nature and man. It's too bad the story is told with various random twists without him getting any credit. I don't think the story is to be taken literally, but is a metaphor. My interpretation is that no matter how overwhelming the odds, one person can make a difference and you have to keep trying regardless.

Sometimes it seems to me like all the starfish I throw are eaten by gulls, too. Metaphorically speaking.

[CathyA]

it is a complicated thing. Is that what the prime directive on Star Trek meant?

Yeah......but they were always interfering, weren't they?

[kib]

Lol. I was completely outraged with the first episode of First Generation. They saved snotty little Wil Wheaton by violating the prime directive, in the first episode! Oh, so that's how it is? Never more, where was conflicted-but-dogmatic William Shatner when we needed him.

[LDAHL]

All life survives at the expense of other life, through predation, parasitism or resource competition. Pretending otherwise is feel-good self-delusion.

Not that self-delusion isn't sometimes a significant contributor to quality of life. If somebody feels better helping a starfish or toad postpone the inevitable for a while, it really doesn't matter all that much in the great sweep of things.

[catherine]

All life survives at the expense of other life, through predation, parasitism or resource competition. Pretending otherwise is feel-good self-delusion.

Not that self-delusion isn't sometimes a significant contributor to quality of life. If somebody feels better helping a starfish or toad postpone the inevitable for a while, it really doesn't matter all that much in the great sweep of things.

That argument has been made to me when I set humane mouse traps, which enable me to collect the mouse unhurt in a little green plastic house and then i can take it way out in the back by the creek.. where is will probably get eaten by something else anyway. But I'd still rather feed a hawk than kill a mouse cold-bloodedly.

But Rogar is right, it's not a question of ecology, it's a question of doing what we can--lighting a candle in the dark as it were.

[LDAHL]

That argument has been made to me when I set humane mouse traps, which enable me to collect the mouse unhurt in a little green plastic house and then i can take it way out in the back by the creek.. where is will probably get eaten by something else anyway. But I'd still rather feed a hawk than kill a mouse cold-bloodedly.

But Rogar is right, it's not a question of ecology, it's a question of doing what we can--lighting a candle in the dark as it were.

I do the same thing when I live trap rabbits in my garden and deport them several miles away. To be honest, though, I find delivering them up to another area's predators is easier than disposing of dead rabbits.

I'm not sure the seagulls would consider a candle to have been lit.

[Ultralight]

I do the same thing when I live trap rabbits in my garden and deport them several miles away. To be honest, though, I find delivering them up to another area's predators is easier than disposing of dead rabbits.

I'm not sure the seagulls would consider a candle to have been lit.

Could you harvest those rabbits for food during the legal season? Rabbit stew is delicious.

[LDAHL]

Could you harvest those rabbits for food during the legal season? Rabbit stew is delicious.

I don't function as my own plumber, electrician or butcher. A wise man knows his limits.

[creaker]

I did read about the frog and snake. It is a dilemma. I know if I try to rescue a bird from a cat it is mostly a lost cause and the bird dies a slow death. What strikes me as funny is that the starfish story is used so much. I think there might be a better analogy somewhere else. Those gulls gotta eat.

But the gulls will eat - the story went that no matter what she did she would not make a dent in the number of starfish on the beach.

I always thought the point of the story was trying to shake up ones perspective. I volunteer for Red Cross - if I looked at it only from the perspective that I'm never going to stop house fires or disasters, it would be a complete waste of my time.

[Williamsmith]

All life survives at the expense of other life, through predation, parasitism or resource competition. Pretending otherwise is feel-good self-delusion.

Not that self-delusion isn't sometimes a significant contributor to quality of life. If somebody feels better helping a starfish or toad postpone the inevitable for a while, it really doesn't matter all that much in the great sweep of things.

The point, if one wants to make it, is that all life has a sort of sacred nature to it, that living things have certain rights, and that we should never minimize the idea that one form of life should be equally as important as another. Even though, inevitably one form of life may depend on another for sustenance. We have an obligation to show mercy to other living things where possible because all living things wish to remain alive, they may even have feelings or fears just like us.

I recall finding a bluejay lying along a road I was walking as a teenager. It had presumably been hit by a passing car. I didn't want it to be smashed into the asphalt or picked clean by a crow, so I picked it up and put it gently in my baseball glove. That is when I noticed that it's eye was not still and would blink at me. I did not know if it was fearful of me or if it was glad to be removed from the roadway. I took it home and made a shoebox filled with soft grass and I laid the bluejay in it. It was still alive. I sat with it until dinner time when my mother told me to get to the table. I ate quickly that day and returned to the front porch where the shoebox was left at the top of the cement stairs. The bird had died. I buried it in my backyard instead of throwing it in the garbage can. We had a moment together, these two living things. That was more than forty years ago and I still remember the day I learned how sacred life was.

Since then I have also learned to kill and slaughter animals for sustenance but I have never taken the life of another living thing without having a sorry soul.

[LDAHL]

But doesn't the mercy shown the starfish come at the seagull's expense? Must we really apologize for being alive our place in the food chain?

[Williamsmith]

But doesn't the mercy shown the starfish come at the seagull's expense? Must we really apologize for being alive our place in the food chain?

Yes, the real moral of the starfish story is, "It sucks to be a seagull." Or, "Do seagulls lives matter?"

[LDAHL]

Or some animals are more equal than other?

[kib]

:D Yes, some are more equal. Just ask Snowball.