Pelicans vs Skimmers: How do You Encourage Biophilia?

Moderated by Jim Siegel, FWS - NCTC

In his essay, “The Extinction of Experience,” Robert Michael Pyle uses metaphor to describe two very different approaches to engaging nature: the Brown pelican dives into the ocean with its whole body when seeking a fish, but the Black skimmer gracefully flies along the surface of the sea, fishing with only its bottom beak in the water.  Pyle says human engagement of nature often reflects the style of one bird or the other:

“In my view, most people who consider themselves nature lovers behave more like skimmers than pelicans.  They buy the right outfits at L.L. Bean and Eddie Bauer, carry field guides, and take walks on nature trails, reading all the interpretive signs.  They watch the nature programs on television, shop at the Nature Company, and pay their dues to the National Wildlife Federation or the National Audubon Society.  These activities are admirable, but they do not ensure truly intimate contact with nature.  Many such "naturalists" merely skim, reaping a shallow reward....How can we engage our biophilia?”

In the conservation field, we work with people on a daily basis.  We may interact in different capacities – some of us in large office complexes, some of us in the field or on a refuge.  How do you leverage these interactions to cultivate your own inner pelican? In what ways are you helping others shift beyond “skimming” nature so they can more deeply connect with what’s wild? 

Introducing Robert Michael Pyle

Our next essay, titled "The Extinction of Experience," was written by a well-known nature writer as part of his book The Thunder Tree: Lessons from an Urban Wildland. Robert Michael Pyle was born in Denver in 1946 and now lives in Grays River, Washington. He received his B.S. and M.S. degrees from the University of Washington, and his M. Phil. and Ph.D. from Yale. He is a respected lepidopterist who wrote The Audubon Society Guide to the Butterflies of North America along with a number of books about nature.

To learn more about Robert Michael Pyle, watch this 15 minute video interview by the North Cascades Institute.

"Disturbing the Universe" by Author Betsy Hilbert

Commentary by Debbie Beer

To act or not to act, that is the question.  Even in a situation that might seem hopeless – saving threatened sea turtles on the beaches of bustling Miami – author BetsyHilbert overcomes thoughts about the futility of her work, and decides that taking action to help protect the species is worth it.

It’s easy to get mired in hopelessness, believing there is nothing that can be done to help a natural world being steadily destroyed by “progress.”  I’m not disputing that it isn’t.  But I believe that nature is powerfully resilient, and our actions can and do make a difference, a significant difference.  Did I learn in high school science classes that every action has an equal re-action?

As humans, with relatively short lives on this earth, we’ll never really know the impact of our actions – good or bad – except in the very short-term.  We won’t know if the process of moving turtle eggs doesn’t damage them more than leaving them alone to bear the brunt of public beach activities.  And we won’t know if it’s a good idea to save this specific population of turtle eggs, either.  They are pre-programmed to return to their birthplace to reproduce.  If they survive to make that endeavor, they may return only to find the entire beachfront inhospitable, paved with condos, littered with trash that will entangle and kill them.

As our knowledge increases, we are increasingly aware of the tremendous and devastating impacts we have on nature’s complex ecosystems.  We are challenged with deciding how to proceed in any given set of circumstances.  It’s a matter of prioritizing values, even if they all seem to be important.

It’s a complex game, as the science, parameters and perceptions are ever-changing.  How many turtles is a sufficient number to consider the species no longer endangered?  How much habitat is enough to set aside for them?  How much resources should be spent on turtles?  On other species?

Why save species in the wild at all?  After all, humans can nearly manufacture and farm just about everything we need to survive.  What purpose do wild sea turtles serve?  Some believe that wild animals are intrinsically beneficial to human existence… that we will need them for future medical or scientific miracles.  I don’t think of it that way myself.  I only know that I identify keenly with the plight of another creature’s struggle to survive, and feel a marvelous sense of joy to see them reproduce the next generation.  I feel deeply satisfied to experience nature at its wildest.  Concrete environments provide little inspiration.

There are no absolute answers, only personal and collective priorities.  As a society, we can choose to act in a way that conserves our natural resources, and even try to restore some of them (Restore to what level?).  We can and do also act in a way that destroys our natural resources. 

We know only that action is perpetual; people will continue to save turtles, develop condos, and picnic on the beach.  You have an individual choice to do nothing, or to act as you see fit.  What would you do?