Sustainability and individual responsibility

Rather than selling spearfishing tours, humpheads can be observed within diving trips which is definitely an interesting incentive for tourists to go on such tours; there will be more divers who would like to see a living humphead than hunters

A few days back a picture appeared on different media which showed a member of a diving school from Unawatuna with a dead humphead which was spearfished. Not only did this picture causeoutrage on social media, it also led to various newspaper articles and further to meetings and discussions with respective organisations and regulatory bodies.

Different departments (Wildlife and Conservation, DFAR, Tourism Department) who are related to such matters are the ones to deal with aspects such as a ban on spearfishing, the protection of endangered species, setting up protected wildlife zones or increase and promote sustainable tourism. 

One picture actually summarised the challenges we face in the country where Sri Lanka’s treasures are exploited for the benefit of a few, creating damage and consequently issues for the large majority. Questions were raised as to why protecting this one fish seems so important for Sri Lanka or why the profit created from spearfishing tourism, as it is practiced in other countries, might not work for Sri Lanka. Such questions again show the low degree of awareness which exists among decision makers.

Where the species in discussion is endangered and IUCN Red Listed, it seems common sense not to hunt it for any purpose; such questions highlight the narrow view and low awareness of the bigger picture and correlations of single activities with the global situation. Rather than selling spearfishing tours, humpheads can be observed within diving trips which is definitely an interesting incentive for tourists to go on such tours. In total there will be more divers who would like to see a living humphead than hunters.

Huntingwild animals

In general hunting wild animals seems to be a hit for those who need to feel the adrenaline rush of killing another living being – the bigger or more dangerous the better – it is big money for those who organise such hunting trips all over the world for the affluent who seem to have no other activities left to engage in. They are heroically displayed with their guns, spears and the dead animals including giraffes, elephants, tigers, lions, leopards and so on. 

I find it hard to call someone heroic who hides in a bush and shoots an animal which was often bred in confined areas and released for hunting into the “wild”. Aren’t all the national park rangers who actually protect the animals with their lives from poachers and hunters more heroic than those hunters? 

If a hunter actually went and fought with a wildanimal with bare hands and won, one could respect that person’s hunting skills (which still would let me raise the question of why taking another living being’s life for fun), however how such hunting is practiced can only be called cowardly and not heroic. It can be only explained with the need for a feeling of supremacy of someone who has a lack of self-esteemand consciousness in general, as in why otherwise does one need to kill another being and feel strongabout it?

Mindset of individuals

Back to Sri Lanka, one of our biggest challenges is and remains the current mindset of individuals. The short-sighted approach of gaining monetary benefits out of an activity which is destroying Sri Lanka in the long term still prevails. At the same time, and this gives hope, it seems that the number of individuals who dare to speak up and feel strongly about environmental protection has increased. 

Environmental groups and the public have reacted strongly to the humphead killing which lead the respective institutions to take action and start drafting the necessary policies and regulations. Another aspect will be to enforce these rules in the affected areas and to find a way to prevent similar activities, even if that might mean to face resistance from groups who would like to continue profit from such activities.

This story displays a situation from the ground which is for sure no single case and occurring all over the world. Accumulating such stories of failed sustainable conduct, we find ourselves in the challenging situation globally which was presented and explained by Sir Prof. Robert Watson in his speech on climate change some weeks back.

In his excellent presentation he outlined within 30 minutes where the world and humanity as a whole stands currently, where it might go and where it should go to prevent increasing environmental, social and economic harm. He also pointed out which steps Sri Lanka can take to facilitate a sustainable development for the country and fulfil its promises given during the Paris Agreement.

There was “nothing new” in what Watson said, we all know the situation is bad, we know that we have the tools and we also know that our activities to change our current behaviour are insufficient. The only thing we seem to not be able to manage is our mindsets. Since decades we are listening to experts who point out the challenges and the solutions. And what do we do?

Climatechange

We continue, we pledge we report and promise. So I am wondering what has to happen that we as humanity really understand our own responsibility and stop blaming anyone else instead of each one of us for the situation in which we are in. Our world is still covered with wars, violence and conflict between human groups – conflict related to various differences between us humans. 

In the middle of all that fighting for or against someone else who might look, work, pray, eat, dress or speak differently we forget about the global challenge which we are facing, which is climate change. This has nothing to do with one country, global north or south, east or west – we are all in it together. Perpetrators and victims at the same time.

Still, the majority of climate change victims (same as for wars and other challenges) are the poor within our societies. And maybe this is also one reason why the actions are so hesitant. One might be tempted to say “as long as only poor people die, there will be no significant change”. It might be still too comfortable in those places where decisions are taken which enforce a capitalistic, growth-centred society which accepts a destruction of the planet and ultimately of society for financial gains. 

Usually what is said about people who face a life-threatening sickness is that they are going through the following psychological stages: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Humanity is facing a species-threatening sickness which is called greed, some might even call it capitalism itself. 

Climate change and its consequences are real, however we still have various examples of decision makers who deny it completely. We also have the group of people who agree and are angry about it and share their anger about the situation. Further we have a group of those who try to bargain a way out of our misery and for sure we have that group which is depressed about the current situation. 

Now all of that does not bring us further. Where only acceptance brings relief in the case of a sick or even dying person, also only acceptance will bring the necessary motivation to change our current behaviour. Humanity is sick, however are we terminally sick?

Listening to Watson, we are not. There are plenty of opportunities, doable, realistic opportunities, to facilitate a change in Sri Lanka and worldwide to balance out the previous damage which we have done to the natural habitats and to assure healthy life on the planet. As we have already gone far, future consequences will be that small islands will vanish and snow caps will melt, however actions taken today can prevent more damage and lead to a balanced nature-society-relationship within the years to come.

Where we are all upset about how Americans can vote for Trump and how the British can vote for Brexit and we point fingers at the statistics which show that it is often the older generations which voted accordingly, remembering the “good old days” without “migration” (forgetting that often they were the very migrants decades ago); aren’t we all guilty of similar behaviour? How long more has each one of us to live? 

Isn’t it funny that we are concerned about the best education for our kids, we let them study until there is no tomorrow … but we do not care about the planet they are going to live on? And for all those who believe in reincarnation: where do you think you are going to live once you come back? Our decisions now will affect our children and future generations to come. If it is political decisions like the above ones, or environmental decisions – we are responsible today for what is there tomorrow. 

Raising awareness

I asked Watson one question: from all his experience, what is the method which works best to raise awareness among the public and among decision makers? He answered: public pressure. This means that we are all asked to take on our role, in whatever profession or situation that might be. 

Each one of us has the power to change the future; this sounds very romantic and a majority of people might say: ‘what can I do, I am only one?’ This is true, however if each individual is “only one” who fulfils his or her responsibility, accumulated it will be all of us. Also in this context the famous statement “imagine there is war, and no one goes there” is valid – it is each one’s small single behaviour which at the end of the day makes “humanity”. 

In the example of the humphead, the public awareness and action of a few concerned led to others taking on their roles as well. Even small stones create circles in a lake!