George Schaller: Everyone's Environment

Image: Beth Wald; Illustration: Malay Karmakar; Imaging: Sushil Mhatre

George Schaller, Senior Conservationist, Wildlife Conservation Society and VP, Panthera Foundation

George Schaller, 77, is recognised by many as the world’s pre-eminent field biologist. He has studied wildlife in Asia, Africa and South America for more than 50 years. National Geographic conferred it’s Lifetime Achievement Award upon him in 2007; he is also the winner of several other prestigious awards. His studies have helped protect animals as diverse as the mountain gorilla, giant panda, lion and the Tibetan antelope. His work inspired the foundation of over 20 parks and preserves worldwide. Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Shey-Phoksundo National Park in Nepal, and the Chang Tang Nature Reserve in Tibet are some of them.

We are all aware of the basic environmental problems affecting our small planet. These range from habitat destruction, water shortage, and extinction of species to pollution of air, water and land to climate change. Governments and news media serve the economy and tend to forget that everything we make, buy and use is wholly dependent on nature. The Earth is a living organism with soil, sea, air, life, sunlight and others all interacting in a way that makes us wholly dependent on natural systems for survival. Yet we have been destroying our environment at an ever-accelerating rate. We have been living off the earth’s capital rather than the interest. Therefore, as Al Gore noted, “we must make the rescue of the environment the central organising principle for civilisation.”

This must involve everyone. Every personal act is also an ecological act, whether we drive a car, plant maize, write an essay on paper or computer, flick on a light. “When drinking a glass of water, think of the source,” states a Chinese proverb. Why save some species, insignificant or otherwise? We know that nature remains a supermarket for new foods, just as it is a pharmacy for new drugs. Every species is a genetic storehouse for the future. We still know little about ecology, about the function of individual species. We have no idea how many species you can lose before the whole system collapses. Human survival — even if promoted by self-interest — seems like a good argument for saving our biological diversity, for leaving future generations with options.

Population growth is a critical issue for the world, but consumption of resources has a much steeper upward curve. However, it should be remembered that globalisation was already active in the 1800s. The British exported wheat to the UK for profit during the great Indian drought of 1890-1910 while thousands of people there starved to death.

Certainly all countries are now fully aware of issues, but environmental concerns remain peripheral to most. Denmark has made a major effort to reduce its carbon footprint, China has had a logging ban in effect since 1998 and has established many nature reserves, Costa Rica has good forest management practices involving local communities, and Rwanda has done a superb job of protecting its mountain gorillas. There are many success stories, large and small, but certain issues — such as the related one, climate change and depletion of fresh water — have barely been addressed. About one-third of fresh water in irrigation canals is lost mainly to evaporation. Over 2,000 years ago, the Afghan civilisation had the sense to cover the canals they built.

We have treated clean air, clean water, fertile soils as free public resources to do with as we want, pollute, degrade, destroy. There is no free lunch. We now have to pay the price. If we want to protect a watershed to assure clean water to those living downstream, those who give up some resource for the common good will have to be paid. If we set up a reserve to protect wildlife, the communities who have traditionally used the resources for fuel, roof thatch and others will have to be paid. It is called “payment for ecosystem services”.

Similarly, companies that pollute air and water must pay. Money? If governments spent a fraction of the billions that they do on armaments and unnecessary wars, there would be ample funds to pay for truly keeping our planet healthy, beautiful, and productive. Industry and agriculture must become far more innovative, productive, and efficient. In addition, the task is to shape new attitudes and create a new design in the strategy of surviving on a crowded planet and still maintaining the full diversity of life. Gandhi said, “There is enough in the world for everyone’s need but not enough for everyone’s greed.”