Animals don’t compete with humans, it’s in our imagination

Animals don’t compete with humans and successful animals don’t compete with each other. Competition theory may be one of ecology’s failures. It’s not that it’s incorrect. It describes one mechanism but alone, this has little to do with how ecosystemsHow ecosystems function An ecosystem is a community of lifeforms that interact in such an optimal way that how ecosystems function best, is when all components (including humans and other animals) can persist and live alongside each other for the longest time possible. Ecosystems are fuelled by the energy created by plants (primary producers) that convert the Sun's heat energy More work overall. In a functioning world, populations have to avoid competition at all costs. It’s literally the opposite of what most people think. The idea that animals are in competition with us for food, is in our imagination. As long as we treat our relationship with wildlife as a competition, we have little chance of rebuilding the natural world we need to survive.

The predator prey paradox

Any animal that lives in a foraging zone risks being eaten by a predator. That’s obvious enough. But it is wrong to assume that this leads to the depletion of prey.

The ultimate winner of a competition will be the one that kills another but in an ecosystem, just as many predators die of starvation as live through eating. If they didn’t, their populations would keep expanding forever. Every prey animal is a predator in its own right, hence predators and prey populations fluctuate together. If predators don’t eat, the prey disappear and visa versa. Unless the system is in balance, it cannot be sustained.

When framed this way, it isn’t so much a paradox as a misinterpretation. It’s important though, because when we think we’re competing with animals, it makes us want to kill them. That’s not in our interest.

Science keeps misleading us into thinking humans and animals compete

A colleague sent me a paper just published in Nature under the title ‘Direct evidence of a prey depletion “halo” surrounding a pelagic predator colony’ [2]. The study looks at the relationship between colonial seabirds and flying fish around Ascension Island.

The paper says that ‘food limitation … naturally limits many predator populations’ but that is only a half truth.

The scientists maintain this limits seabird abundance and they could be threatened by over fishing. The latter idea is correct. However, by implying simple predator-prey relationships, it perpetuates the myth that we can survive in competition with seabirds.

At best, it is misleading and will create conflict between conservationists and fishers. At worst, it can be used by fisheries to support proposals to ‘manage’ wildlife. In other words, to kill seabirds and marine mammals that might be depleting stock. We cannot manage wildlife, it manages us.

It is wrong and counter-effective to even imply this. As I’ve written previously, by ignoring the fundamental role of animals in the integrity of our own economies, we undermine conservationWhy is animal conservation important? Animal conservation is important, because animals are the only mechanism to create biodiversity, which is the mechanism that creates a habitable planet for humans. Without animals, the energy from today’s plants (algae, trees, flowers etc) will eventually reach the atmosphere and ocean, much of it as carbon. The quantity of this plant-based waste is so More and mislead our food industries into thinking they are better able to manage wildlife than to live with it.

If humans compete with animals, we threaten our own survival

Competition is unhealthy and reduces the chance of surviving. Sustainable ecosystems reach peak performance only when the majority of animals avoid competition. The total sum of these systems is what creates human food security and stable climate. Otherwise, all the resources become too thinly spread and chaotic.

If you’re already familiar with this blog, you’ll know this comes back to how wildlife transfers, amplifies and concentrates nutrientsEnergy and nutrients are the same thing. Plants capture energy from the Sun and store it in chemicals, via the process of photosynthesis. The excess greenery and waste that plants create, contain chemicals that animals can eat, in order to build their own bodies and reproduce. When a chemical is used this way, we call it a nutrient. As we More. I have written about how Dugongs strip seagrass away but it bounces back bigger than ever. Remove the Dugongs and the seagrass becomes unhealthy. Insects deplete tomatoes but that makes the fruits more nutrient-rich. The same goes for grassland plains, grazed by herds of Wildebeest in Africa and oceanic islands, replete with their seabirds.

And besides, it makes no sense any other way. Predators have to be integral to ecosystem function(Of an ecosystem). A subset of ecosystem processes and structures, where the ecosystem does something that provides an ecosystem service of value to people. More, or else how do you explain why they existed before us? Take a step back. Consider an island with abundant seabirds. Imagine what it used to be like. In the past seabirds were MORE abundant …back when there were MORE fish … before we started industrial fishing … and before we started killing MORE seabirds.

Somewhere along the line, someone has to ask … ‘hang on though, doesn’t this mean natural prey depletion is a good thing?’ And they’d be right.

An urgent change of perspective is needed

A successful species does what’s needed to condition, enrich and sustain the environment it lives in. Future fisheries and indeed, our survival, depend on letting go of the misconception that we compete with nature. Animals don’t compete with humans. This is a self-centred philosophy we have manufactured for our short-term convenience. We have to realise that this is undermining the ecosystems that deliver food to our plates.

The international decade for biodiversityWhat is the definition of biodiversity? When we ask, what is the definition of biodiversity? It depends on what we want to do with it. The term is widely and commonly misused, leading to significant misinterpretation of the importance of how animals function on Earth and why they matter a great deal, to human survival. Here I will try to More began last month and as yet, I’m not seeing clear signs that the role of wildlife in ecosystem stability is being properly understood. This latest paper in nature is another example.

All conservationists have a duty of care to themselves, the planet and humanity, to make sure we tell the right story: the story that animals are essential for a habitable Earth. This is the only thing that will make a difference and convince people to stop killing animals. And only that will ensure we have a future.

1. MacLulich D A (1937) Fluctuations in the Number of the Varying Hare (Lepus americanus) (Univ. of Toronto Press, Toronto)
2. Sam B. Weber, Andrew J. Richardson, Judith Brown, Mark Bolton, Bethany L. Clark, Brendan J. Godley, Eliza Leat, Steffen Oppel, Laura Shearer, Karline E. R. Soetaert, Nicola Weber, Annette C. Broderick. Direct evidence of a prey depletion “halo” surrounding a pelagic predator colony. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jul 2021, 118 (28) e2101325118; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2101325118