Extinction
Introduction
Extinction of any living being is inevitable; and arguably a consequence of destruction self-inflicted by mankind itself. Let’s go as far back as to the extinction of the Mammoth for example. This creature had lived for thousands of centuries -then man came and hunted it, slaughtered it and erased it. Only scientific research gives a glimpse of what was; ensuring that at the very least the existence of the mammoth didn’t erase from our history. Even in the present, there are genuine concerns of further extinction caused by global warming which is destroying the ozone layer, provoking climate change etc- all caused by mankind’s negligence to protect the earth it inhabits. These global challenges are having a particular impact on the earth’s wildlife. Rainforests are being destroyed, glaciers are melting, the sea is being littered. These might be gold mines for the corporate businessman, but they’re first and foremost homes to the earth’s animals.
The purpose of this article is twofold. Firstly, we will look at the factors of design which contribute to its ultimate destruction. However, we will also consider how innovators are trying to use design as a means of preserving the earth’s wildlife.
Designing Extinction
As society continues to evolve, there’s high expectation for businesses to impress the growing rate of consumers. Take for example food production within the agriculture sector. Most might not know, but farming plays a crucial role in contributing to pollution because of the increasing need for more land. It’s suggested that ‘20% of the richest people in the world use 76% of the natural resources’, meaning that wealthier areas in the world require more natural habitats to be destroyed to make room for agricultural spots to grow food to meet the expectations of the consumer. Ultimately this damages the earth’s environment because it leads to deforestation. Indeed, ‘80% of Earths land animals and plant’s live in forests’, meaning that the loss of forestry caused by the need for ‘76% of the (worlds) natural resources’ causes the death of many animals through the destruction of the habitats.
Truthfully, not all animals face death as a consequence. There are charities that strive to ensure the protection of these animals, and take them to other locations for preservation. In most cases however animals will stay in the confines of what’s natural and familiar to them, and with the land around them missing they become more exposed to poachers and hunters who attack them with a view to making profit from their demise. Take for example the elephant. Many are killed simply for the desire to obtain ivory from their trunks. This is slowly leading to their extinction, and isn’t helped by the fact that animals are finding it difficult to adapt to changing temperatures and food shortages caused by man.
Furthermore, climate change occurs as a result of deforestation. According to EPA, ‘humans release 30 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year…each CO2 molecule might last for up to 200 years, this carbon overload can have long term consequences.’ In other words, we’re aiding the destruction of our planet because of greed by enabling CO2 to trap heat from the sun into the atmosphere which results in our planet and oceans temperatures rising which is killing our sea life. A key example of this is the Polar Bear. Due to climate change, the artic is melting which is difficult for the polar bear to adapt and survive. The national geographic emphasises this as ‘Amstrup’s own 2010 study projected that continued decline in sea ice would reduce the global population of bears by two thirds, to less than 10,000 by 2050'. Thus, due to the rapid melting of glaciers, the bears have to commute by swimming further distances in order to find solid land to hunt. As Andrew Derocher stated ‘ polar bears aren’t made for walking’. By using all their energy to find destinations on which they can survive they are actually walking into a silo of death.
Another problem is the use of non-recyclable materials in mass production which causes environmental sustainability problems. For example, the plastic bag takes up to ‘1000 years to decompose …(with) plastic bottles taking over 450’. Arguably we fail to take account of the amount of time it can actually take for mountains of landfill to disappear from the earth. Until that time, plastic for example, can entrap animals in the oceans, cause them grave bodily harm, inflict chocking where they might mistake it for food, the list goes on. The problem is that companies brainwash us into believing that all recyclable items are friendly to the planet- that we are making a difference by using it but in reality ‘only about 9% of the world’s plastic is recycled and it never fully degrades instead it breaks down into smaller pieces that marine life eventually ingests’- and which I might add, some of us go on to ingest.
Designing to eradicate extinction
As designers we’re constantly looking to innovate ideas and make solutions to the problems which our society faces. For example, in 2014 biologist Michael Thomas designed a theory of ‘facilitated adaptation’; which involved rescuing species that were becoming endangered and then genetically modifying them to suit the dangers they face from climate change by adapting their genes to survive changing temperatures and ecological niches. The purpose behind this new design theory was because ‘most conservative estimates predict that 15–40% of living species will be effectively extinct by 2050 as a result of climate change, habitat loss and other consequences of human activities.’ Ultimately Thomas’ reasoning is that there is no real hope that things will inactively become better, instead society will keep to profit on their unnecessary habits which promotes extinction of our wildlife. So very much like we look at the history books to remember the mammoth, it seems inevitable that one day our children will look to do the same. Yet, if Thomas’ proposal became enforced within society, it could save an immense amount of species allowing wildlife to equip themselves to certain habitats when fleeting their home- thus preventing them to become the prey of poachers and hunters.
Indeed, scientists and designers are continually pairing up in an effort to innovate new ways to improve the wellbeing and safety of animals. In a recent proposal, postgraduate designers from the Royal College of Art and Imperial College have developed a set of tools that trigger warning signals to animals of surrounding dangers. The goal of their design would purely be based on the animal’s reliance to themselves rather than having humans interfered by monitoring their every move. The result of this collaboration has been the development of high-tech bio logging tags, which have been created to suite different species within their different habitats. The first design was created for the humpback whale. It signals sounds through an underwater speaker to warn the whale of any incoming ships thus allowing it to swim directly from the shipping routes to find sanctuary. Yes, it seems a simple design, but simple can be effective- and this is effective because it means that animals can live in a safe natural habitat without being regulated or interfered by mankind.
The second tag was designed for the collared peccary and had similar results. The tag releases vibration signals that directs the animal to deforested areas allowing them to build their habitat without fearing human dangers. Keeping them hidden keeps them unharmed. Although still in the experiential phase, the study has proven to be successful when interacting with the animals as they respond well to the signalling of the tagging service. When the design becomes more developed it could be a great aid to helping endangered species- allowing zoos and conservations to release animals into the wild knowing they will be safe and protected.
In addition to the creation of new designs, there are also simpler experiments taking place through the reinvention of old designs. For example, a recent result to tackle illegal poachers in Africa (where it is common to break into national parks to kill the likes of elephants and rhinos), the government have enforced drones in order to negate hunters.
According to The New York Times the ‘continents’ elephant ‘ population declined by 30% from 2007 to 2014, much of it because of poaching’. Furthermore ‘at least 1,338 rhinos were killed for their horns in 2015 alone’. The drone is still in progress, but if were to become more common it might deter poachers with the fear of conviction if they’re caught. There is still work to be done around this however, because there are arguably faults attributed. For example, the drone doesn’t signal a warning for people movement so someone must be watching every part of the live feed constantly, which isn’t financially or practically functional. Nevertheless, they would I imagine work extremely well as a scare tactic for hunters and also allows the police to look back on the footage to recognize these criminals. Although it has its faults it’s the start of decreasing poaching from endangered animals.
Conclusion
To conclude, it is fair to note that everyone on earth plays a part in the slow (but sure) extinction of our planets wildlife; but equally we all play a fundamental role in its preservation too. As designers we have an onus to try and make solutions to problems, and social problems are no different.
