Resident Aliens
The one thing I find fascinating in some of these
books about animals, birds and aquatic life are the
maps of each species' resident range and migration
routes. They instantly make me wonder what our world
would have looked like if we chose to draw our
countries boundaries keeping their migratory routes
in mind along with ours. To some extent, this is
exactly what we did. We created mobile countries as
we migrated from place to place, in search of food
and better opportunities… and since a lot of our food
(animals, birds, aqua life) was mobile as well, and
migrated to other places in search of better survival
opportunities for themselves, we had to take their
migratory routes into account while migrating. But
this changed, when we learnt to settle down and
domesticate or cultivate our food. (While we're on
the subject, it would be fun to see if our ancient
trade routes overlap with species migration routes in
some way)
But, in the case of aquatic life, I wonder how they draw their boundaries. I suppose the most obvious way is to follow ocean currents or domicile themselves in suitable topographies based on their own physical characteristics ... but I wonder how they cope with trespassing by species alien to their territories (including humans). I also wonder how they cope when they accidentally find themselves in a different territory after a displacement, like say a tsunami. Moreover, if humans could build a world under water, what would it look like?
If you think about it, most countries as we know them today were formed as a result of boundaries drawn willfully by human migrants - marauders, settlers and invaders who shaped our political and cultural landscape for us. Today, millions of people live in spaces where their ancestors did not once belong... Like long-distance migratory birds, some humans migrated long distances, and like short-distance and sedentary birds, some humans traveled locally or settled in one place. But, where invaders occupied the land of these sedentary locals, boundaries and cultures were forced on them... and where locals escaped invasion, they managed to draw their own boundaries and keep their cultural landscape intact! Even today, many humans live a nomadic life... and for them human migration is quite literally what it had always been for several millennia, since we wandered from our evolutionary birthplace in Africa.
In the mean time, over the last 150 million years, birds have been getting smaller and stronger and have learnt to maximize their power to fly long distances with effortless skill. Today the length of their journey seems only limited by the size of our planet.
They have been constantly challenging what we have been learning about evolution. Take for instance, Darwin’s “Survival of the Fittest”: or that competition has been the major driving force of evolution. Many claim today that it is not the lack of space or opportunities that inspires evolution, but on the contrary, the availability of opportunities and living space that does.
So birds learnt to fly and maximized the advantage of being on a different physical plane… opportunities opened up that were not available for the land dwellers! In fact in some instances birds seem to have evolved with more potential than they need. For example a songbird that usually flies 2000 ft above ground in capable of flying as high as 10,000 feet. There are raptors that can fly as high as 30,000 feet but hover at 6000 feet! It is a mystery why they are built more strongly than they really require. The human equivalent of this would have been a mutant like in Heroes, or a superhuman like Superman having strengths greater than needed… (although you can contend that necessity can be invented with opportunity! :)
Like birds, mammals roamed more freely when dinosaurs became extinct and more space became available. Humans too learnt to exploit the excess of resources available to them.
In the larger evolutionary context, all living species are therefore "environmental migrants" and we have all been making intentional and accidental existential choices, and using migration for this purpose whenever suitable.
But sometimes migration is not voluntary. In the case of humans, I immediately think of examples such as the migration during the India-Pakistan partition, slaves in different countries, and even descendants of invaders or colonizers who stayed on post-independence. But, on a lesser controversial subject, take the example of common birds that we see in our neighborhoods. Several of them may have originated elsewhere and traveled to our country along with human migrants.
House sparrows were never meant to belong in the US. 8 pairs of them were introduced for the first time to New York from England in the 1850s, all of which perished quickly unable to cope with the new climate. It was after much trial over many years that they finally multiplied… today they are so abundant that they are considered pests!
Like the house sparrow, several other common birds such as rock pigeons and crows, which seem ubiquitous in almost every part of the world, evolved in europe and central asia and radiated out into other continents with human help. (This also explains why they don't find mention in the old folklore or mythology in countries where they now exist abundantly)
When I see them, they remind me of my own immigrant status. I wonder how soon it will be before a human immigrant is considered a pest… in fact, I wonder if we are already there! … either that or we will have made ourselves so much at home like the crows and sparrows that our existence here will seem more natural than our absence.
But, the maps of migration routes are not about these sedentary, non-migratory birds that emigrated to different places.
They are the routes (or flyways) that birds have been creating for million years (even before human existence) as they fly to near and far places in search of better opportunities. Imagine the kind of genetic programming that has gone into these birds to help them respond to the changing weathers, lengths of days, threat from predators, as they travel from one hemisphere to another, and over several continents! They all have their preferred time of day and preferred altitudes of travel for migration... and have also learnt to adapt their flight and schedule to unexpected environmental changes.
Like birds, there are animals that have been migrating in mass for several millennia… and they too have adapted to new worlds either intentionally or accidentally. There are flowers and fruits that grow world over that once grew in isolated areas in small parts of the planet! Today they have not only adapted to new environments but have also helped create new species.
When I think of all of these non-human species and the genetic programming that has gone purely into making them ideal migrants, I have to wonder what kind of programming makes us humans good migrants as well!
We may have come a long way from thinking of evolution as a competition. But are humans the only species for whom competition has been programmed in us to make us fit for migration? Does survival of the fittest ultimately only apply to us?
I also wonder if humans are not the only species that leave an inheritance for their offspring. Most migrant species don’t live long enough to enjoy the fruits of their labor. They fly, toil and then perish before they can see their offspring’s benefit from their toil. To this point, there is an interesting fact. For many birds
migration happens in one direction and over a bird's lifespan. Such bird species are called nomads and invaders just like in the case of humans … but I would like to think of them as selfless monks with a sense of duty and a quest to find nirvana. :)
For instance a seabird called Manx Sheawaters can live up to 60 years, and covers at least a million kms in distance during its lifetime on migration alone. One particular bird of this species is said to have flown over 8 million kms during its lifetime! Incidentally, these birds also happen to live monogamously!
What does this mean in a more human context? There is a lot of controversial conversations around environmental migration… mainly about the social ramifications of climate change. What does being an environmental refugee mean in a larger evolutionary context?
But, in the case of aquatic life, I wonder how they draw their boundaries. I suppose the most obvious way is to follow ocean currents or domicile themselves in suitable topographies based on their own physical characteristics ... but I wonder how they cope with trespassing by species alien to their territories (including humans). I also wonder how they cope when they accidentally find themselves in a different territory after a displacement, like say a tsunami. Moreover, if humans could build a world under water, what would it look like?
If you think about it, most countries as we know them today were formed as a result of boundaries drawn willfully by human migrants - marauders, settlers and invaders who shaped our political and cultural landscape for us. Today, millions of people live in spaces where their ancestors did not once belong... Like long-distance migratory birds, some humans migrated long distances, and like short-distance and sedentary birds, some humans traveled locally or settled in one place. But, where invaders occupied the land of these sedentary locals, boundaries and cultures were forced on them... and where locals escaped invasion, they managed to draw their own boundaries and keep their cultural landscape intact! Even today, many humans live a nomadic life... and for them human migration is quite literally what it had always been for several millennia, since we wandered from our evolutionary birthplace in Africa.
In the mean time, over the last 150 million years, birds have been getting smaller and stronger and have learnt to maximize their power to fly long distances with effortless skill. Today the length of their journey seems only limited by the size of our planet.
They have been constantly challenging what we have been learning about evolution. Take for instance, Darwin’s “Survival of the Fittest”: or that competition has been the major driving force of evolution. Many claim today that it is not the lack of space or opportunities that inspires evolution, but on the contrary, the availability of opportunities and living space that does.
So birds learnt to fly and maximized the advantage of being on a different physical plane… opportunities opened up that were not available for the land dwellers! In fact in some instances birds seem to have evolved with more potential than they need. For example a songbird that usually flies 2000 ft above ground in capable of flying as high as 10,000 feet. There are raptors that can fly as high as 30,000 feet but hover at 6000 feet! It is a mystery why they are built more strongly than they really require. The human equivalent of this would have been a mutant like in Heroes, or a superhuman like Superman having strengths greater than needed… (although you can contend that necessity can be invented with opportunity! :)
Like birds, mammals roamed more freely when dinosaurs became extinct and more space became available. Humans too learnt to exploit the excess of resources available to them.
In the larger evolutionary context, all living species are therefore "environmental migrants" and we have all been making intentional and accidental existential choices, and using migration for this purpose whenever suitable.
But sometimes migration is not voluntary. In the case of humans, I immediately think of examples such as the migration during the India-Pakistan partition, slaves in different countries, and even descendants of invaders or colonizers who stayed on post-independence. But, on a lesser controversial subject, take the example of common birds that we see in our neighborhoods. Several of them may have originated elsewhere and traveled to our country along with human migrants.
House sparrows were never meant to belong in the US. 8 pairs of them were introduced for the first time to New York from England in the 1850s, all of which perished quickly unable to cope with the new climate. It was after much trial over many years that they finally multiplied… today they are so abundant that they are considered pests!
Like the house sparrow, several other common birds such as rock pigeons and crows, which seem ubiquitous in almost every part of the world, evolved in europe and central asia and radiated out into other continents with human help. (This also explains why they don't find mention in the old folklore or mythology in countries where they now exist abundantly)
When I see them, they remind me of my own immigrant status. I wonder how soon it will be before a human immigrant is considered a pest… in fact, I wonder if we are already there! … either that or we will have made ourselves so much at home like the crows and sparrows that our existence here will seem more natural than our absence.
But, the maps of migration routes are not about these sedentary, non-migratory birds that emigrated to different places.
They are the routes (or flyways) that birds have been creating for million years (even before human existence) as they fly to near and far places in search of better opportunities. Imagine the kind of genetic programming that has gone into these birds to help them respond to the changing weathers, lengths of days, threat from predators, as they travel from one hemisphere to another, and over several continents! They all have their preferred time of day and preferred altitudes of travel for migration... and have also learnt to adapt their flight and schedule to unexpected environmental changes.
Like birds, there are animals that have been migrating in mass for several millennia… and they too have adapted to new worlds either intentionally or accidentally. There are flowers and fruits that grow world over that once grew in isolated areas in small parts of the planet! Today they have not only adapted to new environments but have also helped create new species.
When I think of all of these non-human species and the genetic programming that has gone purely into making them ideal migrants, I have to wonder what kind of programming makes us humans good migrants as well!
We may have come a long way from thinking of evolution as a competition. But are humans the only species for whom competition has been programmed in us to make us fit for migration? Does survival of the fittest ultimately only apply to us?
I also wonder if humans are not the only species that leave an inheritance for their offspring. Most migrant species don’t live long enough to enjoy the fruits of their labor. They fly, toil and then perish before they can see their offspring’s benefit from their toil. To this point, there is an interesting fact. For many birds
migration happens in one direction and over a bird's lifespan. Such bird species are called nomads and invaders just like in the case of humans … but I would like to think of them as selfless monks with a sense of duty and a quest to find nirvana. :)
For instance a seabird called Manx Sheawaters can live up to 60 years, and covers at least a million kms in distance during its lifetime on migration alone. One particular bird of this species is said to have flown over 8 million kms during its lifetime! Incidentally, these birds also happen to live monogamously!
What does this mean in a more human context? There is a lot of controversial conversations around environmental migration… mainly about the social ramifications of climate change. What does being an environmental refugee mean in a larger evolutionary context?
