Some environmental questions have no easy answers | ECOVIEWS

Environmental questions such as "What kind of frog is this?" and "Is it legal to have a pet skunk in my state?" are relatively straightforward, with correspondingly straightforward answers. Questions that demand subjective evaluations, such as "What is the inherent worth of thus and such an animal?" require a more nuanced response.

Q. I live in Florida and have written to state and federal wildlife agencies but have yet to receive a satisfactory reply to this question: What is the justification for preserving dangerous reptiles such as the alligator? It's a lame excuse to say that it would upset an "ecosystem." Are there specific and documented reasons that the American alligator is protected? Of what real value is it?

A. Facets of sociology, psychology, economics and, of course, ecology come into play in considering the value of any element in the natural world and whether it’s worth preserving.

For some people nothing can justify preserving animals that could kill us, such as grizzly bears, tigers and sharks. Other people will always side with the animals — but will do so for a variety of reasons.

Six loose, sometimes overlapping categories can be used to classify people’s attitudes toward wildlife.

The utilitarian category includes the letter writer above, someone who believes that for an animal to have value, it must have at least the potential for pragmatic use by humans, and it must not be a competitor, a threat or even a nuisance to us.

The humanistic view holds that an animal’s feelings and its right to exist are as important as ours. These two attitudes are at opposite ends of a spectrum. A proponent of one is unlikely to ever make a convincing case to a supporter of the other.

For those embracing the aesthetic attitude, dangerous animals, such as alligators, are worth protecting if for no other reason than their sheer magnificence. People who take an environmental stance maintain that any species is part of a complex network and has a role in nature.

Scientists who want to study all wildlife, including alligators, make up another category. And in today’s society, a final category includes hunters, who want to preserve alligators and other wildlife so they can kill them.

As for the danger posed by alligators within their natural range: Who is defining them as dangerous? What danger do they represent? To whom? Clearly, alligators pose little threat to average Americans going about their daily lives.

Let’s put it in perspective. Are alligators more dangerous than lawnmowers or electrical outlets? Thousands of people are killed or injured annually by automobiles. Cars kill more people in a single day than alligators have injured in a century. Few people in the United States are injured by wild animals. Even fewer die from encounters with them.

Most injuries caused by alligators — as well as those caused by snakes, bears and other wild animals in North America — occur when a human encroaches on the animal’s habitat. I do not believe any wild animal should be indicted because of that. Nor should it be eliminated just because it has no obvious value to humans.

Another reason for protecting all wildlife species is that once we declare a particular species as unworthy because someone somewhere finds no value in it, another plant or animal will be next on the list.

Do we get rid of whichever species is the biggest nuisance or the most dangerous or the least useful at any given moment? Should we get rid of blue jays because they are raucous or channel catfish because they have lateral and dorsal spines that can injure us or do we get rid of squirrels because they raid our bird feeders? And who will decide which species should be the next to go?

Finally, some of us, possibly the majority of North Americans, simply like wild creatures. That may be the best reason of all not to eliminate any of them — including alligators.

Whit Gibbons is professor of zoology and senior biologist at the University of Georgia’s Savannah River Ecology Laboratory. If you have an environmental question or comment, email ecoviews@gmail.com.

This article originally appeared on The Tuscaloosa News: Some environmental questions have no easy answers | ECOVIEWS