The Power of Relationships

Throughout these last two weeks, my perception about animals have changed, including my thoughts about my two Jack Russel Terriers. I always thought dogs were a man's best friend. My dogs were always there for me through the ups and downs. When I was happy, they would be extremely playful and did not fail to make me laugh or become overwhelmed with joy and thanks. On the other hand, when I was sad and crying, they always seemed to notice and would come lay by me so I could have a shoulder to lean on. It shocked me when Carl Zimmer claimed that "despite what we might suspect, the science so far does not rank canines very high on the friendship scale" (48). I was in denial after I read this. How could my loving dogs not be my best friends? Then, I stopped and realized something. Maybe they only acted playful when I was happy in order to get some play time and have fun. Maybe they laid by me when I was sad just so they could get petted. Were my dogs being selfish or did they truly care about my feelings, our relationship, and the meaning of friendship? I hope they were showing compassion and love, but I guess I will never know. I do not have the mind of a dog and am unable to communicate in dog language about what they think and how they feel. Although this is the case, Carl Zimmer did cause me to reevaluate the meaning of friendship in animals and whether they are capable of it.

Additionally, I have six chickens, or at least used to have six chickens. Now, I only have three. My family thinks a fox or coyote dug under the fence and snatched three of them up before darting away. Before this occurrence and before reading "Why do Birds Matter," I used to think birds had no great importance. My views greatly changed due to the fact that Jonathan Franzen stated that birds have "economic value, utility to human beings...[and] are usefully edible" for humans and predators (41). This information knocked some sense into me and I began to picture what life would be like without birds, like my very own chickens. My family has already seen a decrease in the number of eggs produced, but on top of that, predators, like the unknown mammal that killed my chickens, will have a harder time scavenging for food. Overall, without birds, bird meat and eggs will be nonexistent causing the populations of predators, including humans, to decrease. The environment would also take a hit since birds take on the roles of "pollinating plants [and] spreading seeds" (Franzen 41). The world as we know it would drastically change, and not for the better. As a result, humans' relationship to birds is extremely important. My interaction with and appreciation for my chickens and other birds has increased since I read this article. Birds do, in fact, matter.

Carl Safina argues that animals should be referred to as a "who" and not an "it" in her prologue "Into the Minefield." Safina illustrates that animals recognize and depend on individuals, are affected by a death in their group, and define relationships. All this grants them the status of being a “who.” In order to prove this idea, she writes that a poacher does not just kill an elephant, he kills the family’s “crucial memory of their elder matriarch, who knew where to travel during the very toughest years of drought to reach food and water.” This instantly reminded me about the story in the article “Mourning” in TIME magazine about Elanor, an elephant matriarch who passed away. Despite her death, "the females of the herd visited the remains" for a week, along with Elanor's baby who "soon died too" due to lack of milk (Kluger 57). The deaths of matriarchs truly do make a difference in the lives of the herd she leaves behind. This can also be seen in a variety of different animal species all around the world, like dolphins. Furthermore, Safina provides another example of pigeons building nests, finding mates, arguing, caring for their babies, flying off, yet still returning, and needing food, water, and a home. She "realized that they lived in their apartments just as" humans live in theirs and are similar to humans in many different ways. Animals form alliances, deal with their rivals, and strive to have a higher social status as well. These actions can be seen in humans again through their careers and ways of life. So, are animals really that different compared to humans? Based on Carl Safina’s article, no. As a whole, humans need to get over the artificial barrier and realize that they are not the measure of all things. If humans are referred to as a "who," then animals should be too. This is because animals have demonstrated acts of kindness, grief, and dependence just like humans and are capable of doing things that humans are unable of accomplishing.