Friday, January 22, 2010

Ships of the Desert: Even They Need Water "to Sail"

The Earth Times link (to the right of this post) helps put the Australian drought into an even bolder perspective.

When we think of camels, we most often envision "Ships of the Sahara Desert and Middle East". They are rugged, independent and well-adapted to extremely dry, desert conditions. I have included a few links to provide an overview of camel physiology to better understand how well-suited to desert life the camel truly is.
  1. A Special Animal in the Services of Man: Camel
  2. Nasal Surfaces Remove Water Vapor: Camel

In spite of their unique qualities, these "Ships" still need water to survive. First, a bit of history. Camels were imported to Australia from India. When motorized vehicles established themselves as the transportation of choice in the 1920's, camels were released from duty and sent to wander the Outback. At first, that provided the easiest solution but one that created today's population of feral camels.

This first link provides a greater historical detail of the introduction of the camel to Australia: Ecological Effects of Feral Camels...on Australia.

As you can imagine, for every problem created there will always be an attempt to find the easiest (though often not strategic) solution.

Now that Australia has been in the midst of an extreme drought, even the "Feral Ships" are finding survival a most difficult challenge. Since being turned away into the Outback, they have developed primal survival instincts which are now returning full-circle to the very ones responsible for their present dire circumstances.

It is that scenario that is described in the Earth Times article: Australia's Death-Row Camels Offered Saudi Sanctuary.

As I was able to witness firsthand in Africa during its worst drought of the century, extreme conditions will always elicit extreme behavior between species. In Africa, it was inter-tribal. In Australia, it is now between the "Feral Ships" and humans.

Guess who is likely to win this one?

0 comments: