Olivia Morris
1 May 2011
McCutchan Pd 7
Biology Honors
The “Balance of Nature” Hypothesis is a hypothesis in which the predators and
prey live in balance of each other. For example, the amount of worms in an area
determines the amount of birds, because birds feed off the worms. If there are no worms,
there are no birds in that area; the birds can’t survive. This specific hypothesis is a great
way to show the flow of organisms in an ecosystem.
Most humane people believe that the natural process of predation is much better
than the other ways animal can die (starvation, overcrowding, hunting). These people
believe that if it is better if the animal dies at a much faster rate than if they simply didn’t
have the food to survive. Think about it, would you like to die quickly or by starving,
getting hungrier and hungrier everyday until you slowly fade away? It sounds like a
horrible thought, nut this is the state of mind these people are in. At least with predation,
one organism is benefiting.
However, when predation is happening in an ecosystem, the predators tend to pick
the weakest animals; less work for them. If they killed the elite prey, then they would
probably be to worn out to eat it! Working for the easy prey isn’t that hard, and it allows
the populations to grow. The evidence that supports this is the documents of natural
predation that show the populations of prey and their ages. On the Contrary, they don’t
kill only the old and the weak, its just mainly the weaker ones in the pack that die from
predation. Other natural selections can effect the entire population of the prey.
In the opinion of many as well as my own, the hypothesis of the balance of nature
is true and useful. The deer on the island would have been much worse off if the wolves
hadn’t been added to create a predator. Instead of dying from getting eaten (sorry Mrs.
McCutchan) they have to die from starvation, brought on by the own population of the
deer. Possibly getting hunted down their entire lives. Not that hunting is bad; I love
jerky! However, if the deer population got so out of control the island had to bring
hunters in to kill off numerous amounts of deer..that wouldn’t be humane would it? Each
hunter could kill seven deer; imagine if 150 hunters shot 7 deer each. That’s 1050 deer in
one season! Which means that hunters could wipe out half the population on the island.
However, the wolves were brought in and the population was narrowed by the natural
occurrences of nature. This creates a better way to have the flow of organisms run
smoothly on the island.
In conclusion, the wolves being added to the island were a positive addition to the
island, for the deer and wolves. The wolves were fed and got to expand heir population,
as the deer no longer had to worry about over population and being wiped out by their
own species. The hypothesis of the balance of nature is an effective hypothesis.