Inukshuks steal and harm habitats and cultural identity, and misdirect travelers. Small creatures live under, beside and between rocks. When pursued, they escape among them. Sometimes they attach themselves to rocks as part of their life cycle. This occurs both in water and terrestrial habitats. So when the rock is wrenched from its place, harm is done to the life which regards them as part of their home territory. Was this the builders intention? Were (or are) they even aware of this? These thoughts put a new light on Inukshuk building, don’t you think?
There is a great post on the Mother Nature Network (here) on this subject from which I’ll extract a few quotations. Also there is a 4 minute video on the subject on the website.
“Stacked rocks in the shape of cairns have long been used as path-indicators, but when it’s done for fun, it can confuse other hikers, causing them to veer off the trail.”
“Also, it’s kind of rude: As Nick of Wicked Wildlife points out in the video above, most of us go to natural spaces to leave the human-dominated world behind. Stacking rocks and leaving them for others to see is a kind of environmental graffiti.”
“As Randall Bonner writes at Wide Open Spaces:
“Each rock in a stream is blooming with life. Everything from aquatic plants to micro-organisms are attached to those rocks. They also create habitat for crustaceans and nymphs. Crevices in the rocks hold eggs in salmon redds to be fertilized, supporting those eggs until they grow into fry and begin feeding off the very critters that were hatching off of and crawling around those same rocks.””
“Even worse, if rocks are removed from a stream bank, it can lead to more and faster erosion of what may already be a fragile place.”
So, you should ask yourself, is the extraordinarily small buzz of self satisfaction created by building one worth it? It is sensible, when one sees a non-official Inukshuk rearing its ugly head, to knock it down and disperse their stones to appropriate places.
Leave a Reply