Humans are the ultimate apex predator — we eat anything that moves and hardly anything wants to eat us.

Sharks got nothing on us.

So what does it mean in ecological terms when there are six billion+ apex predators roaming the planet?

Massive extinctions of other species for one thing as we munch our way down the food chain. As species decline, ecosystems unravel leading to more declines and maybe some blooms of things like weeds and jellyfish. And eventually (perhaps sooner than later) we run out of food and lose ecosystem services, both of which will contribute greatly to rapid increases in disease and death in humans.

That seems to be the logical and grim ecological prognosis.

However, like a car hurtling towards the edge of the cliff, we’re arguing about what CD to listen too instead of applying the brakes. [Or more likely, each of us is plugged into our own IPOD and oblivious to each other and anything else.]

I admit that writing about environmental issues can be depressing. I’m actually an optimist and believe we will jump on those brakes at the last minute.

What would you do?

A commercial trade magazine ($32/yr) took one of my stories, acknowledged me as the original author, rewrote portions but added no new material and put it in their magazine and on their website. I did several interviews with experts who were hard to find and wrote a pretty good story on a new discovery that would benefit farmers. I own the copyright to the story and they didn’t ask and they didn’t pay me to use it.

It is tempting to either use someone else’s writing or make some cosmetic revisions and feel free to profit from it. But its wrong, illegal and adds nothing. Better by far to express your thoughts and research — even if poorly written.

Any ways I asked this publication (which may or may not make this theft a habit) to take the story off their site and compensate me for the use of my material.

So far I’ve been ignored.

What would you do?

Chuse.