The debate about the Beaver of UMBC has 2 opposing sides with equally strong convictions. The beaver is obviously causing enormous amounts of damage to the trees around Pig Pen Pond; this is not the question at hand. The question that has both sides fierce and worked up is what to do with the beaver? Should be we let him live and ruin the Trees around Pig Pen Pond? Should we put netting around all the trees so he can't chew threw them? Should be just out rightly "remove him"? Is it morally wrong to remove him or is it just something that is necessary and proper? Both sides have equally valid answers to these moral questions.
             Morally I don't think that anyone would disagree that it is wrong to kill the beaver. The beaver has not attacked any individual attending UMBC nor has it destroyed their property. But, if morality were the only factor to consider than war would never happen and theft would never occur. Since the beaver is eating the trees and ruining the habitat of the other creatures in Pin Pen pond it is infect hurting other creatures that reside on the land of UMBC. The beaver has visibly taken out 30-40 trees in the Pig Pen Pond area and that in turns means that it has destroyed many nests for birds and killed much of the wild plant life. The beaver if continuing at this pace, and perhaps if the beaver is really a she and not a he, may take out a much larger portion of Pig Pen pond. With the threat of baby beavers Pig Pen pond may not be the only place the environmentalists at UMBC need to worry about. The beaver has taken out 30-40 visible trees, a reasonable estimate would be that he has taken out 50. If this beaver has taken out 50, and takes out 50 more in its life span, and then has 5 babies, then that's 500 trees that this family of beavers will take down. The rate at which trees are being taken down is not even in a close proportion to how
             ...