Colette
I think that the problem of wolf re-intorduction can be debated in multitude
hierarchy. And I think we should distinguish those differences and our ethical
foundations. The hierarchical distinction is as follows:
1: Main quesstion:
Whether or not re-intorduction of wolves is right?
The question goes: Why we need re-introduction of wolves?
Do we need presence of wolves in Yellowstone?
2: Procedual question:
Whether or not transportation of wolves from other places is right?
The question goes: Are there alternatives?
3: Ethical question:
Should we count more on the main issue rather than procedual issue?
Should we value more on general good than individual and instatntaneous
good?
Should we not persue the main or general good, if procedual and individua
l good are violated?
In your case, you feel that re-introduction of wolves is right (1). But you are
not sure whetehr or not the proceduare is right (2). In this case, the next que
stion is "Are there alternative procedures",not whether or not re-introduction
is right. In order to go back to the main question, you have to find evaluate
all possible alternatives. If there are no alternatives, then you has to go
back to the ethical question (3).
Those ethical questions are tough. I cannot give you a straight answer.
I guess, Baird Callicot would, based on Aldo Leopord's Land Ethic, would say
"yes" to the re-introduction. I guess Holms Rolston would do, too.
I do not know what Karen Warren would say about this. I have not read her
ethical perspectives yet.
Toshihide Hamazaki
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 11 17:14:32 1995
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 17:16:36 -0600
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: For the list activists...
CC:
Subj: ACTION ALERT - National Call-in Day Today
July 11, 1995
Today is your day to call Congress and urge your Representative to insure
that the Endangered Species Act stays strong and vibrant. Do not pass up
this opportunity. Every call will be noticed by the Congress and gives us a
rare chance to show Washington that the "public" really cares.
What should you say?? We are sending along another copy of our last alert
with several ideas you can cover.
PLEASE NOTE THAT WE HAVE ONLY UNTIL THURSDAY, JULY 13 TO CONVINCE HOUSE
MEMBERS TO SIGN THE VENTO "DEAR COLLEAGUE" LETTER. Ask your House Member to
do something positive and join her/his 83 colleagues already on the Vento
letter. (If your member is already on the letter, give them a big
thank you!!)
CALL YOUR CONGRESSPERSON
URGE THEM TO PROTECT THE ESA BECAUSE IT PROTECTS US
ASK THEM TO SING THE VENTO LETTER
WE CAN DO IT
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Call Congress for the ESA: Tuesday, July 11
The Endangered Species Act, an American accomplishment which has brought
back the bald eagle and protects rare plants which produce lifesaving
drugs, is under attack in the Congress.
Everyone who supports the ESA and endangered wildlife is asked to "Call
Congress for the ESA" on July 11.
The Capitol Hill switchboard is (202)224-3121;
Call and ask for your Representative, and then deliver the message, "The
Endangered Species Act protects Us; vote for a strong ESA."
A vote in the House of Representatives on legislation which would
cripple the ESA is expected in mid-July, and "Call Congress for the ESA"
is a national campaign to tell Congress that the American people care
about protecting wildlife and the habitats we all depend on.
Since Richard Nixon signed the ESA in 1973, this Act has been one of the
most effective environmental laws in the world, not only bringing back
the bald eagle from the brink of extinction but saving such other
species as the brown pelican, the gray whale, the peregrine falcon, the
American alligator, and the sea otter.
But if the public doesn't speak out, this national accomplishment will
be lost. Efforts by special interests to undo the progress of 23 years
under the ESA have resulted in a bill now before the Congress which
would essentially repeal the Act. Legislation introduced by Rep.
Richard Pombo (the "Pombo ESA bill") which would cripple our nation's
efforts to protect wildlife will be voted on by your Representative
soon.
"Call Congress for the ESA" on Tuesday, July 11; most Congressional
offices are open from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Eastern time -- make your voice
heard.
# # #
************************************************************
Defenders of Wildlife Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1101 14th Street, NW Suite 1400 fax: 202-682-1331
Washington, DC 20005-5601 phone: 202-789-2844x260
Time it took for 50,000 species to go extinct due to natural
causes, on average, throughout the 68 million years prior
to the industrial age: 10,000 years
Time it takes to extinguish 50,000 species now: 1 year
************************************************************
================== RFC 822 Headers ==================
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 95 13:45:49 EST
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Originator: biodiv-l
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
From: "Chuck Beretz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ACTION ALERT - National Call-in Day Today
X-Listserver-Version: 6.0 -- UNIX ListServer by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Biodiversity Information Network List
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 11 20:19:01 1995
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jonesli)
Subject: Re: ecofeminist views on wolf reintroduction
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 22:21:50 -0400 (EDT)
on an issue such as this, i think that we also need to ask "what happens
if we don't reintroduce wolves?" (or other once indigenous species to
other regions). would not one perspective be to look at the world as it
is now, and find how we (humans) live WITHIN what currently exists rather
than some ideal? (not above it or below
it, but mutually dependent on everything around us)
if the deer population gets so out of control, could this not be a flux
in the earth's history...one that we will have to learn to adapt to
and not adapt to ourselves? and here, i am NOT considering that if we
keep polluting and keep extinguishing species that we can use this "flux"
theory to explain it all away, but i am wondering if there is a way
to look at the earth as it is now and find our place within it without
having to return to some "ideal." and can we really fix everything?
i think that we can stop future encroachments, and there ARE some things
that can be fixed (cleaned up and restored), but can we really manipulate
ourselves backwards fully?
i think chaos theory comes into play here. we have no means for predicting
whether this act will result in whole-earth benefits, or even an even
worse state than we are in now.
i would also ask, "how will those that would reintroduce the wolves measure
their efforts?" will they say "the wolf population has to stay above X
amount"? or will they say "we will introduce these wolves and give them an
area in which to thrive, not bounded by the desires of humans and should
their numbers dwindle, then we will let them dwindle"?
of course, we must try things. if we don't then we are susceptible to the
logic that "we can't TOTALLY foretell the effect of CFC's on the ozone, so
we don't have to do anything until we have PROOF." this is dangerous.
i worry mostly about how those managing the garden of yellowstone will
measure their efforts.
girl, do i wish i had all the answers instead of all the questions!
sk}l
l. jones
