So humans are qualitatively different from, say, birds that pass 
seeds through their guts? I doubt there's a scientific basis for such 
a distinction.

Jane Shevtsov

At 09:35 AM 5/2/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Apparently I responded too quickly without choosing my words 
>carefully enough.  I do believe that by saying that a species 
>evolves in response to the environmental factors within an 
>ecosystem, I allowed for migration of an ecosystem or parts of an 
>ecosystem in response to stresses such as global climate 
>change.  Also by saying that species introduced by man cannot become 
>native I believe that I allowed for other types of migration.
>
>Bob Mowbray
>
>-------------- Original message from William Silvert 
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: --------------
>
>
> > This seems to imply that a species is native only if it evolves in the
> > location where it is found, and that any species which arrives by 
> migration
> > or other form of transport is not native. This is a very Eulerian 
> approach.
> > In particular, with global warming we can expect species to drift towards
> > the poles, so even though the entire ecosystem drifts polewards, 
> can we say
> > that the component species cease to be native?
> >
> > Bill Silvert
> > Habitat Ecologist

==================================================================================================
"If you try and take a cat apart to see how it works, the first thing 
you have on your hands is a non-working cat." --Douglas Adams

Jane Shevtsov
co-founder, <http://www.worldbeyondborders.org/>World Beyond Borders
science journalist, <http://www.jyi.org/>Journal of Young Investigators

"When Kansas and Colorado have a quarrel over the water in the 
Arkansas River they don't call out the National Guard in each state 
and go to war over it. They bring a suit in the Supreme Court of the 
United States and abide by the decision. There isn't any reason in 
the world why we cannot do that internationally." --Harry S Truman  

Reply via email to