The changes in Arkansas that were projected by the EPA suggest increases in rainfall up to 20% by 2100. If any plant species can adapt to this in less that 100 yrs I will be shocked. Ecosystems and communities may adapt, but the species will either be preadapted or exptirpated in that time frame. After all, how many species adapted to the other environmental problems we have plagued the planet since 1900? IN fact, how have organisms adapted to the presence of humans? Not very well, and they had a lot longer to adapt to us than they will have to the much more intensive changes that are predicted in our climate.
On Thu, July 19, 2007 10:24 am, James J. Roper wrote: > While you may be right about change faster than nature, what you are > implying may not be so easily done. Indeed, what it sounds like to me is > basically translocation of plants - introducing species in places where we > "think" they would end up after some interval of time, given large > uncertainties in climate change. First, we must remember that introduced > species are a major environmental problem today - basically, we have > alread= > y > introduced weeds and invasive plants and animals the world over. Will we > continue that process thinking that where we put the organisms is where > nature will have done so eventually? Evolution is a predictive process? > > Maintaining adaptedness? I am at a loss to even figure out what that > means. Organisms are adapted by natural selection to their environments. > Stephen J. Gould has shown us that this can happen quickly, and Darwin > figured it to happen slowly. But, there is ample evidence that it can > happen relatively quickly. Maintaining adaptedness seems to me to imply > stasis - keeping plants the way they are in the face of climate change by > moving them to places for which they are already adapted. Just monitoring > climate and imagining moving plants around to follow what we think are > goin= > g > to be long-term climate changes (considering how much they can vary over > ou= > r > lifetimes without really changing in the long term context) gives me the > heeby jeebies - as someone said, a way for someone to get funded for years > to come, but with no real scientific basis or accounting. After all, how > would we know it worked? Check back in 500 years, 1000? > > Finally, you mentioned trees, but what about the millions of other species > in a community or ecosystem? Do we assume that the species we don't move > around will figure out how to find and follow the ones we do? > > We should all read David Ehrenfeld's great book, now out of print - "The > arrogance of humanism" - so that we can look on our supposed "fix-its" for > what they are - self-deception that when things get bad enough, someone > wil= > l > come up with a way to fix it. The only problem is, fix-its usually don't. > > Sure, we can build underpasses for turtles, salamanders and what not, and > teach a Whooping Crane how to fly south for the winter, but for the > million= > s > of other species that will have to cope, these are psuedo-solutions that > only give funding to the wrong places. What we need is prevention, > because > we sure won't know how to fix what we are breaking. > > Cheers, > > Jim > > > On 7/19/07, jerry rehfeldt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> There's no doubt whatsoever that projected rates of change are far >> greate= > r >> than natural processes can accommodate. Maintaining adaptedness in plant >> populations will require the assistance of mankind to transfer the >> appropriate populations of the appropriate species to the new location >> of >> their climatic optima. Assisting migration, therefore, is only a part of >> the >> managerial options. Maintaining adaptedness, particularly in trees, will >> require us to participate in the evolutionary process; we must be >> willing >> to >> provide the fuel for speeding up the process of selection. >> >> In forestry, the information is available for providing appropriate >> guidelines. However, I am not aware of current reforestation, rehab, or >> conservation programs that are targeting climates of the 2020's. The >> closest >> that I know of involves the effort of researchers to find a 'home' in >> British Columbia for populations of California's Brewer spruce, a >> species >> classified today as threatened. >> > > > > --=20 > -- > James J. Roper, Ph.D. > Ecologia e Din=E2micas Populacionais > de Vertebrados Terrestres > ------------------------------ > > Caixa Postal 19034 > 81531-990 Curitiba, Paran=E1, Brasil > ------------------------------ > > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Telefone: 55 41 33857249 > Mobile: 55 41 99870543 > ------------------------------ > > Ecologia e Conserva=E7=E3o na UFPR <http://www.bio.ufpr.br/ecologia/> > Econci=EAncia - Consultoria e Tradu=E7=F5es > <http://jjroper.googlespages.co= > m> > Malcolm L. McCallum Assistant Professor of Biology Editor Herpetological Conservationa and Biology [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
