Yes, we should be teaching them as different classes, and the typical
Miller text EVS class often offered at freshman level is literally nothing
more than a watered down environmental class that does little to cover
either ecology or evs.

:)

On Fri, November 23, 2007 5:50 pm, Andrew Park wrote:
> The statement that "most silviculture is little more than tree
> farming" is wildly inaccurate in most places except the US southeast,
> Chile, New Zealand, some parts of Europe and China, and latterly, pulp
> plantations in southern Brazil.
>
> In most of north America, forests are managed as semi-natural habitats
> with minimal intervention after logging, or not managed at all.  Even
> planted forests fairly rapidly develop species compositions and stand
> structures that resemble naturally regenerated forests of similar age.
>   There is also a very large literature on the subject of using
> silviculture to create, maintain, or emulate habitat structures.
>
> As for "tree farms", I suspect (though I can't prove) that most
> intensively managed plantations are way more diverse than an
> intensively managed cornfield.
>
> But back to the central subject.  I get the feeling form the way this
> thread has gone that people see Ecology as a "pure" science, while
> "environmental science" is always applied.  If that is true (and I am
> a bit skeptical about the rigidity of the division), should we be
> teaching them as wholly separate subjects in wholly separate courses?
>
> Andy
>


Malcolm L. McCallum
Assistant Professor of Biology
Editor Herpetological Conservation and Biology
http://www.herpconbio.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to