Wayne, I think you touched on a very good point here, and I think ECOLOG is one of the best listservs on the web for hayseeds-cum-intellectuals such as myself, who seem to have a foot in both worlds. I like my intellectualism to be plain-spoken, and my hayseed-ism to be intelligent. I also like to hear plenty of good references from others on the list, places for me to visit to learn more about a topic, books to try on for size, etc. I'm very glad to have found ECOLOG; although fairly new to the world of academia, I feel as at-home as a little fish in a big pond can be expected to feel. I know that I can ask questions and expect a wide array of answers from a vast pool of differing perspectives and experiences. Respectfully, Kelly Stettner (aka Hayseed) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 16:58:59 -0700 From: Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> Subject: Reason and rhetoric The Fall and Growth of Intellectual Discipline ECOLOG as fertile ground?
Y'all: I confess to not being quite up to the task of following all the convolutions of all the threads and strands of discussion about "growth," for example, so I'll cast this before the multitudes of my betters for analysis. "Intellectual" has gotten a bad rap over the years. I suspect that one of the primary causes is the snooty way those who think of themselves as intellectuals claim superiority over the more plain-spoken "folk." It is a natural reaction to this kind of snobbery to oppose it intuitively, and it seems that the logical and reason the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater--for example, all academics get tarred with the same brush when some hayseed emerges from the shrubbery in full anti-intellectual cry. Then the pendulum sways backwards as the "intellectuals" who feel gored by such cries or who seize upon any fragment, large or small, of the anti-intellectual rant and discredit all hayseeds, regardless of the meritorious part(s) imbedded within their outraged or even self-deprecating rhetoric. In both the "hayseed" camp and the "intellectual" camp there are solid thinkers and irrational poseurs who use diversionary tactics to "win," rather than find common ground and pick carefully through the thickets in a disciplined exchange. All the sound and fury may be insignificant to reasonable minds, but when penetration of the semantic foggery is attempted by such minorities, they are quickly shrouded by the smoke of indignation and they back off in frustration. Is this dichotomy real? If so, what is the cure? I hope that the best intellects in academia will step forward (perhaps in this forum, perhaps elsewhere) and set an example for us all. No doubt they will have to pick carefully through the aborted seedcoats and chaff for a few viable hayseeds, but the dialogue, one would hope, would pave the way toward removing the causes of anti-intellectualism at its root, much of it right under their feet. Noblesse Oblige? One of the first signs of this might be to look for merit in the statements of the inferior and build upon that/those point(s) rather than coyly suggesting the inferiority of the anti-intellectual (hayseed, academic, or ?) or outright putting him or her in his or her place. From that higher road, I wonder if error might then fall away and be replaced by reason? Might the kind of mutual respect often expressed on Ecolog be magnified and catch on across society? Just an idea . . . WT Black River Action Team (BRAT) 45 Coolidge Road Springfield, VT 05156 http://www.blackriveractionteam.org ~ Fun, hands-on science, and stewardship since 2000! ~ --- On Mon, 8/3/09, ECOLOG-L automatic digest system <[email protected]> wrote: From: ECOLOG-L automatic digest system <[email protected]> Subject: ECOLOG-L Digest - 1 Aug 2009 to 2 Aug 2009 (#2009-212) To: [email protected] Date: Monday, August 3, 2009, 12:00 AM There are 9 messages totalling 937 lines in this issue. Topics of the day: 1. Postdoc: Chemical Ecology of Plant-Herbivore Interactions 2. What's wrong with growth (was: ESA position on sustainable growth) (2) 3. Listserv posting and email subject line additions Ecolog 4. What's wrong with growth, (was: ESA position on sustainable growth) 5. Summary of Colorado Birds, Vol. 43, No. 2 6. Reason and rhetoric The Fall and Growth of Intellectual Discipline ECOLOG as fertile ground? 7. Listserv posting and email subject line additions Ecolog 8. New articles for Population Ecology (July 2009) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:25:10 -0600 From: David Inouye <[email protected]> Subject: Postdoc: Chemical Ecology of Plant-Herbivore Interactions Postdoctoral Scientist Position -- Chemical Ecology of Plant-Herbivore Interactions Creative and enthusiastic people are encouraged to apply for a postdoctoral position to work in the area of tritrophic interactions and chemical ecology in wild and cultivated Solanaceae. Our lab has been using genetically modified plants, chemical and phytohormonal analyses and to test ecological predictions about the role of plant defense in multispecies interactions. Previous field and lab experience in one or more of the following fields is essential: population/community ecology, entomology, chemical or molecular ecology, insect physiology, insect behavior. The primary responsibility of the postdoctoral researcher will be to conduct experiments in two areas 1) the interactions between plant resistance and predation and 2) the role of plant defense pathways in resistance to insects and pathogens. Development of related, independent research by the postdoc is encouraged. The position is based at Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. The position is open immediately but the start date is very flexible. The position is available for one year with the possibility of renewing an additional year. Interested applicants should send a cover letter describing why you are interested in the position, the names of 3 references, and a complete CV to Dr. Jennifer Thaler ([email protected]). Review of applications will begin immediately and will continue until the position is filled. Cornell University is an equal opportunity and affirmative action employer. Women and minorities are encouraged to apply. ----------------------------------------------- Jennifer Thaler [email protected] Department of Entomology 4138 Comstock Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 USA Phone: 607-255-7064 Fax: 607-255-0939 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 17:11:42 +0000 From: [email protected] Subject: Re: What's wrong with growth (was: ESA position on sustainable growth) International trade agreements would probably prevent us from putting taxes on imports. Bob Mowbray Tropical Forest Ecologist -------------- Original message from Kelly Stettner <[email protected]>: -------------- > Hmmm, Amartya...you bring up lots of good points again! > Isn't Sony a Japanese corporation? Maybe with US offices, but I thought >they (along with many technology firms) are Asian-based? Couldn't the US slap >them with an import tax geared toward recycling fees? Or do our >administrations look the other way because 1) we love the technology and 2) we >all "just need to get > along"? > The financial incentive to recycle that you speak of could happen here, on >a > grassroots level rather than on a federal one. :-) > > Cheers, > Kelly > > Black River Action Team (BRAT) > 45 Coolidge Road > Springfield, VT 05156 > http://www.blackriveractionteam.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:02:24 -0700 From: Neil Dawe <[email protected]> Subject: Re: What's wrong with growth (was: ESA position on sustainable growth) I am happy to see that people are wrestling with the nuances of technological progress vis-=E0-vis economic growth and environmental protection. That said, I would encourage those interested in this topic to read Czech's article, Prospects for Reconciling the Conflict between Economic Growth and Biodiversity Conservation with Technological Progress ( http://steadystate.org/Files/Czech_Technological_Progress.pdf) for a clear explanation of why reconciling the conflict through technology has not occurred and is most probably infeasible because of the tight linkage between technological progress and economic growth at current levels of technology. And those who think it might be better, 'trying to "turn the supertanker," rather than stopping it in its tracks' might find James Gustav Speth's, *Th= e bridge at the edge of the world* of interest as in Chapter 5 (page 111) he asks and answers the question, "Does it make sense to challenge economic growth directly?" After some convincing discussion, he concludes that "if growth remains an over-riding priority, [the adoption of any far-reaching prescriptions] will remain problematic. The powerful forces driving the clash of economy and environment thus will continue, and that makes it necessary to address those forces--growth, consumerism, corporate behavior among them. So it makes very good sense to question economic growth and the growth imperative." Neil K. Dawe, Director of Canadian Operations Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy 2009/7/31 James Crants <[email protected]> > Kelly, > > I think you're right that more intelligent, efficient use of resources > (including improved technology) could produce economic growth with no > increase in consumption, but this has its limits. The logic is really > pretty simple; can the economy keep growing forever? No. At some point, > you've made all the gains that improved efficiency and technological > advancement can give you, and more growth cannot be achieved without more > resources. > > It doesn't look like our improvements in efficiency are keeping up with o= ur > demands for resources, so growth at the current rate necessarily requires > increased resource consumption. In fact, we're already experiencing > humanitarian disasters and wars over dwindling resources. The Gulf War a= nd > the latest invasion of Iraq were both about who controls the oil supply, > and > the Rwandan genocide was essentially over agricultural land. Attempts to > drill for oil in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge and to tap Yellowsto= ne > for geothermal energy indicate that anything we think we've preserved for > posterity might be sold off and consumed, if the price is high enough. > > It's not that economic growth is inherently bad. Continued growth is bad > when you're already running out of resources to fuel it. > > Jim C. > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 7:46 AM, Kelly Stettner < > [email protected] > > wrote: > > > Wayne: I love your enthusiasm and support for the "sparks" that ignite > > conversation and imagination! > > > > Joe: Thank you for your "humble opinion," you invite me to clarify and > ask > > more questions. You note two points about economic growth: > > > > 1. "Economic growth", as commonly used, means that every year the human > > species creates more "economic activity" than the year before (fueled b= y > > growth in both population and per-capita consumption). > > > > 2. "Economic activity" inevitably involves consumption of resources, so > > that means every year we convert more land to human use, generate more > > electricity, cut more trees, mine more minerals and fuels, manufacture > more > > goods, produce more pollution, catch more fish, etc. So clearly there > has > > to be a limit at some point. > > > > Joe, Since I'm not an economist, I must ask questions in order to > > understand. I see what you're saying in both of the above points; > unlimited > > "taking" is short-sighted and self-defeating. However, can the growth > and > > activity you describe not be coupled with activities that replenish wha= t > we > > consume? We cut trees and mine the earth ~ but we can also replant and > > learn ways to harness the energy we need from a variety of resources. = I > > know that much of our technology seemed like science fiction just ten o= r > > twenty years ago. iPhones, blackberries, laptops ~ even digital watche= s > > were fantasy before they became reality. Is there reason to believe we > > can't figure out how to replenish the resources we use, use them more > > efficiently, engage in utilizing other resources we hadn't tried before > > (Sea-floor vents? Algae? Kudzu or Japanese knotweed? Something on Ma= rs > on > > the moon?), and find ways to lessen our impact on the planet? Green > roofs, > > companion gardening, rain barrels, etc are all low-tech, old ideas tha= t > > could be just the beginning ~ and could also fuel the economic growth o= f > our > > society. Businesses are cropping up all over the place to explore thes= e > > ideas. > > > > I also see economic growth in terms of those nations with big problems: > I'm > > thinking about improving pollution and sanitation and waste issues in > places > > like Africa and India and China. Environmental degradation isn't just = a > > Western problem; I think it's even more critical of an issue in > > less-developed areas of the world. Change in those places will take mo= re > > than a few years, it'll take a change in government before any real > > environmental issues are recognized and addressed. The issues of > > population, sanitation, poverty and pollution in those areas of the wor= ld > > are far more complex than I can understand at this point in my life, bu= t > I > > feel strongly that the developed nations need to recognize that Third > World > > pollution & waste are a huge "elephant in the room." > > > > A few more cents' worth, > > Kelly Stettner > > Director > > Black River Action Team > > www. BlackRiverActionTeam. org > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 20:26:38 -0700 > > From: Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: ESA position on sustainable growth > > > > Forum: > > > > I find myself in agreement with almost all "sides" of this discussion; = it > > is > > healthy, stimulating, alive--as it should be. > > > > I am greatly encouraged that this Forum, fine as it is, is undergoing > > likewise a process of refinement, and I welcome the array of voices tha= t > > provide great illuminating sparks. > > > > Gratefully, > > WT > > > > "'Tis friction's brisk rub that provides the vital spark!" --Unknown > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:21:12 -0700 > > From: joseph gathman <[email protected]> > > Subject: What's wrong with growth, (was: ESA position on sustainable > > growth) > > > > Kelly Stettner wrote: > > > Why does growth have to be viewed as "bad"? > > > > Kelly - since you asked, here's why the original proposers targeted > > economic growth as the problem (as I have understood it): > > > > 1. "Economic growth", as commonly used, means that every year the human > > species creates more "economic activity" than the year before (fueled b= y > > growth in both population and per-capita consumption). > > > > 2. "Economic activity" inevitably involves consumption of resources, so > > that means every year we convert more land to human use, generate more > > electricity, cut more trees, mine more minerals and fuels, manufacture > more > > goods, produce more pollution, catch more fish, etc. So clearly there > has > > to be a limit at some point. > > > > Economists and politicians claim that some economic growth doesn't > involve > > consumption. This may be true, but the examples they give are debatabl= e, > > and they still can't show how the entire economy can grow without growt= h > in > > resource consumption. So far all we have is big claims and hopeful > words. > > The neoclassical-economic world even gave us Julian Simon and others wh= o > > denied the existence of ANY limits to natural resources. This is not a > > crowd in which I can have any confidence. > > > > Just my humble opinion, > > Joe > > > > > > > > > > > -- > James Crants, PhD > Scientist, University of Minnesota > Agronomy and Plant Genetics > Cell: (734) 474-7478 > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 00:13:03 -0700 From: Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Listserv posting and email subject line additions Ecolog Ecolog: All of Silvert's points are well-taken. (I must admit to have occasionally emailed both the poster and Ecolog, but I agree with Silvert that deleting the poster's email address is a courtesy that should be practiced) Perhaps the key is to encourage originators to use subject lines, particularly beginning with one word most relevant and basic to the subject matter? What alternative might improve the custom? Can everyone be satisfied? If the most relevant and basic term is the lead in the subject line, those who would enjoy the convenience of merely clicking on the subject category to assemble all of the related posts, there is an added benefit to the instant retrieval of all messages with the same lead term, but most likely with a different secondary category, regardless of the posting date, that would serve as a reminder of similar threads in the past. This would place the current thread foremost in the list, unlike performing a search for a term that, while one might think it would be present in the subject line, it would not be, e.g., in a thread with a subject line like "2010 ESA Annual Meeting: Call for Symposium and OOS Proposals." One would not find that thread through a "Climate" or "Global warming," for example, would one? In this case, I believe that the subject did shift from "2010" to a discussion focused on climate, specifically the theme of the meetings, to wit, "The theme for the ESA Annual Meeting in 2010 is 'Global Warming: The legacy of our past, the challenge for our future,'" the subject within that post that prompted the post I made and added the most general category, "climate" to the subject line, which I considered appropriate and relevant. I retained the original post and its subject line for reference, even though the "strand" of the ESA meeting post (not yet a "thread" at the time; it was an initial, or original, post). I suppose I could have made it an entirely "new" thread, and left the post and the key statement within it out or pasted it in, out of context. If no addition to the subject-line in this specific case was justified, I would welcome any reasoning to the contrary. Just to be clear, I am perfectly satisfied with Ecolog as it is, with each post reflecting the best judgment of the author. WT PS: Since Silvert has truncated my original post below, those interested in my initial post on this thread (as originator) will have to look for it (if it has not been deleted) under its posting date. Not to sound grumbly, but I think it's best to include the entire context/thread when responding to posts; in fact, I find it most convenient for all posters to include the entire thread so that readers do not have to hunt up the pieces. While this may seem untidy, it does enable one to have the entire thread (and its strands) on one email; in that case, all the other previous posts can be deleted, greatly facilitating review. (Admittedly, there is a problem with this, as responses are not always in perfect sequence.) If one is going to delete portions of a post, the use of a telling notice such as [clip] can give the reader a hint that a fragment is missing. But, as long as there is clarity, I welcome the diversity of opinion and reasoned, relevant contributions to all subjects. It is simply the best list on the Internet, and the only one to which I subscribe. ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Silvert" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 4:09 AM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Listserv posting and email subject line additions Ecolog > Although I can understand the potential for people who only follow a > couple > of topics with threaded readers to miss some posts with modified subject > lines, I really don't see this as a big issue. Most threads dominate the > postings for their lifetime, but threads evolve too, and after a while the > original subject line is no longer fully descriptive. As for tracing back > to > the original posting, if the post includes just the relevant part that > should be sufficient. > > And in keeping with the evolutionary nature of threads, I would add my own > mild complaint - replying not only to the list, but to the poster as well. > This means that the person who posts gets two copies of every reply, but > this can lead to confusion for everyone, since it unsyncs the postings. > Suppose that you reply to this post with messages to both me and the list. > I > get the personal reply first, and respond to both you and the list. Unlss > David is very diligent about the order that items go out, list members may > receive a response before they see the message to which the response is > sent. This happens sometimes on this list, but it is quite common on > unmoderated lists where longer messages may take longer to get circulated. > Since presumably the people who post to the list also read the list, there > is no need to include them in the reply, just send it to the list please. > > Bill Silvert > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Wayne Tyson" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 9:32 PM > Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Listserv posting and email subject line additions > Ecolog > > > Ecolog: > > I received the following message from a listserv subscriber who wishes to > remain anonymous: > > "I know people have asked before and you have dismissed it, but I find >> your changing of seemingly every subject line annoying and >> presumptuous. In this case, what was gained by changing the subject >> line? It made referencing back the original email more difficult." > > . . . and in later message: "PS This is a personal message and I would > appreciate it not being > forwarded to the whole list. > > Thanks," > [Name withheld at sender's request]] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date: 07/31/09 05:58:00 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 08:37:51 +0100 From: William Silvert <[email protected]> Subject: Re: What's wrong with growth, (was: ESA position on sustainable growth) I don't have any data on these cities, but there seems to be a growing consensus that city dwellers have a smaller footprint than people living in the countryside. On a per capita basis I suspect that these two "dense, hi-tech masses of humanity" are not doing too badly, especially since in wealthy cities there is more incentive to find good ways to dispose of waste. Landfills are expensive, and in cities you are more likely to find old cars recycled than dumped in a field. Sure I agree with all of Joe's comments about being careful and not trusting incompetent economists, but I do think that people can often manage to live better without requiring more resources per person. Is this economic growth? I'll leave that to the economic semanticists. Bill Silvert ----- Original Message ----- From: "joseph gathman" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 7:08 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] What's wrong with growth, (was: ESA position on sustainable growth) > By the way, you mentioned Hong Kong and Singapore. What is the ecological > footprint of those two dense, hi-tech masses of humanity? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 06:52:28 -0700 From: Ted Floyd <[email protected]> Subject: Summary of Colorado Birds, Vol. 43, No. 2 Hello, Ecologists. Here is a summary of the contents of vol. 43 no. 2 (2009) of the journal Colorado Birds, published by Colorado Field Ornithologists (CFO). * PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE. * By BILL SCHMOKER. * Pp. 88-89. * Welcome to incoming CFO President Jim Beatty, plus reflections on the growth of the organization in recent years. * CFO BOARD MINUTES. * By ALLISON HILF. * Pp. 89-92. * Minutes of the 31 January 2009 CFO board meeting, including actions and deliberations regarding adoption by CFO of the ABA Code of Birding Ethics, bylaws changes regarding board service and term limits, and enhancements to online communication from CFO. * ACROSS THE BOARD: JIM BEATTY. * By BILL SCHMOKER. * Pp. 92-95. * Profile of CFO board member Jim Beatty, Vice President and Field Trip Director; a lifelong birder, Beatty attended Cornell University, where he squandered his time in engineering, not ornithology; he has since made amends by birding hard everywhere he goes; as a CFO board member, Beatty is especially keen on continuing to develop online excellence for the organization. * TEN YEARS OF PROJECT FUNDING BY CFO. * By WILLIAM H. KAEMPFER. * Pp. 95-97. * Overview of CFO's research project fund, which has provided more than $21,000 to 25 projects during the past 10+ years; funded research has focused both on individual bird species and special bird habitats, and research results are regularly reported in this journal. * REMEMBERING BILL BROCKNER. * By KEVIN J. COOK. * Pp. 98-101. * Reminiscences about the life and times of the late William ("Bill") Brockner, Colorado birding icon, tireless champion of bird conservation, and one of the first persons to record 700 species in North America north of Mexico. * KLEPTOPARASITISM OF AMERICAN COOTS BY AMERICAN WIGEONS. * By LISA CARMODY and ALEXANDER CRUZ. * Pp. 101-111. * A quantitative study of kleptoparasitism of American Coots by American Wigeons, conducted in Boulder County, Colorado, revealed that kleptoparasitism rates are higher in female wigeons than in males, that coot density and overall frequency of kleptoparasitism by wigeons are positively correlated, and that overall feeding rates and frequency of kleptoparasitism are inversely correlated. * COLORADO'S FIRST RECORD OF SOOTY TERN. * By BRANDON K. PERCIVAL. * Pp. 111-115. * Written account and photographic documentation of Colorado's first Sooty Tern, present 12-13 September 2008 in Otero and Crowley Counties; the bird was judged to have arrived in Colorado via Hurricane Gustav, whose remnants passed over southeastern Oklahoma nine days prior to the Colorado sighting. * DENVER AUDUBON'S MASTER BIRDER PROGRAM. * By KAREN VON SALTZA. * Pp. 115-120. * Overview of Master Birder certification process by the Audubon Society of Greater Denver; starting with a selective admissions process, participants complete 18 requirements, including recognition in the field of 200 bird species in Colorado, so as to be able to assume leadership roles in the Colorado birding community. * FIELD NOTE: AN APPARENT SECOND BROOD OF JUNIPER TITMOUSE. * By TINA MITCHELL. * Pp. 120-123. * Documentation of an apparent second brood by a Juniper Titmouse pair in Fremont County, Colorado; previous research on the breeding ecology of the species has been quite scant, indicating that Juniper Titmice usually raise one brood per year; there are few if any previously published reports of double-brooding in the species. * THE 50TH REPORT OF THE CBRC. * By LAWRENCE S. SEMO. * Pp. 123-135. * Summary of 63 reports by 11 observers of 43 occurrences of 39 bird species, 9 reports of which were rejected; highlights include acceptance of Colorado's first Sooty Tern, bringing the state list to 488 species, plus acceptances of King Rail, Ancient Murrelet, Smith's Longspur, and Type 3 Red Crossbill. * THE HUNGRY BIRDER: ALAMOSA. * By JOHN J. RAWINSKI. * Pp. 135-137. * The lowdown on where to eat in Alamosa, offering Mexican restaurants aplenty, the True Grits Steakhouse (with its John Wayne motif), Wise Apples (burgers and fries), and various coffee shops that, alas, tend not to be open when birders most need for them to be open, i.e., before sunrise. * NEWS FROM THE FIELD: FALL 2008 (AUGUST-NOVEMBER). * By ANDREW SPENCER. * Pp. 137-152. * Highlights include Eurasian Wigeon, Red-throated Loon (6 reports), Yellow-billed Loon, Brown Pelican, multiple Tricolored Herons, Red-shouldered Hawk, Gyrfalcon, Laughing Gull (3 reports), possible Slaty-backed Gull, Glaucous-winged Gull, Sooty Tern, Ancient Murrelet, Whip-poor-will, Anna's Hummingbird, Eastern Wood-Pewee, Alder Flycatcher, possible Pacific-slope Flycatcher, Philadelphia Vireo, Henslow's Sparrow, and Nelson's Sharp-tailed Sparrow. * IN THE SCOPE: JUVENILE HORNED LARK. * By TONY LEUKERING. * Pp. 152-154. * Cautionary note about the potential to confuse juvenile Horned Larks with other bird Colorado bird species, especially Sprague's Pipits; juvenile Horned Larks can be present in Colorado from late March into September; a good point of distinction is the long primary projection of Horned Lark vs. the short primary projection of Sprague's Pipit. For more information on the journal Colorado Birds, please visit the Colorado Birds webpage of the CFO website: http://tiny.cc/yIre4. For more information on CFO, please visit the CFO homepage: http://www.cfo-link.org. ------------------------------- Ted Floyd [email protected] Lafayette, Boulder County, Colorado ------------------------------- Ted Floyd Editor, Birding ------------------------------- Please support the American Birding Association: Click on http://www.goodsearch.com/?charityid=884482 to search the internet. Check out the American Birding Association on FaceBook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=22934255714 Check out the American Birding Association on Twitter: http://twitter.com/abaoutreach Please visit the website of the American Birding Association: http://www.aba.org _________________________________________________________________ Get free photo software from Windows Live http://www.windowslive.com/online/photos?ocid=PID23393::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:SI_PH_software:082009 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 16:58:59 -0700 From: Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> Subject: Reason and rhetoric The Fall and Growth of Intellectual Discipline ECOLOG as fertile ground? Y'all:=20 I confess to not being quite up to the task of following all the = convolutions of all the threads and strands of discussion about = "growth," for example, so I'll cast this before the multitudes of my = betters for analysis.=20 "Intellectual" has gotten a bad rap over the years. I suspect that one = of the primary causes is the snooty way those who think of themselves as = intellectuals claim superiority over the more plain-spoken "folk." It is = a natural reaction to this kind of snobbery to oppose it intuitively, = and it seems that the logical and reason the baby gets thrown out with = the bathwater--for example, all academics get tarred with the same brush = when some hayseed emerges from the shrubbery in full anti-intellectual = cry. Then the pendulum sways backwards as the "intellectuals" who feel = gored by such cries or who seize upon any fragment, large or small, of = the anti-intellectual rant and discredit all hayseeds, regardless of the = meritorious part(s) imbedded within their outraged or even = self-deprecating rhetoric.=20 In both the "hayseed" camp and the "intellectual" camp there are solid = thinkers and irrational poseurs who use diversionary tactics to "win," = rather than find common ground and pick carefully through the thickets = in a disciplined exchange. All the sound and fury may be insignificant = to reasonable minds, but when penetration of the semantic foggery is = attempted by such minorities, they are quickly shrouded by the smoke of = indignation and they back off in frustration.=20 Is this dichotomy real? If so, what is the cure?=20 I hope that the best intellects in academia will step forward (perhaps = in this forum, perhaps elsewhere) and set an example for us all. No = doubt they will have to pick carefully through the aborted seedcoats and = chaff for a few viable hayseeds, but the dialogue, one would hope, would = pave the way toward removing the causes of anti-intellectualism at its = root, much of it right under their feet. Noblesse Oblige?=20 One of the first signs of this might be to look for merit in the = statements of the inferior and build upon that/those point(s) rather = than coyly suggesting the inferiority of the anti-intellectual (hayseed, = academic, or ?) or outright putting him or her in his or her place. From = that higher road, I wonder if error might then fall away and be replaced = by reason? Might the kind of mutual respect often expressed on Ecolog be = magnified and catch on across society?=20 Just an idea . . . WT ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 16:21:38 -0500 From: James Crants <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Listserv posting and email subject line additions Ecolog Wayne, I'm with Jonathan here. I use gmail, and I find it much easier to identify a new post as relevant to previous ones if it is included in the same thread. I get at least 50 emails a day, and I'm simply not going to take the time to do a search for emails whose subject lines share terms with the ones I'm interested in. Instead, I visually scan for threads that have already caught my interest by looking for threads with multiple posts, and I scan for new threads that might be interesting by looking at the portion of the subject line that's visible in my inbox. If a thread doesn't seem interesting at this stage, out it goes, with only slight risk I'll miss anything I care about. Which brings up another problem with changing the subject line when the subject hasn't really changed: if your new subject text is all I can see in my inbox, I may not know it's connected to the old thread. Given your fondness for wordplay, there's a fair chance that the purpose of your message won't be obvious based on what I see in my inbox, and I'll delete it without realizing it's related to a thread I'm interested in. Finally, I've noticed that the change in subject heading sometimes leads to one conversation forking into two parallel ones, with the same points being made under both subject lines. Given how long it can take to craft a response that you know hundreds of intelligent people might be reading, the time wasted when a conversation forks and people unwittingly replicate each other's points may be substantial. Jim Crants On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:13 AM, Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> wrote: > Ecolog: > > All of Silvert's points are well-taken. (I must admit to have occasionally > emailed both the poster and Ecolog, but I agree with Silvert that deleting > the poster's email address is a courtesy that should be practiced) Perhaps > the key is to encourage originators to use subject lines, particularly > beginning with one word most relevant and basic to the subject matter? What > alternative might improve the custom? Can everyone be satisfied? > > If the most relevant and basic term is the lead in the subject line, those > who would enjoy the convenience of merely clicking on the subject category > to assemble all of the related posts, there is an added benefit to the > instant retrieval of all messages with the same lead term, but most likely > with a different secondary category, regardless of the posting date, that > would serve as a reminder of similar threads in the past. This would place > the current thread foremost in the list, unlike performing a search for a > term that, while one might think it would be present in the subject line, it > would not be, e.g., in a thread with a subject line like "2010 ESA Annual > Meeting: Call for Symposium and OOS Proposals." One would not find that > thread through a "Climate" or "Global warming," for example, would one? In > this case, I believe that the subject did shift from "2010" to a discussion > focused on climate, specifically the theme of the meetings, to wit, "The > theme for the ESA Annual Meeting in 2010 is 'Global Warming: The legacy of > our past, the challenge for our future,'" the subject within that post that > prompted the post I made and added the most general category, "climate" to > the subject line, which I considered appropriate and relevant. I retained > the original post and its subject line for reference, even though the > "strand" of the ESA meeting post (not yet a "thread" at the time; it was an > initial, or original, post). I suppose I could have made it an entirely > "new" thread, and left the post and the key statement within it out or > pasted it in, out of context. > > If no addition to the subject-line in this specific case was justified, I > would welcome any reasoning to the contrary. > > Just to be clear, I am perfectly satisfied with Ecolog as it is, with each > post reflecting the best judgment of the author. > > WT > > PS: Since Silvert has truncated my original post below, those interested in > my initial post on this thread (as originator) will have to look for it (if > it has not been deleted) under its posting date. Not to sound grumbly, but I > think it's best to include the entire context/thread when responding to > posts; in fact, I find it most convenient for all posters to include the > entire thread so that readers do not have to hunt up the pieces. While this > may seem untidy, it does enable one to have the entire thread (and its > strands) on one email; in that case, all the other previous posts can be > deleted, greatly facilitating review. (Admittedly, there is a problem with > this, as responses are not always in perfect sequence.) If one is going to > delete portions of a post, the use of a telling notice such as [clip] can > give the reader a hint that a fragment is missing. But, as long as there is > clarity, I welcome the diversity of opinion and reasoned, relevant > contributions to all subjects. It is simply the best list on the Internet, > and the only one to which I subscribe. > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Silvert" <[email protected]> > > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 4:09 AM > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Listserv posting and email subject line additions > Ecolog > > > > Although I can understand the potential for people who only follow a couple >> of topics with threaded readers to miss some posts with modified subject >> lines, I really don't see this as a big issue. Most threads dominate the >> postings for their lifetime, but threads evolve too, and after a while the >> original subject line is no longer fully descriptive. As for tracing back >> to >> the original posting, if the post includes just the relevant part that >> should be sufficient. >> >> And in keeping with the evolutionary nature of threads, I would add my own >> mild complaint - replying not only to the list, but to the poster as well. >> This means that the person who posts gets two copies of every reply, but >> this can lead to confusion for everyone, since it unsyncs the postings. >> Suppose that you reply to this post with messages to both me and the list. >> I >> get the personal reply first, and respond to both you and the list. Unlss >> David is very diligent about the order that items go out, list members may >> receive a response before they see the message to which the response is >> sent. This happens sometimes on this list, but it is quite common on >> unmoderated lists where longer messages may take longer to get circulated. >> Since presumably the people who post to the list also read the list, there >> is no need to include them in the reply, just send it to the list please. >> >> Bill Silvert >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wayne Tyson" <[email protected]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 9:32 PM >> Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Listserv posting and email subject line additions >> Ecolog >> >> >> Ecolog: >> >> I received the following message from a listserv subscriber who wishes to >> remain anonymous: >> >> "I know people have asked before and you have dismissed it, but I find >> >>> your changing of seemingly every subject line annoying and >>> presumptuous. In this case, what was gained by changing the subject >>> line? It made referencing back the original email more difficult." >>> >> >> . . . and in later message: "PS This is a personal message and I would >> appreciate it not being >> forwarded to the whole list. >> >> Thanks," >> [Name withheld at sender's request]] >> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date: 07/31/09 > 05:58:00 > -- James Crants, PhD Scientist, University of Minnesota Agronomy and Plant Genetics Cell: (734) 474-7478 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 10:41:32 +0900 From: Mayuko Tanigawa <[email protected]> Subject: New articles for Population Ecology (July 2009) New articles for Population Ecology (July 2009) Eleven new articles of Population Ecology were published at 'Online First' last month. (1) Rachel M. Goodman Evidence of divergent growth rates among populations of the lizard Anolis carolinensis based on experimental manipulations of egg size (2) Shouhei Ueda, Swee-Peck Quek, Takao Itioka, Kaori Murase and Takao Itino Phylogeography of the Coccus scale insects inhabiting myrmecophytic Macaranga plants in Southeast Asia (3) Jan Riegert, Drahomíra Fainová and Dagmar Bystřická Genetic variability, body characteristics and reproductive parameters of neighbouring rural and urban common kestrel (Falco tinnuculus) populations (4) Xue-Bing Yan, Yu-Xia Guo, Fa-Yang Liu, Chong Zhao, Quan-Lan Liu and Bao-Rong Lu Population structure affected by excess gene flow in self-pollinating Elymus nutans and E. burchan-buddae (Triticeae: Poaceae) (5) Hiroshi O. Tanaka, Seiki Yamane and Takao Itioka Within-tree distribution of nest sites and foraging areas of ants on canopy trees in a tropical rainforest in Borneo (6) Mauro Fasola, Diego Rubolini, Enrico Merli, Eleonora Boncompagni Long-term trends of heron and egret populations in Italy, and the effects of climate, human-induced mortality, and habitat on population dynamics (7) James G. Smith, Anthony D. Griffiths and Barry W. Brook Survival estimation in a long-lived monitor lizard: radio-tracking of Varanus mertensi (8) Joseph O. Ogutu, Hans-Peter Piepho, Holly T. Dublin, Nina Bhola and Robin S. Reid Rainfall extremes explain interannual shifts in timing and synchrony of calving in topi and warthog (9) James Joseph Campanella, Paul A. X. Bologna, Stephanie M. Smith, Eric B. Rosenzweig and John V. Smalley Zostera marina population genetics in Barnegat Bay, New Jersey, and implications for grass bed restoration (10) Lázaro Rafael Sánchez-Velásquez and María del Rosario Pineda-López Comparative demographic analysis in contrasting environments of Magnolia dealbata: an endangered species from Mexico (11) Cristina Lopez-Gallego and Pamela O’Neil Life-history variation following habitat degradation associated with differing fine-scale spatial genetic structure in a rainforest cycad The abstracts of these articles are available for everyone free of charge at Online First. The full texts are available for the members of the Society of Population Ecology and institutions registered with SpringerLink. * Population Ecology at Online First: http://www.springerlink.com/content/103139/?Content+Status=Accepted However, the article (6) above has been published as 'Open Choice'; the 'Open Choice' articles have full, free access to anyone, any time, and anywhere in the world, regardless of the individual membership of the society or the institutional registration with SpringerLink. Have a read of this article promoted by Population Ecology at http://www.springerlink.com/content/103139/?Content+Status=Accepted The details of 'Open Choice' are explained at the following site. http://www.springer.com/east/home/open+choice?SGWID=5-40359-0-0-0 Population Ecology is an English scientific journal published by the Society of Population Ecology four times a year. It enjoys a high international reputation and has a long history of over 40 years. All manuscripts are reviewed anonymously by two referees, and the final editorial decision is made by the Chief Editor based on the referees' evaluations. The articles are abstracted/indexed in BIOSIS, Current Contents/ Agriculture, Biology & Environmental Sciences, Environmental Periodicals Bibliography (EPB). Population Ecology welcomes submissions of papers by non-members. To submit your manuscript to Population Ecology, go to https://www.editorialmanager.com/poec/ We look forward to your subscription and submission. Editorial Office Population Ecology Chief Editor Takashi Saitoh Field Science Center Hokkaido University, Japan ------------------------------ End of ECOLOG-L Digest - 1 Aug 2009 to 2 Aug 2009 (#2009-212) *************************************************************
