I think that Malcolm's posting is based on an overly restrictive
mathematical view. It is not necessary to quantify things in order to rank
them. Was Shakespeare a greater writer than X (whom I shall not name)? By
what numerical criterion? When battlefield physicians carry out triage, do
they use a calculator? Is it really that hard to figure out how important
earthworms are? We should be able to set our priorities without putting an
artificial price on everything. Even statisticians have been able to
ordinate without numerical values.
The statement "How can you value something for which you don't know its
role????", is also a bit restrictive. It is true that there are millions of
species, many of them as yet unknown, which we can neither value nor
identify by role, but that is not really the issue. When it comes to
conservation we are talking about a relatively small number of identifiable
species which are the objects of attention and debate. For these we have by
now been able to identify the roles of different species in ecosystems. Many
of the recent postings seem to suggest that we don't know anythng abut how
ecosystems work, and that is why we cannot determine which species are most
vital and deserving of our limited capacity to conserve. I really think that
we have a pretty good idea of who does what in ecosystems, and which species
are most critical to ecosystem functioning. Our knowledge is far from
perfect, but good enough so that I think that we are shirking our
responsibility if we just sit back and fail to provide scientific input to
critical decisions that affect the global ecosystem.
Bill Silvert
----- Original Message -----
From: "malcolm McCallum" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: segunda-feira, 23 de Novembro de 2009 3:11
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Insignificant species?
Then you would be lumping inappropriately.
I am not saying we should not try, just saying that we are
pretty darn naive if we think we can do much of a good job
with our absence of knowledge. How can you value something
for which you don't know its role????
IN fact, such situations of valuing will inevitably lead to such
economic approaches as contingent valuation. In esence,
most folks won't value a garden slug very high. How do you value it?
What does its actual role amount to in $$?
While one might think something is important, another might think that
same thing/role is unimportant. We can't even agree on simple things
such as what species is in our hand...how can we possibly gain consensus
with our meager understanding of of ecological webs to possibly get there.
So much life history information is lacking on so many species, it is
virtually
impossible to do much more than guess at a value considering this
currently
lacking understanding.
