Jason, et al-

The purist position is untenable.  If human agency marks the difference
between wild and managed, as soon as we take any action to change (+/-)  the
fitness of any population or species we move it from the roster of wild
biota to the roster of managed biota.  Even dividing wild from managed along
the lines of intentionally vs unintentionally affected becomes problematic;
that puts unintentionally subsidized fitness (e.g., weeds) into the wild
category.  Attempts to parse all this began in the 1830s.  Natural
historians then were distinguishing natural history from human history based
on evidence of human agency.  Absence of such evidence was all that made
natives native or wild things wild.  This remains the case.  In short,
ecologists need to 'get over' such distinctions.  They aren't ecological.
They're cultural.  Human agency, intentional or otherwise, now affects
everything, and will for the foreseeable future.

Matthew K Chew
Assistant Research Professor
Arizona State University School of Life Sciences

ASU Center for Biology & Society
PO Box 873301
Tempe, AZ 85287-3301 USA
Tel 480.965.8422
Fax 480.965.8330
[email protected] or [email protected]
http://cbs.asu.edu/people/profiles/chew.php
http://asu.academia.edu/MattChew

Reply via email to