Re: Ecology and the American Indian

[Ellen Dannin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]

A visit to Cahokia (across the river from St. Louis) is fascinating in and
of itself and also for the evidence it provides that the large number of
residents there overused the local resources, which then led to its
decline. There may have been other factors, such as climate, but the
decline took place sufficiently recently -- i.e. just before contact -- 
that climate records should be sufficiently revealing to decide whether
this was a factor.

Just as it's wrong to assume that an Indian is an Indian with no
variations, it is also wrong to assume that all there is to the
Judaeo-Christian tradition can be summed up in one sentence of Genesis.
Other parts of the bible make it clear that parts of a field had to remain
unharvested and that every seventh year the land had to be allowed to
rest. It was forbidden to cut down fruit trees in time of war, for
example. Not paying workers on a daily basis was a crime against the
community because it could lead to poverty and anti-social behaviour.

There were lots of rabbinic exegeses on these and other points which
expanded the protections. There is a whole line of analysis on baalei
chayot - the pain of living things - and of the demand that humans not
cause pain to animals or other living things.

How much or how little individuals observed these is open to debate, just
as it seems likely that not all Indians, even members of a very
ecologically oriented tribe, likely behaved in a fully reverent way
towards nature.



Ellen J. Dannin
California Western School of Law
225 Cedar Street
San Diego, CA  92101
Phone:  619-525-1449
Fax:    619-696-9999