[ECOLOG-L] Ecology Terminology Natural Re: [ECOLOG-L] Natural systems
Honorable Forum: It is intellectually healthy to continue to discuss meanings, particularly when the discussion sharpens rather than muddies distinctions. That is, after all, why language is useful. Language breaks down when it is used to manipulate rather than communicate. Context is important, particularly when a term can mean different things in different contexts, but terms are most useful when they are universal in their meaning. In some academic contexts, for example, terms may be defined more or less sharply than in the general context of the broader usage in society at large. Beyond the sometimes necessary realm of technical jargon and shorthand, any discipline stands to benefit from terminology that is as universal, that has the same meaning in the broader context of society and in the realm of academic discipline. Sometimes, as in ecology, for example, the meaning of terms becomes muddied by overly broad application, when distinctions become unclear or marginally relevant to the more disciplined definition. Natural, however, while it may suffer from some misuse (as in advertising, which is, by its nature [no pun], artificial), has long served to distinguish that which is artificial from that which simply IS, without interference. Nature is natural; that which interferes with it is artificial. WT - Original Message - From: Czech, Brian cz...@vt.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:09 PM Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Natural systems It's true that natural is just semantics in some contexts, but defining the term can affect the way our public lands are managed. See for example the Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health Policy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Here is one proposal for a frame of reference for natural conditions: http://steadystate.org/Chronological_Frame_of_Reference_for_Ecological_Integrity.pdf http://steadystate.org/Chronological_Frame_of_Reference_for_Ecological_Integrity.pdf Brian Czech, Visiting Professor Natural Resources Program Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University National Capital Region, Northern Virginia Center 7054 Haycock Road, Room 411 Falls Church, Virginia 22043 From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news on behalf of Steve Kunz Sent: Fri 2009-03-06 10:24 To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Climate change and Agroecosystems In the case of human mammals, there is something unique about our place in the world. We have the intelligence to control our environment on a large scale. Our control of otherwise natural systems can throw them out of balance, or at least, into a new balance. In an extreme case, this intelligent control can completely wipe out most if not all of our own species and most others (think: nuclear war). The planet doesn't care if this happens, and some species will survive and help start things over. Is the result natural or unnatural? At that point, it's just semantics anyway. Peace! Steve Kunz In a message dated 3/5/2009 6:08:37 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, atom.fuller...@gmail.com writes: I'm a grad student who reads the list-serve to look for job opportunities, but these threads on agroecosystems and climate change bring up a question I have never really gotten a satisfactory answer to, namely: Are humans to be considered a part of the natural world? On the one hand, humans are clearly a species of mammal living on the planet. Science in general follows the Copernican Principle: don't assume there is anything particularly unique about your place in the world. I doubt many of you would consider us to have been specifically placed on the planet and set apart from other forms of life. And yet, when it comes to the things humans do, a clear distinction is made between human causes and natural ones, human modified ecosystems and wild ones. And it is definitely useful to make distictions between human effects and natural ones when studying many ecosystems-I've certainly done it in my own research. So why is this true? How can natural humans cause unnatural effects (or is one assumption false, despite both seeming reasonable)? Can only humans harm the environment? What's the difference between an invasive species being introduced to an island by humans, or the same one arriving on the foot of a bird? What does harming the environment mean, anyway? Somewhat like the two perspectives above, I have seen it defined as: (A) changing the environment from it's original natural or pre-human state (which natural state? how do you define your baseline?), and (B) Making the environment less capable of supporting human life (supporting human life now or indefinietely? at what standard of living?). Those two goals aren't always compatable. So, comments? Thoughts? How do you resolve this? Adam
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Thank you for responding to the survey!
Czech, Brian wrote: Surely the key to environmental protection and economic security is not to maximize scientific credibility or minimize social responsibility, but rather to optimize the mixture. An interesting survey on self-censorship was forwarded to me this week. It's an good idea and I'd be curious to see the results, especially if others on this list participate. Here's the link: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=F1xytz_2fF_2fPl31pjFaIMzcg_3d_3d
[ECOLOG-L] Microbial Metagenomics Course, Summer 09
Microbial Metagenomics MMG 490/MMG 890 Section 432 Drs. Thomas Schmidt and Jay Lennon, MSU June 15th -- June 27th Kellogg Biological Station MTuWThFSat 9am - 5pm *Admission to this class is by application only; Scholarship support is available!* This course offers students opportunities to use state-of-the-art genomic methods to address questions about the structure and function of microbial communities. Our field site will be the Long Term Ecological Research Site at KBS. The nucleic acid based data generated during the course will be integrated with the expansive data set from the KBS LTER, which includes measurements of the flux of greenhouse gases. The ultimate goal of the course is to uncover relationships between changes in microbial communities and ecosystem functions. Morning lectures will address pertinent ecological theories and principles underlying experiments that will be conducting during the afternoon. The afternoon laboratory sessions will be focused on molecular methods, including generation purification of DNA from soil, PCR amplification and construction of clone libraries, and quantitative PCR. This is an intensive 2-week course modeled after the longer and internationally acclaimed MBL Microbial Diversity Course that Dr. Schmidt directs. 3 Credits. Admission to this class is by application only. http://www.kbs.msu.edu/summercourses/documents/Microbial-applic.doc or http://tinyurl.com/c73k62 Please email kbssum...@kbs.msu.edu with questions. Gwen Pearson, PhD Assistant Director for Education and Outreach Kellogg Biological Station http://www.kbs.msu.edu Other KBS Summer course listings: http://www.kbs.msu.edu/summercourses/courses/index.php
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Natural systems
Brian, Adam and all, Another angle I like to consider is that we could treat natural and human nature and naturalness of humans all as flexible and open to our creative and participatory input and action. One quick citation for this approach is the book by Wes Jackson - Becoming Native to this Place. Rather than treat natural as a static, objective, absolute, immutable term and reality, we can decide, assert, agree and act to make ourselves natural, as well as what that means to us. Many of us are not native to this place (Wes Jackson in Kansas or myself in Western Maryland) yet following Jackson's lead we could make a different reality - we could become native, or become natural, a natural part of the local environment, community, ecosystem able to co-exist with other species, self-sustain over the long-term and maybe even do more good than harm. I think it is a good question and topic of discussion, and even if messy, confusing or difficult still worth wrestling with. If it points to deep issues like paradigmatic stances of objectivist versus participatory human-nature relations, and lets people consider the implications, then it seems to have real value. A few rough thoughts on this...a topic I have also ponder all through grad. school and after... Dan Fiscus -- Dan Fiscus Assistant Professor Biology Department Frostburg State University 308 Compton Science Center Frostburg, MD 21532 USA 301-687-4170 dafis...@frostburg.edu From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news on behalf of Czech, Brian Sent: Sat 3/7/2009 5:09 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Natural systems It's true that natural is just semantics in some contexts, but defining the term can affect the way our public lands are managed. See for example the Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health Policy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Here is one proposal for a frame of reference for natural conditions: http://steadystate.org/Chronological_Frame_of_Reference_for_Ecological_Integrity.pdf http://steadystate.org/Chronological_Frame_of_Reference_for_Ecological_Integrity.pdf Brian Czech, Visiting Professor Natural Resources Program Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University National Capital Region, Northern Virginia Center 7054 Haycock Road, Room 411 Falls Church, Virginia 22043 From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news on behalf of Steve Kunz Sent: Fri 2009-03-06 10:24 To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Climate change and Agroecosystems In the case of human mammals, there is something unique about our place in the world. We have the intelligence to control our environment on a large scale. Our control of otherwise natural systems can throw them out of balance, or at least, into a new balance. In an extreme case, this intelligent control can completely wipe out most if not all of our own species and most others (think: nuclear war). The planet doesn't care if this happens, and some species will survive and help start things over. Is the result natural or unnatural? At that point, it's just semantics anyway. Peace! Steve Kunz In a message dated 3/5/2009 6:08:37 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, atom.fuller...@gmail.com writes: I'm a grad student who reads the list-serve to look for job opportunities, but these threads on agroecosystems and climate change bring up a question I have never really gotten a satisfactory answer to, namely: Are humans to be considered a part of the natural world? On the one hand, humans are clearly a species of mammal living on the planet. Science in general follows the Copernican Principle: don't assume there is anything particularly unique about your place in the world. I doubt many of you would consider us to have been specifically placed on the planet and set apart from other forms of life. And yet, when it comes to the things humans do, a clear distinction is made between human causes and natural ones, human modified ecosystems and wild ones. And it is definitely useful to make distictions between human effects and natural ones when studying many ecosystems-I've certainly done it in my own research. So why is this true? How can natural humans cause unnatural effects (or is one assumption false, despite both seeming reasonable)? Can only humans harm the environment? What's the difference between an invasive species being introduced to an island by humans, or the same one arriving on the foot of a bird? What does harming the environment mean, anyway? Somewhat like the two perspectives above, I have seen it defined as: (A) changing the environment from it's original natural or pre-human state (which natural state? how do you define your baseline?), and (B) Making the environment less capable of supporting human life (supporting human life now or indefinietely? at
[ECOLOG-L] GDP, housing bust, and habitat conversions
Has anyone been giving thought to how the current economic downturn might be affecting rates of habitat conversion? In the U.S., housing-based habitat conversions have been one of the leading drivers of habitat loss and degradation, during the most recent decades. This perhaps represents an opportunity for an empirical test of the steady state economy ideas. GDP has measurably dropped in the last months; have rates of habitat conversion likewise dropped? -- Robert Baldwin Assistant Professor, Conservation Biology/GIS Department of Forestry and Natural Resources Clemson University Clemson, SC (864) 656-4857
[ECOLOG-L] Summer Field Positions for Students: Forest Ecology on the Colville National Forest
DESCRIPTION: One (1) field crew supervisor and one (1) field crew position will be hired to assist a University of Montana graduate student with data collection. The project’s objective is to assess the response of ponderosa pine and Douglas fir to drought and climate variability across different habitat types and growing conditions. The crew will spend approximately three months working across all corners of the Colville National Forest in northeast WA to locate sites and collect data. Camping will sometimes be required to access the most remote sites. RESPONSIBILITIES: Primary duties will involve coring trees and measuring various stand and tree attributes. Locating study sites will be an important and challenging component of these positions and will require the use of topographic maps, GPS, 4WD and off-trail hiking. QUALIFICATIONS: These positions will be hired as USFS employees through the STEP program. Candidates must be students that plan on returning to a college or university degree program following the field season. These positions are best suited to upper-level undergraduates or graduate students who are giving serious consideration to advanced study or professional work in forest ecology or silviculture. Candidates must be in good physical condition and capable of working long days in the field under hot, rugged and sometimes remote conditions. Most importantly, I seek individuals who are self-motivated, detail-oriented, have legible handwriting, and can work and live cooperatively with others. Valid driver’s license and safe driving record is required. SALARY: $13.18 to $16.44/hr DOE. Housing will be available. DURATION/SCHEDULE: Positions will be based out of the Sullivan Lake Ranger District, ~20 miles from the Canadian border. Anticipated start and end dates are 8 June to 28 August 2009. The work schedule will most likely be four 10 hour days with three days off each week. CLOSING DATE: Applications will be considered on a rolling basis until 10 April 2008. APPLICATION MATERIALS: 1) Cover letter that includes information about your interests and qualifications; dates of availability; and names, phone numbers, and email addresses of 3 references - including your most recent employer; 2) Resume; 3) Academic Transcripts. TO APPLY: Attach application materials (preferably as a single Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF file) using the following naming format: “lastname_firstname_09App”. Email complete application with subject line “2009 Field Work Application” to: gunnar_carnw...@yahoo.com FOR MORE INFORMATION: Gunnar Carnwath, PhD candidate University of Montana Email: gunnar_carnw...@yahoo.com Phone: 509-675-1540
[ECOLOG-L] Postdoc: functional biodiversity research, Germany
Jena, Germany: Postdoctoral position in functional biodiversity research The position is based at the Institute of Ecology of the Friedrich-Schiller-University of Jena and will focus on synthesizing work on the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in biodiversity experiments and in natural and managed systems. The successful applicant will have the task to analyze if and how the mechanisms identified in biodiversity experiments can be applied to more natural systems and vice versa. The person will closely work together with researchers of the Jena grassland biodiversity experiment (www.the-jena-experiment.de). Preference is given to applicants with proven experience in community ecology and modeling. Experience in scientific writing is desirable. Please address further questions to mailto:wolfgang.weis...@uni-jena.dewolfgang.weis...@uni-jena.de. Central tasks include the scientific preparation and coordination of future project applications, the organization of workshops, and analyses of already existing data sets, pre-selection of suitable experimental sites and conduction of pre-studies. Further information are available under: http://www.uni-jena.de/ecology.htmlwww.uni-jena.de/ecology.html. The successful candidate should hold a PhD a relevant field. Salary and benefits are linked to the German employee scale TV-L (full position). As the Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena intends to increase the proportion of female employees in science, women are particularly encouraged to apply. In case of equal personal aptitudes and qualification priority will be given to disabled persons. Please send your application document (cover letter, CV, list of publications, names and addresses of three references, all in a single pdf-file) with the corresponding reference number to mailto:wolfgang.weis...@uni-jena.dewolfgang.weis...@uni-jena.de and quote reference number 21/2009. Review of applications starts on 13. March 2009 and continues until the position is filled. Wolfgang W. Weisser Institute of Ecology Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena Dornburger Str. 159 07743 Jena Germany Tel: 0049 (0) 3641 949 410/400 Fax: 0049 (0) 3641 949 410/402 Homepage: www.uni-jena.de/ecology.html
[ECOLOG-L] What is natural, was: Climate change and Agroecosystems
atom.fuller...@gmail.com writes: Are humans to be considered a part of the natural world?... ... How do you resolve this? Simple: long ago I resolved to stop trying to resolve it. ;) Seriously, there's no clear answer that everybody agrees upon. Your message summed up the problem well, so leave it at that. It is what it is. And, ultimately, I don't think we have to worry about what we call natural or unnatural - it doesn't really affect what we (scientists) do. (It can, however, be a hot potato in the political/advocacy realm.) I tend to think of it this way: I think it likely that on any hypothetical planet with the right conditions, a sentient species is likely to evolve, and it will probably develop technology that alters its environment. So in that sense, human civilization is just an outcome of natural evolutionary processes. But I could be all wrong. Joe
[ECOLOG-L] Assistant Professor job--reposting--Dover, Delaware
I apologize for double posting! Application materials were left out of the first version. DELAWARE STATE UNIVERSITY POSITION ANNOUNCEMENT: ASSISTANT PROFESSOR - BIOSTATISTICIAN APPLY ONLINE: WWW.DESU.EDU General Description of the Job: The position is a 12-month tenture-track faculty position (75% research and 25% teaching) as a biostatistician at the assistant professor level. Research is open and concentration areas are in agriculture and natural resource disciplines that include plant, animal, and the environmental sciences, fisheries and wildlife sciences, genetics and genomics, morphometrics, population biology, and/or statistical ecology. Qualifications in statistics, with experience in multivariate analysis, meta-analysis, Bayesian statistics, and/or spatial statistics are requisite. Postdoctoral experience is desired. The ability to work in a collaborative interdisciplinary environment is essential. Teaching responsibilities include both introductory and advanced biostatistics courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels. As a faculty member, the successful candidate would also mentor and advise undergraduate and graduate students, actively engage in research, serve on academic committees, and seek extramural grant funding. Because this position is partly supported by Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCor) funding, the successful candidate will actively participate in the University's goal to develop and establish the Center for Integrated Biological and Environmental Research (CIBER) at DSU and the statewide EPSCoR mission of research, education and outreach. Qualification Standards 1. Education: Candidate must have an earned doctorate degree in biostatistics or a related field with demonstrated expertise in statistical theory and analyses in one or more of the sub-disciplines mentioned below. 2. Successful experience: Excellent written and verbal communication skills are required. Research proficiency is expected. Teaching experience at the college level is desirable. 3. Other preferences: The successful candidate must be able to work supportively as a member of a team. Essential Functions The following are the functions essential to performing this job. 1. Teach a maximum of three courses each academic year, as required 2. Develop a nationally recognized research program. 3. Publish in recognized refereed journals. 4. Develop and submit grant proposals; coordinate and manage grants secured. 5. Advise undergraduate and graduate students 6. Participate in local, regional, national and international conferences. 7. Supervise assigned staff, including students. 8. Serve on academic committees, as assigned. 9. Participate in outreach activities, as needed. 10. Perform service to the community, as appropriate. Performance Standards The criteria for evaluation in this position include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Develop a Plan of Work that addresses the needs of the citizens of Delaware. 2. Provide reports on input, impact, and successful outcomes of the faculty member's programs. 3. Produce scholarly work in peer-reviewed scientific journals, books, and other publications. 4. Secure research project funding from extramural granting agencies. 5. Exhibit excellence in research, teaching, and service. 6. Comply with and facilitate the EEO mandate of Delaware State University and USDA. Applicants should submit electronically as ONE PDF FILE that includes a letter of application, curriculum vitae, statements of research and teaching goals, and scanned transcripts. In addition, arrange to have three letters of reference sent directly to: Dr. Dyremple Marsh, Dean, Delaware State University, College of Agriculture and Related Sciences, 1200 N. DuPont Highway, Dover, DE 19901; email: lhopk...@desu.edu The position is to be filled for the 2009 Fall semester. -- Kevina Vulinec, PhD, Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Delaware State University, Dover, Delaware 19901-2277, (302) 857-6457 Fax: (302) 857-6455, kvuli...@desu.edu
[ECOLOG-L] The Sustainable Development Paradox - Part 3
The March 2009 issue of the E-Journal of Solidarity, Sustainability, and Nonviolence (SSNV) is online. This is the third issue of the sustainable development paradox series, and includes a synthesis of all the nformation, analysis and conclusions for the three-part series. A critical conclusion is that sustainable development is impossible without gender equality in both secular and religious institutions. Part 1 - January 2009 - http://pelicanweb.org/solisustv05n01.html Part 2 - February 2009 - http://pelicanweb.org/solisustv05n02page1.html Part 3 - March 2009 - http://pelicanweb.org/solisustv05n03page1.html The March 2009 issue is enhanced by two invited articles from distinguished authors. The April 2009 issue will start a new series on the educational dimension of sustainable development. SSNV is a monthly, free subscription, open access e-journal. Sincerely, Luis __ Luis T. Gutierrez, Ph.D. The Pelican Web http://pelicanweb.org/ Editor, Solidarity, Sustainability, and Nonviolence http://pelicanweb.org/solisust.html
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Natural systems
I would challenge the statement Any alteration of the natural situation is, by default, an adverse effect or change. Smallpox or polio vaccinations are an anthropomorphic alteration of the natural situation, but are they an adverse effect or change? I suppose some might argue that vaccines result in increased human populations, and that is an adverse effect. But now we need to define adverse effect -- is it adverse from a broad human perspective, or is it adverse from some other entity's perspective (Mother Nature? Creator/God/Allah/Brahma/Odin/Wicca? The Society for the Total Overall Protection of Everything Wild?). I can think of other examples of human intervention that we might debate over whether or not they have adverse effects: Stopping a highly intensive wildfire before it destroys an old growth stand. Building a salmon fish ladder around a recent landslide barrier. Protecting endangered northern spotted owls from niche takeover by a natural invasion of barred owls. Providing nest boxes for cavity nesters after a blowdown of snag habitat. Granted, most human alterations of natural systems have had an adverse effect, even some well-intention alterations (e.g., introducing Russian olive and multiflora rose to improve North American wildlife habitat) but I think we're slowly learning how to do a better job than even nature can do. Warren W. Aney Senior Wildlife Ecologist Tigard, Oregon -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu]on Behalf Of Geoffrey Patton Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 19:09 To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Natural systems Dear Good Ecologers: While Dr. Czech has produced an elegant and exhaustive treatise on the application of important concepts in natural systems, it is a bit dense and unapproachable for many. It is with deep regret that I am unable to cite the specific reference for what I am about to write. I have frequently attributed it to John Clark's Ecosystem Management while knowing that's inaccurate. However, the quote I've constucted is Any alteration of the natural situation is, by default, an adverse effect or change. Paraphrased, Nature took millenia to achieve the current dynamic balance of plants and animals, predators and prey, entropy and enthalpy. Any alteration at Man's hand away from the natural order of things conflicts with the balance and is adverse. Thus, we should try to our last breath to make things as conducive to nature's way as possible. I think that's what we're talking about here. Cordially yours, Geoff Patton, Ph.D. 2208 Parker Ave., Wheaton, MD 20902 301.221.9536 --- On Sat, 3/7/09, Czech, Brian cz...@vt.edu wrote: From: Czech, Brian cz...@vt.edu Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Natural systems To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Date: Saturday, March 7, 2009, 5:09 PM It's true that natural is just semantics in some contexts, but defining the term can affect the way our public lands are managed. See for example the Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health Policy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Here is one proposal for a frame of reference for natural conditions: http://steadystate.org/Chronological_Frame_of_Reference_for_Ecological_Integ rity.pdf http://steadystate.org/Chronological_Frame_of_Reference_for_Ecological_Inte grity.pdf Brian Czech, Visiting Professor Natural Resources Program Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University National Capital Region, Northern Virginia Center 7054 Haycock Road, Room 411 Falls Church, Virginia 22043 From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news on behalf of Steve Kunz Sent: Fri 2009-03-06 10:24 To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Climate change and Agroecosystems In the case of human mammals, there is something unique about our place in the world. We have the intelligence to control our environment on a large scale. Our control of otherwise natural systems can throw them out of balance, or at least, into a new balance. In an extreme case, this intelligent control can completely wipe out most if not all of our own species and most others (think: nuclear war). The planet doesn't care if this happens, and some species will survive and help start things over. Is the result natural or unnatural? At that point, it's just semantics anyway. Peace! Steve Kunz In a message dated 3/5/2009 6:08:37 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, atom.fuller...@gmail.com writes: I'm a grad student who reads the list-serve to look for job opportunities, but these threads on agroecosystems and climate change bring up a question I have never really gotten a satisfactory answer to, namely: Are humans to be considered a part of the natural world? On the one hand, humans are clearly a species of mammal living on the planet. Science in general follows the Copernican Principle: don't assume there is anything
[ECOLOG-L] Request for Assistance with Doctoral Dissertation - Brief Questionnaire
Hello, I am a doctoral candidate in Environmental Studies at Antioch University New England. I am in the process of conducting my dissertation research and the initial phase of data collection involves seeking out members of the environmental community, including academics and scientists, to participate in a brief questionnaire on the topic of self-censorship. This questionnaire is completely confidential. My dissertation domain is environmental communication and more specifically on the matter of under what circumstances people self-censor themselves regarding topics or issues in which they hold strong opinions. If you are interested in this topic or just like online questionnaires, please navigate over to the URL pasted below: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=F1xytz_2fF_2fPl31pjFaIMzcg_3d_3d Also feel free to distribute this URL to anyone else you believe might be interested in the issue. Once I collect a sufficient amount of responses, I will be considering interviews with those who indicate that they would like to participate in a subsequent phase. Thank you in advance for your participation. Christopher Ryan, AICP Environmental Studies Doctoral Program Research Summary Web Site: http://www.relocalizations.net/ANE/cjrdocdishome.html E-Mail Contact: [ mailto:cr...@antioch.edu ]cr...@antioch.edu Christopher Ryan Antioch University New England Environmental Studies Doctoral Program 40 Avon Street Keene, NH 03431 christopher_r...@antiochne.edu 617-838-9454
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Natural systems
I highly doubt we can do better than nature for most other species on the planet -- the only species we can do a better job than even nature can do is our own and a handful of domesticated species. For the rest, test outcome we can manage is to do a less bad job than we have been doing. Dave Warren W. Aney wrote: I would challenge the statement Any alteration of the natural situation is, by default, an adverse effect or change. Smallpox or polio vaccinations are an anthropomorphic alteration of the natural situation, but are they an adverse effect or change? I suppose some might argue that vaccines result in increased human populations, and that is an adverse effect. But now we need to define adverse effect -- is it adverse from a broad human perspective, or is it adverse from some other entity's perspective (Mother Nature? Creator/God/Allah/Brahma/Odin/Wicca? The Society for the Total Overall Protection of Everything Wild?). I can think of other examples of human intervention that we might debate over whether or not they have adverse effects: Stopping a highly intensive wildfire before it destroys an old growth stand. Building a salmon fish ladder around a recent landslide barrier. Protecting endangered northern spotted owls from niche takeover by a natural invasion of barred owls. Providing nest boxes for cavity nesters after a blowdown of snag habitat. Granted, most human alterations of natural systems have had an adverse effect, even some well-intention alterations (e.g., introducing Russian olive and multiflora rose to improve North American wildlife habitat) but I think we're slowly learning how to do a better job than even nature can do. Warren W. Aney Senior Wildlife Ecologist Tigard, Oregon -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu]on Behalf Of Geoffrey Patton Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 19:09 To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Natural systems Dear Good Ecologers: While Dr. Czech has produced an elegant and exhaustive treatise on the application of important concepts in natural systems, it is a bit dense and unapproachable for many. It is with deep regret that I am unable to cite the specific reference for what I am about to write. I have frequently attributed it to John Clark's Ecosystem Management while knowing that's inaccurate. However, the quote I've constucted is Any alteration of the natural situation is, by default, an adverse effect or change. Paraphrased, Nature took millenia to achieve the current dynamic balance of plants and animals, predators and prey, entropy and enthalpy. Any alteration at Man's hand away from the natural order of things conflicts with the balance and is adverse. Thus, we should try to our last breath to make things as conducive to nature's way as possible. I think that's what we're talking about here. Cordially yours, Geoff Patton, Ph.D. 2208 Parker Ave., Wheaton, MD 20902 301.221.9536 --- On Sat, 3/7/09, Czech, Brian cz...@vt.edu wrote: From: Czech, Brian cz...@vt.edu Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Natural systems To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Date: Saturday, March 7, 2009, 5:09 PM It's true that natural is just semantics in some contexts, but defining the term can affect the way our public lands are managed. See for example the Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health Policy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Here is one proposal for a frame of reference for natural conditions: http://steadystate.org/Chronological_Frame_of_Reference_for_Ecological_Integ rity.pdf http://steadystate.org/Chronological_Frame_of_Reference_for_Ecological_Inte grity.pdf Brian Czech, Visiting Professor Natural Resources Program Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University National Capital Region, Northern Virginia Center 7054 Haycock Road, Room 411 Falls Church, Virginia 22043 From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news on behalf of Steve Kunz Sent: Fri 2009-03-06 10:24 To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Climate change and Agroecosystems In the case of human mammals, there is something unique about our place in the world. We have the intelligence to control our environment on a large scale. Our control of otherwise natural systems can throw them out of balance, or at least, into a new balance. In an extreme case, this intelligent control can completely wipe out most if not all of our own species and most others (think: nuclear war). The planet doesn't care if this happens, and some species will survive and help start things over. Is the result natural or unnatural? At that point, it's just semantics anyway. Peace! Steve Kunz In a message dated 3/5/2009 6:08:37 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, atom.fuller...@gmail.com writes: I'm a grad student who reads the list-serve to look for job opportunities, but these threads on agroecosystems
