Subject: ECOLOG-L Digest - 2 May 2002 to 3 May 2002 (#2002-114)
There are 21 messages totalling 1731 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Tropical Ecology Graduate Field Course -- Costa Rica
2. Smell a Red Herring?
3. Science and Advocacy: Difference Between Raw and Transdisciplinary
Wildl...
4. towards the greening of production
5. Deep Ecology (2)
6. data and semantics (3)
7. Science and Advocacy: Difference Between Raw and
Transdisciplinary Wildl...
8. Job: Instructor (Wildlife Biology in Wildlife Biology Curriculum), CSU
9. Science and Advocacy: Difference Between Raw and
10. Ecologist/Weed Scientist job - USDA-ARS - Ft. Collins, CO
11. Poisonous Plant Research Laboratory
12. Biosphere Reserve Integrated Monitoring Programme
13. Fire Wars site
14. Sustainable Forestry and Biodiversity Symposium
15. Deadline Extended for ESA Panel on Vegetation Classification Workshop o
VegBank
16. JOB POSTING - ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE]
17. Environmental Job Openings from EnviroNetwork
18. Entry Level Conservation Biology Position with Minnesota DNR
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 00:12:31 -0500
From: Carla Guthrie <cguthrie@MAIL.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Tropical Ecology Graduate Field Course -- Costa Rica
GRADUATE COURSE IN RAINFOREST RESEARCH -- COSTA RICA
Dr. Larry Gilbert of the University of Texas at Austin is leading a field
course in tropical ecology from late June to early August 2002 at Sirena
Biological Station, Corcovado National Park, Costa Rica.
This course is designed to help graduate students develop research projects
in a rainforest environment and learn the logistics of tropical field
research. After a week of general orientation to local habitats and
organisms, students focus on individual projects. Lectures on a variety of
topics are presented by faculty, students, and local researchers.
This course has room for 2 additional participants. All students must have
at least a bachelor's degree and qualify for transient status at
UT-Austin. The course will begin June 27 and end August 5, 2002. (Dates
may change slightly based on participant schedules.) All students must
obtain permission from Gilbert before enrolling.
In addition, students must prepare a short research proposal prior to
starting the course, as well as apply for a personal research permit from
the Costa Rican government to work in Corcovado National Park. We will
help students apply for and obtain these permits, which can be renewed for
future research.
The course web site is: http://www.utexas.edu/courses/zoo384l/
Estimated total costs for this course are approximately $3000. This
includes 3 hours tuition ($500 for Texas Residents, $1100 for
non-residents), airfare to Costa Rica, and station fees while at Sirena.
Estimated airfare is $550, and station costs are $25-$30 per day (for
approximately 35 days).
Sirena Biological Station is located 1 km from the Pacific Ocean in a large
patch of lowland wet tropical forest. There is ready access to a variety
of natural habitats, such as rocky intertidal, estuaries, swamps, streams,
and rainforest, as well as a variety of old field habitats and areas
undergoing continual disturbance naturally along ridges and rivers.
Corcovado is one of the last places in Central America where animals such
as jaguar, puma, ocelot, Baird's Tapir, peccaries, and four species of
monkeys have large stable populations. The station is equipped with
laboratories, dining and dormitory facilities, a camping area and a grass
airstrip.
Contact Larry Gilbert directly at lgilbert@mail.utexas.edu or Carla Guthrie
at cguthrie@mail.utexas.edu for more information.
______________________________
Carla Guthrie
Graduate Student
for
Lawrence E. Gilbert
Professor, Section of Integrative Biology
Director, Brackenridge Field Laboratory
The University of Texas
Section of Integrative Biology
Austin, TX 78712
512-471-4705
http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~gilbert/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 22:15:28 -0700
From: Steve Erickson <wean@WHIDBEY.NET>
Subject: Re: Smell a Red Herring?
Re: The concept that "increased productivity/efficiency either has,
does, or will preserve nature:
I suggest reading "Agriculture versus Biodiversity: Will Market
Solutions Suffice?" in the latest (Spring 2002) issue of Conservation
in Practice. It describes how using only market based incentives has
not been effective in getting green revolution farmers in the Yaqui
Valley in Mexico to reduce Nitrogen inputs. There is more in this
article and it provides much food for thought on these subjects.
The reason why I don't personally subscribe to the view that
increased productivity/efficiency has, does, or will "preserve"
nature is for two reasons:
1. Often (but not always), the increased productivity is the result
of increasing inputs. Inevitably, you get out what you put in. The
Green Revolution is a classic example of this. Basically, yields were
boosted by breeding crop varieties that could take advantage of
increased nutrient inputs. There are the impacts at all stages of
this agri-system, from the production, transport, and application of
the nutrients (and other inputs), through their economic consumption
and application, to their leakage from the intensive agri-system
(i.e. pollution). I've never seen an examination or study comparing
or contrasting either real or theoretical systems producing the same
total yields at the ends of the agri-system extremes, The intensive
Green Revolution agri-system supposedly uses less land by consuming
more inputs (which themselves require space for their production,
transport, and resulting pollution) with the result of leakage from
the agri-system creating greater external pollution (affecting areas
outside of the immediate agri-system). The extensive lower intensity
agri-system directly uses a larger area to produce the same yield,
but has lower inputs and therefore less spatial impacts from the
creation and transportation of those imputs, and less leakage and
resultant pollution. Which of these actually affects less land when
all the environmental externialities and impacts are also included?
Is an agri-system running chickens on suburban lawns with no
supplemental feed or fertilization actually less spatially efficient
than an industrial agri-biz system with a factory with 100,000 hens
importing feed from hundreds of miles away and producing pollution
that affects additional large areas? Anyone know of any actual
studies on this question of total spatial impacts?
2. An even more central problem of the assumption that increased
efficiency/productivity will save us (I acknowledge I am stereotyping
and trivializing) is that at its core it requires a belief that
humans behave differently than all other organisms. In its most
misanthropic phrasing, this underlying belief can be summed up as "If
we feed them they will not breed." I happen to believe that despite
our apparent cleverness, humans will increase to consume whatever
resources are available and will not stop unless their are
countervailing forces that cause them not to, be those foreces lack
of resources, social mechanisms, or a combination of these. Which of
these ultimately stops the continually increasing consumption is not
relevant to the underlying conceptual problem with the
efficiency/productivity paradigm: it doesn't address the underlying
problem - the lack of basic sustainability.
-Steve Erickson
Frosty Hollow Ecological Restoration
==================================================
>Stanís skepticism is well-placed, and the message he responds to points
>out an increasingly divisive issue in ecological economics. Basically,
>there are 3 major sub-movements afoot in ecological economics: 1) haltin
>economic bloating and moving toward the steady state economy (led by
>Herman Daly); 2) increasing the productive efficiency of natural capital
>(often identified with Robert Costanza although Costanza fully supports
>1 as well); 3) a more just distribution of wealth (led by reformers in
>the developing nations; e.g., Vandana Shiva). As a wildlife biologist,
>Iíve weighed in to support an emphasis in the U.S. on #1, acknowledging
>that # 3 is the appropriate social focus in the global South. Clearly
>all 3 are admirable, none is sufficient of itself, and the key is
>establishing a good balance and emphasis.
>
>The big problem with # 2 is that it is so prone to co-optation by
>industry and fence-riding economists. # 2 is not inconsistent with the
>neoclassical theory of perpetual economic growth. It simply refocuses
>from increasing efficiency of (man-made) capital and labor to natural
>capital (or land). There is no clear message, for example, in the work
>of Paul Hawken and Amory Lovins (Natural Capitalism) that economic
>bloating is a long-term problem. The focus on increasing the productive
>efficiency of natural capital is becoming a red herring, leading us
>astray from the real issue of economic growth as an anachronistic goal a
>odds with wildlife conservation.
>
>Stan is astute to suspect industrial subterfuge. Agricultural, logging,
>and mining corporations, especially, can seem supportive of ecological
>economics and ecological sustainability as long as they promote # 2.
>Letís challenge them to support #1 in the U.S. and # 3 in the South.
>
>I have a manuscript under review that will highlight the contrasts, at
>least between # 1 and # 2. In a nutshell, it goes like this: Increasin
>efficiency (including that of natural capital) in the U.S. has become a
>function of research and development (R&D). R&D has become primarily a
>function of corporate profit. Corporate profit prior to R&D is a
>function primarily of economies of scale (i.e., greater production and
>consumption at pre-R&D levels). In other words, the institutionalizatio
>of R&D has relegated increasing productive efficiency to a zero or
>negative-sum game in terms of its ability to produce a sustainable
>outcome. Itís a hypothesis, but itís consistent with the data Iíve
>acquired on R&D in the U.S. and with concurrent trends of technological
>progress, economic growth, and biodiversity erosion.
>
>More and more, I see attempts to engage natural resources professionals
>in steady state economics (#1) diverted by the topic of increasing
>natural capital efficiency (#2). It takes away the focus on # 1 every
>time. Iím starting to wonder if this diversion is intentional on the
>part of interests standing to profit by # 2 and not by # 1. Would that
>be such a surprise? Remember how the big timber companies (some of whic
>are now getting into real estate development) latched onto "ecosystem
>management"?
>
>I urge the wildlife profession to acquire and maintain a focus on # 1:
>the fundamental conflict between economic growth and wildlife
>conservation. # 1 calls for a solid commitment to a new national goal ń
>the goal of the steady state economy with mildly equilibrating populatio
>and per capita consumption at a sustainable level. A goal clearly
>consistent with long-term wildlife conservation.
>
>Brian Czech
>Arlington, VA
>USA
>Www.steadystate.org
>
>
>
>***********************
>
> >Stan Moore San Geronimo, CA hawkman11@hotmail.c
m
>
> >First, I would like to see some documentation to the claims that th
>so-called "Green Revolution" is an environmental triumph. Second, I
>would like to hear some details about the farming and forestry technique
>and their impacts on ecosystems on which these techniques are practiced.
>I would like to know what the risks are of the sort of monocultures that
>are typically used in these practices. And I would like to know if it
>might be smarter just to recommend management of the human population by
>incentives to reduce the birthrate and to eventually actually reduce the
>human population to lower levels than we see today. This sounds like a
>propanda blitz for corporate agriculture to me! I am not very confident
>of their commitment to scrupulous honesty.>
>
>
>
> >From: Alex Avery
> >Reply-To: Alex Avery
> >To: TWS-L@LISTSERV.VT.EDU
> >Subject: Conservation Declaration unveiled, invitation to sign on
> >Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 17:02:27 -0400
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >Received: from [198.82.161.192] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id
>MHotMailBE9AF7E9001640042A1AC652A1C087DB5; Thu, 02 May 2002 14:23:09
>-0700
> >Received: from listserv.vt.edu (LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1])by listserv.v
.edu
>(8.12.2.Beta5/8.12.2/LISTSERV) with ESMTP id g42JRTmH009764;Thu, 2 May
>2002 17:12:19 -0400
> >Received: from LISTSERV.VT.EDU by LISTSERV.VT.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP
>release 1.8d) with spool id 1617290 for TWS-L@LISTSERV.VT.EDU; Thu, 2 Ma
>2002 17:12:17 -0400
> >Received: from vivi.cc.vt.edu (IDENT:mirapoint@vivi.cc.vt.edu
>[198.82.161.183]) by listserv.vt.edu (8.12.2.Beta5/8.12.2/LISTSERV) with
>ESMTP id g42L2GZJ070750 for ; Thu, 2 May 2002 17:02:16 -0400
> >Received: from mx20b.rmci.net (mx20b.rmci.net [205.162.184.38]) by
>vivi.cc.vt.edu (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.1.0.54-GA) with SMTP id
>ABQ01939; Thu, 2 May 2002 17:02:15 -0400 (EDT)
> >Received: (qmail 4550 invoked from network); 2 May 2002 21:02:13 -0
00
> >Received: from customer-216-222-77-154.har.velocitus.net (HELO
>Alex?Avery) (216.222.77.154) by mx20.rmci.net with SMTP; 2 May 2002
>21:02:13 -0000
> >From owner-tws-l@LISTSERV.VT.EDU Thu, 02 May 2002 14:25:18 -0700
> >X-Sender: aavery@rica.net
> >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1
> >Message-ID: <4.1.20020502165156.014f9890@rica.net>
> >Sender: TWS-L Discussion List
> >
> >An open Declaration in Support of Protecting Nature with High-Yield
>Farming and
> >Forestry has just been unveiled at:
> >www.HighYieldConservation.org
> >
> >The lead signatories of the Declaration are Greenpeace co-founder D
.
>Patrick
> >Moore, James Lovelock (Gaia Hypothesis), Nobel Peace Prize laureate
Dr.
>Norman
> >Borlaug (1970 Peace laureate and "Father of the Green Revolution) a
d
>Dr. Oscar
> >Arias (1986 Peace laureate and former President of Costa Rica), Sen
tor
>George
> >McGovern ("UN Ambassador to the Hungry"), Dr. Per Pinstrup-Anderson
>(2001 World
> >Food Prize winner), Senator Rudy Boschwitz, Dr. Bruce Ames (UC
>Berkeley), and
> >more.
> >
> >
> >"Growing More Per Acre Leaves More Land For Nature"
> >
> >High-yield farming -- the Green Revolution -- has been a significan
> >environmental and humanitarian triumph. Since the 1960's it has led
to
>better
> >lives and prevented the deaths and malnourishment of billions of pe
ple.
>
> >Additionally, the Green Revolution's higher yields have protected
>millions of
> >square miles from being put under plow for food production, thereby
>saving
> >large amounts of natural habitats for biologically diverse plant an
>animal
> >species. In the same way, high-yield forestry reduces logging press
res
>on wild
> >forests.
> >
> >The world's population is likely to rise to nine billion people in
he
>coming
> >decades. Global demand for food and forest products will double. Ye
we
>are
> >already taking more than one-third of the planet's total land area
or
> >farming. Thus, the greatest threat to the Earth's biodiversity is
>habitat loss
> >through the conversion of natural ecosystems to farmland.
> >
> >Additional high-yield practices based on advances in biology, ecolo
y,
> >chemistry, and technology are critically needed to improve the huma
>condition
> >and preserve our natural environment.
> >
> >We invite all organizations and individuals concerned with human we
fare
>and
> >the conservation and preservation of our planetís rich biological
>heritage to
> >join us in support of high-yield agriculture and forestry by adding
>their names
> >to this declaration.
> >www.HighYieldConservation.org
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-------
>MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: Click Here
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To unsubscribe from this list, send
>a message to listserv@listserv.vt.edu with the words "signoff tws-l" in
>the body of the message.
>Brian Czech
>Arlington, VA
>USA
Frosty Hollow Ecological Restoration
Box 53, Langley, WA 98260
(360) 579-2332
wean@whidbey.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 00:15:03 -0700
From: sfrank <sfrank@TOLEDOTEL.COM>
Subject: Re: Science and Advocacy: Difference Between Raw and
Transdisciplinary Wildl...
Ernie, I agree whole heartedly. Efficiency is one of the foremost =
principals of conservatism. The route to efficiency is not through =
taxation, and that is where, I believe, we differ. Taxation hurts the =
poor in the long run. The stock answer is redistribution of wealth, or =
socialism a concept which has failed in every country that has imposed =
it. Make a environmental friendly product that is as good or better than =
a non green product for a competitive price and people will buy it. The =
problem as I see it is human greed still rules. Even in socialist =
countries, the government officials become the wealthy ruling class, =
revolution follows. The backlash to the Clinton-Gore administration was =
George W Bush, now we have to fight mines dumping tailings in rivers =
that can not handle the acid rock. Is this a fair trade? It depends on =
you point of view.=20
One thing environmentalists (not ecologists) over look is the fact they =
have to convince conservatives like myself that their ideas are right. =
Conservatives make up a powerful voting block. We need fact not theory =
and theosophy to convince us. When the environmental movement first =
started I was 100% on board. Stopping Dow Chemical from dumping nitric =
acid in a river is a heroic cause. Now, however the same multi-national =
corporations are funding the green groups through the Environmental =
Grant Asc. (EGA). I personally see this as being a huge co-opting of the =
environmental movement.=20
Here is an example that I can document numerous times. a small landowner =
has a stand of timber that he wants to log. A organization like "Friends =
of the Earth" sues to stop the logging, with funds provided through the =
EGA. The landowner facing huge legal bill sells his land to the nature =
conservancy, Weyerhaeuser contracts with the Nature conservancy to log =
the timber. Folks where is the equity in that? This is one reason the =
green movement is encountering so much resistance and rightly so.
Yes Ernie my mind is open and I will be contacting you personally. Good =
hearted people can reach an agreement on doing what is right, Steve
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Arcologic@aol.com=20
To: sfrank@toledotel.com ; ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU ; =
ecol-econ@csf.colorado.edu=20
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: Science and Advocacy: Difference Between Raw and =
Transdisciplinary Wildl...
Dear Steve,
You said,
I am all for science based ecology and protecting species that can =
be saved.
>From this, I can see that you and I are on the same team. On all =
other remarks, you were wrong. I would not care to argue the points. =
Others will abuse you sufficiently. I ask that you keep an open mind =
and listen to new ideas.
A particularly simple error is the belief that economic activity must =
expand in proportion to population. Efficiency has to be included in =
the equation.
We can talk off-list if you want to explore some point in depth.
Ernie Rogers
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 22:00:16 -0700
From: Ian Murray <seamus2001@ATTBI.COM>
Subject: towards the greening of production
>From Fields to Factories
Plant-Based Materials Replace Oil-Based Plastics, Polyesters
By Terence Chea
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 3, 2002; Page E01
When Patrick Gruber, chief technology officer at Cargill Dow LLC, peers into
the future, he sees a world made of corn. Not gaudy structures like South
Dakota's Corn Palace, whose exterior is decorated with thousands of painted
corn cobs, but the stuff of everyday life: T-shirts, socks, milk bottles and
auto parts.
Gruber's future may soon be reality. Cargill Dow's new factory in Blair,
Neb., which converts field corn into a biodegradable substance it calls
NatureWorks PLA, is shipping the material in bulk to produce packaging
materials, clothing and bedding products.
Coca-Cola Co. is using it to make soft-drink cups, McDonald's for salad
containers and Pacific Coast Feather Co. to fill pillows and comforters.
Cargill Dow executives said the corn-derived polymer will compete directly
with petroleum-based plastics and polyesters on price and performance.
"It's all about sustainability," Gruber said. "Would you rather buy a
product made from corn from the Midwest or petroleum from the Middle East?"
The commercial launch of Cargill Dow's NatureWorks -- the first
"biomaterial" to reach the market -- demonstrates the rapid emergence of
industrial biotechnology. In the past three decades, biotechnology has
revolutionized health care with new medicines and diagnostic tests. It has
changed agriculture with genetically modified crops and livestock. Now it is
transforming industry.
"We're just beginning to see it adopted in all sectors of the manufacturing
economy," said Brent Erickson, vice president of industrial and
environmental biotechnology at the Washington-based Biotechnology Industry
Organization. "This could transform the old economy. It's going to provide
new ways to make things that are cleaner and more economical."
But the question persists: Is industrial biotechnology good business?
Researchers have shown that it's scientifically possible to make
environmentally friendly materials and processes, and major corporations are
investing heavily in their development. But industrial biotechnology, which
is a small business relative to medical biotechnology, has yet prove its
worth in the marketplace.
"There's a lot of potential here, but I think we're early on in realizing
this potential," said Roger Wyse, a managing director at Burrill & Co., a
San Francisco venture-capital firm. Burrill recently created a $50 million
fund to invest in early-stage start-ups focused on biomaterials and
bioprocessing, but Wyse cautions investors about the sector's future.
"Investors would like to see how they're going to get a return on their
investment," Wyse said. "That's quite clear in health care, but it's much
less clear in some of these new areas."
Nonetheless, in ways seen and unseen, biotechnology is changing the
industrial landscape. Major chemical makers are building plants to convert
biomass (plant-based organic matter such as corn, rice and grass) into
biomaterials. Enzymes -- proteins that trigger molecular reactions -- are
replacing chemicals for industrial tasks such as cleaning, bleaching and
food processing. Biotech companies are developing technology to turn
agricultural waste products such as corn stalks into ethanol, a commonly
used fuel additive.
Most plastics and polyesters are made with chemicals extracted from
petroleum. Biotechnology uses the sugars stored in plant matter to make the
ingredients of new materials.
Industrial biotechnology does not draw as much attention or controversy as
other areas of biotechnology, such as cloning, stem-cell research or genetic
manipulation of plants and animals. For example, Greenpeace is opposed to
industrial biotechnology when it involves the environmental release of
genetically engineered organisms, but supports the development of biomass as
an alternative source of energy and material.
"You reduce dependence on fossil fuels, you reduce greenhouse gas production
and you eliminate toxic chemicals that become part of the ecosystem for
decades," said Rick Hind, who directs Greenpeace's anti-toxics campaign.
Several factors are accelerating the development of industrial
biotechnology. Advances in genetic technology provide new tools to design
more sophisticated products and processes. Stricter environmental standards
and a growing number of environmentally conscious consumers are creating a
market for bio-based products. Venture capitalists and major corporations
are making large investments in industrial biotech research.
The government is showing increasing interest in the field. Several federal
agencies, led by the Energy and Agriculture departments, sponsor research to
develop alternatives to fossil fuels, address global climate change,
reinvigorate rural economies and reduce dependence on foreign oil.
"This administration is looking for a very balanced portfolio of energy
sources, and biomass is one of them," said Mark D. Paster, an official with
the Energy Department.
The farm bill passed by the House yesterday authorizes $5 million in 2002
and $14 million a year from 2003 through 2007 to fund biomass research and
make grants to build "biorefineries" -- factories that convert biomass into
chemicals, fuels and energy. The bill also would require the government to
give preference to purchasing bio-based products.
Almost all of the world's largest chemical makers are investing in biomass
research. Multinationals such as BASF AG, Celanese AG, Chevron Texaco Corp.,
DSM NV, DuPont Co. and Dow Chemical Co. are forging partnerships with
biotech companies to develop new enzymes that can break down plant sugars.
"Ten or 15 years ago, people would have said, 'It's a laboratory curiosity,
but nothing's happening,' " said Kevin Swift, an economist at the American
Chemistry Council, an Arlington-based trade group that represents the major
oil and chemical companies. "People are now investing in actual commercial
plants. It's beyond the laboratory."
DuPont, the world's largest chemical company, is working with sugar producer
Tate & Lyle PLC to build a factory that uses a genetically engineered
microbe to convert plant sugars into an ingredient to be used in clothing,
packaging and plastics. DuPont uses a chemical process to make the
ingredient, but the company plans to switch to the biological process once
the technology is fully developed.
Cargill Dow's $300 million Nebraska factory, which became fully operational
in January, is the first to produce biomaterials on a commercial scale. If
the company succeeds in making bio-based products profitable, other
companies and countries could follow as technology improves and oil reserves
shrink.
Cargill Dow, a joint venture between agricultural giant Cargill Inc. of
Minnetonka, Minn., and Dow Chemical of Midland, Mich., was spun off from
Cargill in 1997 and now employs about 230 people.
The company's factory uses a fermentation process to extract natural sugars
from corn and produce the key ingredient in a substance called polylactide,
known by the brand name NatureWorks PLA.
The company makes PLA from the sugar in corn kernels but plans to switch to
cheaper agricultural waste such as corn stalks, wheat straw, rice hulls,
sawdust and prairie grass, whose sugars are more difficult to break down.
Company officials say NatureWorks products degrade more easily, generate
fewer greenhouse gases and require less energy, water and raw materials to
produce compared with petroleum-based products. They also pitch its national
security benefits.
"Every dollar we spend on agricultural products here is a dollar that
doesn't go overseas," Gruber said. "We can deliver the technical performance
at a fair price. Plus, it's made from renewable resources."
Pacific Coast Feather, one the nation's largest home textile companies,
plans to introduce its first PLA-based products at retailer Bed, Bath and
Beyond Inc. in June.
Pacific Coast officials said PLA-based fibers insulate and breathe better
than polyester-based products and do not retain odors as much. Its goal is
to convert 80 percent of its polyester-based products to NatureWorks over
the next five years, said Fritz Krueger, the company's vice president of
marketing. The new products will cost about the same as other high-end fiber
bedding products, he said.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 09:07:33 -0500
From: Christopher J Wells <chris_wells@USGS.GOV>
Subject: Re: Deep Ecology
Ken,
I don't think "sfrank" esposued or promoted a particular belief system. He
may have one, though. As I read his note, "sfrank" quoted other folks who
pointed-out what they believed was consistency between certain historic
polytheistic beliefs and "deep ecology". I think that presents one with a
falsifiable contention. This is good logic, whether or not one agrees with
him and his personal beliefs.
In my opinion, "sfrank" and the authors whom he quotes either misrepresent
the beliefs of the people who worshipped "Ashtaroth and Baal" or
misunderstand deep ecology. I contend that deep ecology is not a
polytheistic belief as they seem to portray it but rather, a
pseudoscientific pantheistic religion.
It is pseudoscience in the same way that some UFO fans are
pseudoscientific: they take accepted physical laws and widely observed
phenomenon and extrapolate into a sphere of belief that is unfalsifiable.
There is nothing wrong with that and that doesn't mean it is wrong. It
just isn't scientifically useful.
It is pantheistic in that it describes a commonality of existence between
all things and all life. It elevates that presumed relationship to nearly
equal (or greater) than the importance of our own species. That is
pantheism.
In closing, I don't think it is particularly useful to disparage the
convictions or beliefs of others in order to make a reasoned, logical
arguement concerning philosophical or scientific issues. That
argumentative technique is fine for politicians. Leave it to them.
---chris
Geographer
USGS/BRD
Ken Parejko
<parejkok@UWSTOUT To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UM
.EDU
.EDU> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Deep Ecology
"Ecological
Society of
America: grants,
jobs, news"
<ECOLOG-L@LISTSER
V.UMD.EDU>
05/02/02 09:24 AM
Please respond to
Ken Parejko
In a recent email, "sfrank " demonstrates a myopic (Christian) vision of
deep ecology and in so doing mislabels it as a religion. He quotes John
K. Williams to that effect, and places it in the "nature religion" of
Ashtaroth and Baal. In William's quotation nature is labelled as divine,
non-rational and non-moral.
While some may pursue "deep ecology" with religious fervor, and the
language of "deep ecology" may sometimes take on a quasi-spiritual
character, it is not of its own nature religious. Religon requires the
belief in a deity. To deny the reality and existence of the Christian
deity does not necessarily require one to believe in the existence of
any other deity, whether within nature (immanent) or transcendent. A
deep ecologist, in my view, simply attempts to break down the
socially-constructed barriers between self and other, where other is the
non-human natural world. This allows a new and revitalized understanding
of how the natural world works, a kind of Kuhnian revolution. While
reductionism has its place (and "scientific" ecology uses it as its
primary paradigm) it is fascinating how much we can learn about the
natural world by stepping outside that paradigm.
It's rather like looking for a dim star in the sky. Astronomers know
that because the fovea contains cones rather than rods, if we stare
directly at the star's supposed location, we may not see it. But if we
shift our focus slightly our peripheral vision, where there are the more
sensitive rods, is more likely to find it. The laser-beam of
reductionism can tell us much, but not all, about the natural world. One
only has to read Aldo Leopold, Thoreau, or John Muir (all extremely
well-versed natural historians, in the more "reductionist" tradition) to
realize that a deeper understanding of ecology demands we step, now and
again, outside ourselves and the social constructs which we are, and in
so doing allow the natural world to speak to us through our "peripheral"
vision.
There is a long tradition of deep ecology, though not called that, which
pre-dates Christianity by more than three centuries. This is the Stoic
viewpoint of nature. From its beginning in the teachings of Zeno of
Citium and Chryssipus, Stoicism like modern science teaches that nature
is rational. The Stoic goal of life is to live virtuously, and it is by
studying nature that we learn what is right and what is wrong. Quoting
Gisela Striker, Stoic ethics is "an investigation of what it is to live
in agreement with nature." Or as Cicero put it, the supreme good is
"living comformably with nature." As a scientist and Stoic I vehemently
take issue with William's portrayal of nature as irrational and
non-moral.. While some Stoics are deists (who believe that nature itself
is divine) many are not; so it is best portrayed as a philosophy, not a
religion. Whether one is a deist or not is quite irrelevant, both to
the Stoic and deep ecological tradition.
I believe that many others, like myself, who consider themselves both
"scientific" and "deep" ecologists, and able to navigate within both
traditions, are insulted by the portrayal of our complex epistemology as
nothing more than the worship of Ashtaroth and Baal. I suspect
Christians would be equally insulted by characterizing all of them as
rabid, sadistic witch-hunters or Inquisitional judges. I, for one, have
never worshipped Ashtharoth or Baal and expect to have many other more
important things to do in my remaining years than take up that kind of
silliness.
Ken Parejko
Biology Dept.
UW-Stout
Menomonie, WI
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 08:09:27 -0700
From: Jim_Boone@NOTES.YMP.GOV
Subject: Re: data and semantics
Robert,
IMHO...
I prefer "data" as plural, but as with so many style issues, ultimately it
doesn't matter how we use it: we all understand what we mean. What is
important, however, is that we pick a style and use it consistently. Style
probably should be a journal-level decision, but at the least, we should be
consistent in our individual articles.
Cheers, Jim
==================
Please respond to Robert Froese <robert.froese@TAGANOV.COM>
Sent by: "Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news"
<ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
cc:
Subject: data and semantics
Federal Record Status Not Determined
Apologies for any cross-posting with the forest@listserv.funet.fi list!
I had an interesting dialogue with a colleague recently about the singular
and plural uses of "data". Informal web research has revealed some
controversy about the appropriate use of the word (e.g.,
http://www.ecoscribe.com/freestuff/sevenrules.htm and
http://www.skidmore.edu/academics/sociology/resources/writing_peeves.html).
I wonder if some list members might add opinion or information to what I've
obtained so far? I haven't found anything specific to forestry as a
discipline, science or profession.
It appears the historical root is clear; datum is singular, and data is
plural. Yet contemporary English allows for data to be used in the
singular as an abstract mass noun. From the Merriam-Webster Collegiate
Dictionary usage definition for "data":
usage Data leads a life of its own quite independent of datum, of which it
was originally the plural. It occurs in two constructions: as a plural noun
(like earnings), taking a plural verb and plural modifiers (as these, many,
a few) but not cardinal numbers, and serving as a referent for plural
pronouns (as they, them); and as an abstract mass noun (like information),
taking a singular verb and singular modifiers (as this, much, little), and
being referred to by a singular pronoun (it). Both constructions are
standard. The plural construction is more common in print, evidently
because the house style of several publishers mandates it (
http://www.m-w.com).
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language more formally
addresses the differences of opinion:
data The word data is the plural of Latin datum, "something given," but
does that mean you should treat it as a plural noun in English? Not always.
The plural usage is still common enough, as this headline from the New York
Times attests: Data Are Elusive on the Homeless. Sometimes scientists think
of data as plural, as in These data do not support the conclusions. But
more often scientists and researchers think of data as a singular mass
entity like information, and most people now follow this in general usage.
Sixty percent of the Usage Panel accepts the use of data with a singular
verb and pronoun in the sentence Once the data is in, we can begin to
analyze it. A still larger number, 77 percent, accepts the sentence We have
very little data on the efficacy of such programs, where the quantifier
very little, which is not used with similar plural nouns such as facts or
results, implies that data here is indeed singular
(http://www.bartleby.com/64/pages/page86.html).
However, by convention in technical and scientific writing data is most
commonly treated as plural; see http://web.bham.ac.uk/johnstf/revis006.htm
for example, though his data is/are :) more than 5 years old. This
convention is not absolute and is changing; some dictionaries formally
define data as taking a singular or plural verb, including the Cambridge
International Dictionary of English:
data
noun [U + sing/pl v]
information, esp. facts or numbers, collected for examination and
consideration and used to help decision-making, or information in an
electronic form that can be stored and processed by a computer
(http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=data*1+0).
Some definitions single out computer science as a discipline in which the
singular as abstract mass noun is acceptable. Other and hard sciences are
also formally accepting data as singular and plural; see the American
Chemical Society Style Guide for example:
The reason you often see "data" as a singular as well as a plural noun is
that many scientific publications consider the word to have become
legitimate in both capacities. The ACS Style Guide, page 50, flatly states,
"'Data' can be a singular or plural noun," and gives the example, "After
the data is printed and distributed, we can meet to discuss it. (Refers to
the whole collection of data as one unit.)"
(http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/mdd/v05/i02/html/02readers.html).
Interestingly, the American Statistical Association formally lists the
Merriam-Webster Collegiate dictionary as a designated style and usage
source, which is perhaps the most common reference of data as a singular
abstract mass noun. The guide doesn't reference "data" or any other words
specifically, however.
Those sites that discuss the appropriate use of "data" in the singular as
an abstract mass noun note that usage has evolved. Usage appears to have
followed the trend of words like "agenda", and other examples exist, like
"criteria" (http://web.bham.ac.uk/johnstf/revis006.htm).
Thoughts?
Respectfully,
...Robert
--------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Froese, MF, RPF http://www.taganov.com/robert.html
The opinions presented in this e-mail are exclusively those of
Robert Froese and may not be attributed to any other person or
organization unless stated explicitly to that effect.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 09:24:07 -0400
From: Hale.Stephen@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV
Subject: Re: data and semantics
Robert Froese mentioned that computer science may be a discipline in
which the word data is treated as an abstract mass noun. Here is a data
manager's perspective:
Data Are, Datta Is
We database managers are known to be fastidious,
We block data violations both obvious and insidious.
So there's nothing that makes us feel more slandered
Than questioning our search for data standards.
We believe in data standards with all our heart.
Without them, our databases would fall apart.
In writing copious documentation we do not slumber
But we can't agree on data's pronunciation or number.
Many of us say ta
Pronounce the word as DAY-tuh.
Others think it ought ta
Be pronounced as DAH-tuh.
To others, that don't matta,
They pronounce it as DAT-uh.
Habits are hard to erase,
But standards will never pass
If some of us load a database
While others load a dattabass.
What's more, data, the plural of datum,
Takes a plural verb (other forms, we hate 'em).
Good grammar we do not mar
When we say the data are.
But we flunk our grammar quiz
When we say the data is.
And, in the past tense,
We can always infer
That the data were.
It would make our ears buzz
To hear that the data was.
It gives some of us a righteous frown
To hear data used as a collective noun.
In this new singular situation
Data is akin to information.
But if data has taken on a singular form
Then, for the plural, will datas become the norm?
If we don't follow Latin rules verbatim
At least, here is an ultimatum:
Please do not use are with datum!
No doubt it would be foolish to go so far
To wonder whether metadata is or are.
And, what is worse (this will really grate 'em),
Is there such a thing as a metadatum?
It's really quite simple, you see.
Subject and verb in number must agree.
Else, we sound like grammatical rubes:
"Standards is going down the tubes."
In scientific circles, if we slip and say the data is,
Our status and tenure we will be trimmin'.
Just like using a title other than Ms
At a meeting of the National Organization for Women.
For language and data we do need standards.
(We can't have Frenchmen speaking Chinese to Spaniards.)
And we couldn't enjoy a game of Scrabble
If we were a talking Tower of Babel.
But very strict grammar would be a bummer.
We like to say "Let's database those numbers."
By this usage we are not perturbed,
We believe any noun can be verbed.
But I'm beginning to fear,
Although we can design complex databases with numerous parameters,
It's becoming painfully clear
That we can't write consistent poetic quatrains in iambic pentameters.
English standards ease people communication
And data standards ease database integration.
But let's not pretend we can reach data nirvana
When we use whatever English grammar we wanna.
Our search for data standards is hopeless, you see,
Until on the word data itself we can agree.
We will never have data standards harmony and bliss
While some say DAY-tuh are and others say DAT-uh is.
Stephen S. Hale
Science Editor 24(4):135, Jul-Aug 2001
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 09:41:37 -0500
From: "William A. Hayes Ph.D." <pilot@RIVERBOATHOUSE.COM>
Subject: Re: Science and Advocacy: Difference Between Raw and
Transdisciplinary Wildl...
"Good hearted people can reach an agreement on doing what is right, Steve"
I think this sums it up! If we had enough people with their hearts in the
right place who are willing to get together and talk things out, we could
potentially solve a great number of problems. Unfortunately, human nature
is to take on a them and us stance in most situations that are the least
confrontational. Somehow we have to make "us" more inclusive and "them" a
null set. Then we can get away from the excess baggage and get around to
solving problems and doing good things for the world (including humanity).
William Hayes, Ph.D.
Professor of Biology
Delta State University
pilot@riverboathouse.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news
[mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU]On Behalf Of sfrank
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 2:15 AM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: Science and Advocacy: Difference Between Raw and
Transdisciplinary Wildl...
Ernie, I agree whole heartedly. Efficiency is one of the foremost =
principals of conservatism. The route to efficiency is not through =
taxation, and that is where, I believe, we differ. Taxation hurts the =
poor in the long run. The stock answer is redistribution of wealth, or =
socialism a concept which has failed in every country that has imposed =
it. Make a environmental friendly product that is as good or better than =
a non green product for a competitive price and people will buy it. The =
problem as I see it is human greed still rules. Even in socialist =
countries, the government officials become the wealthy ruling class, =
revolution follows. The backlash to the Clinton-Gore administration was =
George W Bush, now we have to fight mines dumping tailings in rivers =
that can not handle the acid rock. Is this a fair trade? It depends on =
you point of view.=20
One thing environmentalists (not ecologists) over look is the fact they =
have to convince conservatives like myself that their ideas are right. =
Conservatives make up a powerful voting block. We need fact not theory =
and theosophy to convince us. When the environmental movement first =
started I was 100% on board. Stopping Dow Chemical from dumping nitric =
acid in a river is a heroic cause. Now, however the same multi-national =
corporations are funding the green groups through the Environmental =
Grant Asc. (EGA). I personally see this as being a huge co-opting of the =
environmental movement.=20
Here is an example that I can document numerous times. a small landowner =
has a stand of timber that he wants to log. A organization like "Friends =
of the Earth" sues to stop the logging, with funds provided through the =
EGA. The landowner facing huge legal bill sells his land to the nature =
conservancy, Weyerhaeuser contracts with the Nature conservancy to log =
the timber. Folks where is the equity in that? This is one reason the =
green movement is encountering so much resistance and rightly so.
Yes Ernie my mind is open and I will be contacting you personally. Good =
hearted people can reach an agreement on doing what is right, Steve
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Arcologic@aol.com=20
To: sfrank@toledotel.com ; ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU ; =
ecol-econ@csf.colorado.edu=20
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: Science and Advocacy: Difference Between Raw and =
Transdisciplinary Wildl...
Dear Steve,
You said,
I am all for science based ecology and protecting species that can =
be saved.
>From this, I can see that you and I are on the same team. On all =
other remarks, you were wrong. I would not care to argue the points. =
Others will abuse you sufficiently. I ask that you keep an open mind =
and listen to new ideas.
A particularly simple error is the belief that economic activity must =
expand in proportion to population. Efficiency has to be included in =
the equation.
We can talk off-list if you want to explore some point in depth.
Ernie Rogers
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 10:18:13 -0600
From: David Inouye <di5@umail.umd.edu>
Subject: Job: Instructor (Wildlife Biology in Wildlife Biology Curriculum),
SU
POSITION: Instructor (Wildlife Biology in Wildlife Biology Curriculum)
LOCATION: Department of Fishery and Wildlife Biology, College of Natural
Resources, Colorado State University, Fort Collins
APPOINTMENT: Nine month, for one year only
QUALIFICATIONS: 1) Ph.D.or professional experiences in disciplines
related to
duties described below. 2) Practical experience in
teaching/extension/research related to this position. 3) At least one degree
in wildlife or closely-related natural resources, such as fisheries,
conservation biology. 4) Publications in refereed scientific periodicals and
examples of public outreach in this field. 5) Skilled in using modern
methods, technologies, and media in teaching and outreach.
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: This is a teaching position to assist in
required
courses that are integral to the core training in the College of Natural
Resources and Department of Fishery and Wildlife Biology. No research work i
required. 1) Teach Principles of Vertebrate Management (FW 360) and possibly
First Year Seminar (FWCC 192 or NR 192) in the fall semester. 2) Teach
Conservation and Management of Large Mammals (FW 469) and Ecology (BY 320) i
the spring semester.
SALARY AND FRINGE BENEFITS: Commensurate with qualifications and
experience.
University benefits as per final appointment.
APPLICATION PROCEDURE: Send your curriculum vita, official transcripts
from all
universities attended, representative publications, a list of four reference
(one of whom was your adviser for the highest degree if completed in the
last 7
years), and a statement of interest that includes your philosophy of teachin
and your research and scholarly work in this field. Applicants are asked to
request letters of reference be sent to the address below. Faxed and
electronically mailed applications are acceptable, but should be followed
immediately by hard copies. Send information to:
Rudy Garcia, Chair
Wildlife Biology (Instructor) Search Committee Department of Fishery and
Wildlife Biology
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1474
E-Mail: robinett@cnr.colostate.edu
Departmental Fax: 970-491-5091 Departmental Telephone: 970-491-1410
DEADLINE: Position will be open until filled, but for full consideration,
applications must be postmarked by 21June 2002. The position begins August
15,
2002. Applicants must be able to interview during July 2002.
For more information about our department see our web site:
<http://www.cnr.colostate.edu/FWB>http://www.cnr.colostate.edu/FWB
Colorado State University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action
institution and complies with all federal and Colorado state laws,
regulations,
and executive orders regarding affirmative action requirements in all
programs. The Office of Equal Opportunity is located in Room 101, Student
Services. In order to assist Colorado State University in meeting its
affirmative action responsibilities, ethnic minorities, women, and other
protected class members are encouraged to apply and to so identify
themselves.
The Colorado Open Records Act may permit the University to treat
application as
confidential to a limited extent. If you wish to have your application
treated
as confidential, to the extent permitted by law, it must be accompanied by a
written request that all materials submitted be held in confidence to the
extent permitted under the Colorado Open Records Act at the time it is
submitted to the Search Committee.
======================
Sharyl Pierson
Administrative Assistant
Department of Fishery & Wildlife Biology
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1474
(970) 491-1410 Fax (970) 491 - 5091
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 12:21:47 EDT
From: Seston@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Science and Advocacy: Difference Between Raw and
Corporation not only co-opts the environmental movement. Corporate power
interferes with and co-opts many areas of society including government,
education, culture, family businesses, and scientific research. In the
Jan/Feb issue of "World Watch" in their Environmental Intelligence section
they note the new policy adopted by several scientific journals to require
authors to reveal any sources of funding or financial interests that might
influence the research. The co-opting of biomedical research by the
pharmaceutical industry is well known. The World Watch note mentions an
analysis of studies on the safety of a heart drug. The analysis showed that
96% of researchers with ties to pharmaceutical companies found the drug safe
However only 36% of those without industry connections found the drug safe.
The co-opting of research by industry is a serious threat to science.
Big corporations have benefited enormously from socialism. Grants, hand outs
subsidies, tax rebates, favored treatment, special access, exceptions, and o
and on. Whenever there is massive amounts of socialism for powerful
corporations conservatives are mute. Whenever there is any hint of socialism
for the poor, working people or family businesses, conservatives howl. Why i
that?
Lane Smith
In the end, our society will be defined not only by what we create, but by
what we refuse to destroy. - John Sawhill, Nature Conservancy.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 11:18:39 -0600
From: Justin Derner <jderner@NPA.ARS.USDA.GOV>
Subject: Ecologist/Weed Scientist job - USDA-ARS - Ft. Collins, CO
USDA, REE, Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Rangeland Resources
Research Unit, Crops Research Lab, Fort Collins, Colorado,
Ecologist/Weed Scientist. The aim of the research program is to develop
new knowledge and concepts for understanding the biology, ecology, and
population dynamics of invasive weeds, and to develop principles and
mechanisms for their control, including restoration of desirable
vegetation where necessary. The incumbent will develop and evaluate
strategies involving livestock management practices, biological control,
along with integrated weed management practices, for restoring
rangelands degraded by invasive weeds and preventing the further spread
of invasive weeds in the future. Research of the Unit is directed to
determining the effects of grazing management and global change on
animal production, soil and vegetation resources, ecosystem plant
health, and to developing healthy, sustainable and economically viable
management systems. The incumbent works closely with public land
managers, private ranchers and range scientists to develop strategies
for combating invasive weeds on public and private lands. Entry level
salary is from $45,285 - $58,867 per year (GS-11) to $54,275 - $70,555
per year (GS-12), depending on qualifications. PhD preferred. A
comprehensive benefits package includes paid sick leave and annual
leave, life and health insurance, and a savings and investment plan
(401K type), and a Federal retirement plan. For more information,
contact Dr. Jack Morgan, 970-498-4216; 307-772-2433, ext. 103;
morgan@lamar.colostate.edu. Application procedures and general
information may be obtained by contacting Kathie Peterson, 307-772-2433,
ext. 105, kathiep@lamar.colostate.edu, or go to www.ars.usda.gov and
click on "Careers with ARS", and then under "Current Job Openings",
click on "Research Scientist". Applications will be accepted from May 6
through the closing date, June 17, 2002. Applications must be
postmarked by the closing date. Applicants should reference
Announcement Number: ARS-X2W-2292. USDA/ARS is an Equal Opportunity
Employer.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 11:10:15 -0700
From: Steve Erickson <wean@WHIDBEY.NET>
Subject: Re: data and semantics
Of daytuh and dahtuh
I hope that you'll agree
Why it really really
Doesn't matter much to me
You call it daytuh
I call it dahtuh
But when the system crashes
It doesn't really mattuh
Just shut the whole thing down
-Steve Erickson
Frosty Hollow Ecological Restoration
Box 53, Langley, WA 98260
(360) 579-2332
wean@whidbey.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 13:45:37 -0500
From: Christopher J Wells <chris_wells@USGS.GOV>
Subject: Re: Deep Ecology
Before I came to work in the cushy land of .gov, I was a surveyor and I've
played in nature quite a bit. I worked in the Rockies, Michigan, most of
the Gulf Coastal states, and Argentina where I spent six months encamped on
the Andean overthrust. After that I worked as a botanist for a decade or
so. I like nature okay, but never had a brilliant epiphany from it. I
don't that many folks do.
Many folks find nature especially beautiful when enjoyed through the
senses. In my case, I feel some form of discordance when science and
metaphysics become entwined. Please don't misunderstand, I think it is
perfectly okay to speak of science within a metaphysical context. It is
interesting, often informative and occasionally enlightening. The reverse
is confused and pointless.
---chris
Christopher J Wells
Geographer
National Wetlands Research Center
Biol. Res. Div./U.S. Geol. Surv.
Allan Shanfield
<anshanfield@uc To: Christopher J Wells
davis.edu> <chris_wells@USGS.GOV>
cc: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD
EDU>
05/03/02 11:57 Subject: Re: Deep Ecology
AM
Dear Christopher,
Animism is the physical sensation that the world is alive and that we are
part of it; there is an arbitrary boundary b/w the senses and the world.
Who percieves with their intellect alone; moreover, who wants to? It is
an "in-ness" and a relaxation of boundaries. Science - a wonderful
endeavor - distances itself from the real world and itself is a
reification. Science gives us what it finds but it does not give us what's
there. Who can honestly deny feeling intangibly profound feelings when in
a "wilderness" (once home to our spp. according to anthroplogists) on a
mountaintop, or just letting one's guard down "out there". This business
with Baal and other stuff is anthropomorphic and after the fact; also,
good material for humor. The limitations of science in separating the body
from the world - in conjucntion with a host of events that precipitated
this bizarre event - is worth study and interesting. Spend a season alone
in the wild and tell me if you did not fee ineffable feelings of
connection or others that you'll never explain via words.
Modern science, as I see it (naturally in the minority) is half-knowledge;
to deny the "widsom of the body" (sense Cannon, early 1920's) seems like a
fascistic worldview and in an evolutionary context, a very radical notion.
For urban dwellers who never leave the concrete and iron, this is a
psycho-physiological disaster yet to be put on the table for discussion -
although E.O. Wilson, Stephen Kellert, Shepard, and other bright minds
have gone there.
Regards,
Allan Shanfield
Biogeography
_______________________
> Ken,
> I don't think "sfrank" esposued or promoted a particular belief system.
He
> may have one, though. As I read his note, "sfrank" quoted other folks w
o
> pointed-out what they believed was consistency between certain historic
> polytheistic beliefs and "deep ecology". I think that presents one wit
a
> falsifiable contention. This is good logic, whether or not one agrees
with
> him and his personal beliefs.
>
> In my opinion, "sfrank" and the authors whom he quotes either
misrepresent
> the beliefs of the people who worshipped "Ashtaroth and Baal" or
> misunderstand deep ecology. I contend that deep ecology is not a
> polytheistic belief as they seem to portray it but rather, a
> pseudoscientific pantheistic religion.
>
> It is pseudoscience in the same way that some UFO fans are
> pseudoscientific: they take accepted physical laws and widely observed
> phenomenon and extrapolate into a sphere of belief that is unfalsifiabl
.
> There is nothing wrong with that and that doesn't mean it is wrong. It
> just isn't scientifically useful.
>
> It is pantheistic in that it describes a commonality of existence betwe
n
> all things and all life. It elevates that presumed relationship to
nearly
> equal (or greater) than the importance of our own species. That is
> pantheism.
>
> In closing, I don't think it is particularly useful to disparage the
> convictions or beliefs of others in order to make a reasoned, logical
> arguement concerning philosophical or scientific issues. That
> argumentative technique is fine for politicians. Leave it to them.
>
> ---chris
>
>
> Geographer
> USGS/BRD
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ken Parejko
> <parejkok@UWSTOUT To:
ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
> .EDU> cc:
> Sent by: Subject: Deep Ecology
> "Ecological
> Society of
> America: grants,
> jobs, news"
> <ECOLOG-L@LISTSER
> V.UMD.EDU>
>
>
> 05/02/02 09:24 AM
> Please respond to
> Ken Parejko
>
>
>
>
>
> In a recent email, "sfrank " demonstrates a myopic (Christian) vision o
> deep ecology and in so doing mislabels it as a religion. He quotes John
> K. Williams to that effect, and places it in the "nature religion" of
> Ashtaroth and Baal. In William's quotation nature is labelled as divine
> non-rational and non-moral.
>
> While some may pursue "deep ecology" with religious fervor, and the
> language of "deep ecology" may sometimes take on a quasi-spiritual
> character, it is not of its own nature religious. Religon requires the
> belief in a deity. To deny the reality and existence of the Christian
> deity does not necessarily require one to believe in the existence of
> any other deity, whether within nature (immanent) or transcendent. A
> deep ecologist, in my view, simply attempts to break down the
> socially-constructed barriers between self and other, where other is th
> non-human natural world. This allows a new and revitalized understandin
> of how the natural world works, a kind of Kuhnian revolution. While
> reductionism has its place (and "scientific" ecology uses it as its
> primary paradigm) it is fascinating how much we can learn about the
> natural world by stepping outside that paradigm.
>
> It's rather like looking for a dim star in the sky. Astronomers know
> that because the fovea contains cones rather than rods, if we stare
> directly at the star's supposed location, we may not see it. But if we
> shift our focus slightly our peripheral vision, where there are the mor
> sensitive rods, is more likely to find it. The laser-beam of
> reductionism can tell us much, but not all, about the natural world. On
> only has to read Aldo Leopold, Thoreau, or John Muir (all extremely
> well-versed natural historians, in the more "reductionist" tradition) t
> realize that a deeper understanding of ecology demands we step, now and
> again, outside ourselves and the social constructs which we are, and in
> so doing allow the natural world to speak to us through our "peripheral
> vision.
>
> There is a long tradition of deep ecology, though not called that, whic
> pre-dates Christianity by more than three centuries. This is the Stoic
> viewpoint of nature. From its beginning in the teachings of Zeno of
> Citium and Chryssipus, Stoicism like modern science teaches that nature
> is rational. The Stoic goal of life is to live virtuously, and it is by
> studying nature that we learn what is right and what is wrong. Quoting
> Gisela Striker, Stoic ethics is "an investigation of what it is to live
> in agreement with nature." Or as Cicero put it, the supreme good is
> "living comformably with nature." As a scientist and Stoic I vehemently
> take issue with William's portrayal of nature as irrational and
> non-moral.. While some Stoics are deists (who believe that nature itsel
> is divine) many are not; so it is best portrayed as a philosophy, not a
> religion. Whether one is a deist or not is quite irrelevant, both to
> the Stoic and deep ecological tradition.
>
> I believe that many others, like myself, who consider themselves both
> "scientific" and "deep" ecologists, and able to navigate within both
> traditions, are insulted by the portrayal of our complex epistemology a
> nothing more than the worship of Ashtaroth and Baal. I suspect
> Christians would be equally insulted by characterizing all of them as
> rabid, sadistic witch-hunters or Inquisitional judges. I, for one, have
> never worshipped Ashtharoth or Baal and expect to have many other more
> important things to do in my remaining years than take up that kind of
> silliness.
>
> Ken Parejko
> Biology Dept.
> UW-Stout
> Menomonie, WI
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 13:52:42 -0600
From: David Inouye <di5@umail.umd.edu>
Subject: Poisonous Plant Research Laboratory
3. Poisonous Plant Research Laboratory
http://www.pprl.usu.edu/
This Web site from the US Department of Agriculture's Agriculture Research
Service (ARS) focuses on poisonous plants and research currently being done
on some of the problems caused by them. The main page gives some background
on poisonous plants and the importance of the research, while the research
page links to substantial information, including publication submissions and
annual reports, about several ongoing ARS research projects. The site also
contains a list of some poisonous plants in the western US, with links to
detailed descriptions and photos of the plants and their potential effects.
[AL]
>From The NSDL Scout Report for the Life Sciences, Copyright Internet Sc
ut
Project 1994-2002. http://scout.cs.wisc.edu/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 13:52:50 -0600
From: David Inouye <di5@umail.umd.edu>
Subject: Biosphere Reserve Integrated Monitoring Programme
4. Biosphere Reserve Integrated Monitoring Programme
http://www.unesco.org/mab/brim/index.htm
This new Web site focuses on the Biosphere Reserve Integrated Monitoring
(BRIM) Programme, part of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and
Cultural Organization's (UNESCO) Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme.
"BRIM undertakes abiotic, biodiversity, socio-economic and integrated
monitoring in the World Network of Biosphere Reserves." Data included within
the Resources section includes flora and fauna monitoring from the MAB
programme, as well as abiotic, biotic, and socio-economic data from other
sources. Links to resources that describe monitoring methods and protocols
are other valuable components of this site. [AL]
>From The NSDL Scout Report for the Life Sciences, Copyright Internet Sc
ut
Project 1994-2002. http://scout.cs.wisc.edu/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 13:53:29 -0600
From: David Inouye <di5@umail.umd.edu>
Subject: Fire Wars site
13. Fire Wars [Flash]
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/fire/
Although wildfire can be quite destructive, some plants and animals become
adapted to and even require this disturbance for their survival. This
companion Web site to the new PBS NOVA program, Fire Wars, focuses on
wildfires, the people who fight them, and the impact that the fires have on
natural ecosystems. A teacher's guide accompanies the site, offering ideas
for discussion and activities that can be used alone or with the television
program. One particularly interesting section is entitled On Fire. This
sequence of interactive features walks the user through the chemical
reactions involved in combustion. This site is also reviewed in the May 3,
2002 _Scout Report_.[AL]
>From The NSDL Scout Report for the Life Sciences, Copyright Internet Sc
ut
Project 1994-2002. http://scout.cs.wisc.edu/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 14:59:15 -0400
From: NCSE List Manager <henderson@NCSEONLINE.ORG>
Subject: Sustainable Forestry and Biodiversity Symposium
The National Commission on Science for Sustainable Forestry presents:
"Biodiversity in Forest Planning and Management: Science Status and
Research Needs"
Portland, Oregon
June 20, 2002
This first Annual NCSSF symposium will identify, characterize and
prioritize the gaps in our understanding of the connections between
forest management practices and biodiversity.
Themes include:
-Integration of biodiversity into future forest planning and management
-Managing for biodiversity on different ownerships
-Biodiversity and the "green" certification of forest products
-Management needs for High Conservation Value Forests
-Needs and priorities for science supporting biodiversity
-Defining a research agenda and the next steps for collaboration among
participants
Key speakers will address the topic from diverse perspectives, and
panels will discuss the significance. Participants will have an
opportunity to share their views and provide input to NCSSF in
developing our related research program.
For the agenda and more information, please visit:
http://www.NCSSF.org/. Attendance is limited to the first 100
registrants. Register online beginning May 10th. Group rate hotel
accommodations are available.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 15:38:26 -0400
From: Lori Hidinger <lori@ESA.ORG>
Subject: Deadline Extended for ESA Panel on Vegetation Classification Worksh
p
on VegBank
DEADLINE EXTENDED TO MAY 15--SPACE STILL AVAILABLEAN INTRODUCTION TO
VEGBANK: A TOOL FOR DATA ENTRY, ACQUISITION, AND ARCHIVING A Fieldtrip
and Workshop sponsored byThe ESA Vegetation Classification
Panelhttp://www.vegbank.org/workshop.html There is currently no
public archive for vegetation plot data in the U.S or elsewhere, yet
such an archive is critical for plot storage, plot identification and
access, and for plot documentation and citation. Such a repository is
especially needed for obtaining, synthesizing, and documenting the large
number of field observations needed to classify, describe, and name
vegetation types, particularly for the U.S. National Vegetation
Classification (US-NVC). The ESA Panel on Vegetation Classification has
been developing VegBank (www.vegbank.org) to meet this need. For
vegetation plot data VegBank is expected to function in a manner
analogous to GenBank in that primary data will be deposited for
reference and reanalysis. VegBank is intended to be directly linked to
vegetation types and description maintained in the USVC classification
database. This workshop will introduce attendees to the functions and
applications of VegBank in vegetation science by walking participants
through all phases of the classification process, from collection and
entry of original field plot data to extraction of preexisting
complementary plot data, data set integration, subsequent analysis,
documentation, and final archiving. Workshop participants will first
visit a range of vegetation types in the Santa Catalina Mountains, after
which they will divide into five crews deployed to different field
locations. They will use the Panel's "Standards for Floristic Vegetation
Classification" as a basis for collecting field data that will be
entered into VegBank. The second day will be spent in a
computer-teaching lab at the University of Arizona. There participants
will download the VegBank client tool, upload field data to the client,
query the central database for related plots, and develop an amalgamated
set of plot data for classification. They will then output a set of plot
data for initial analysis. Participants will end the workshop by
employing analytical tools to evaluate their derived data with respect
to current floristic descriptions of vegetation types in the USVC.
SPACE IS LIMTED TO 25. Due to this limitation and the specialized nature
of the workshop, all those wishing to participate must apply and be
accepted. Applications and additional information are available online
(http://www.vegbank.org/panel/workshop_app.html). Graduate student
participation is especially encouraged and all graduate students
accepted to the workshop will receive a full fee scholarship.
Applications will be evaluated by the instructors and applicants will be
informed of their status by May 16, 2002. APPLICATIONS ARE DUE May 15,
2002. Once accepted into the Workshop, all participants MUST register
for the Workshop and the ESA Annual Meeting through the ESA Annual
Meeting registration process. All Workshop participants MUST be
registered for the ESA Annual Meeting to participate in the Workshop.
Student scholarships only cover the cost of the Workshop, not the cost
of the ESA Annual Meeting.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 16:07:41 -0400
From: Kerren Henry <khenry@RAMAPO.EDU>
Subject: JOB POSTING - ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--Boundary_(ID_3+0ASIdfiRPBmaV+xCHufQ)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Hello,
Please post the following job on our behalf.
Thank you.
**************************
--Boundary_(ID_3+0ASIdfiRPBmaV+xCHufQ)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="PSTN#706.txt"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-disposition: inline; filename="PSTN#706.txt"
RAMAPO COLLEGE OF NEW JERSEY
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ADVERTISING AUTHORIZATION FORM
LISTSERVER
* * * AD COPY * * *
Ramapo College of New Jersey is a four-year undergraduate college located in
the beautiful foothills of the Ramapo Valley approximately 25 miles northwes
of New York City. Established in 1969 as a state-supported, coeducational
ollege of liberal arts, sciences and professional studies, this institution
ffers an array of undergraduate, graduate, and post baccalaureate programs f
cused on the four "pillars" of the Ramapo College mission - international, i
tercultural, interdisciplinary, and experiential education. The College is
committed to global education. It is a Fulbright Center and houses the New
Jersey Governor's School for International Studies. On-site childcare is av
ilable.
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
FALL 2002
POSITION # 706
JOB DESCRIPTION
Plant Ecologist needed to teach (12 credits a semester of) Environmental Stu
ies (100 level), General Ecology (200 level), Field Biology and Ecology (300
level), and Ecosystems (400 level). This is a one-year, non-tenurable appoi
tment with the possibility of renewal for up to two years.
REQUIREMENTS
Ph.D. or ABD with imminent completion date is required. Applicant must demo
strate teaching excellence, an ability to incorporate new technologies in th
ir teaching, and a commitment to interdisciplinary teaching.
Faculty members are expected to maintain active participation in research an
/or scholarship, college governance, campus and community affairs, and acade
ic advisement.
Interested applicants should submit a letter of interest, vita, and a list o
three references to Dr. William Makofske, Search Committee Chair, School of
Theoretical and Applied Science, or email:bmakofsk@ramapo.edu. Review of ap
lications will begin immediately, and continue until the position is filled.
Since its beginning, Ramapo College has had an intercultural/international m
ssion. Please tell us how your
background, interest and experience can contribute to this mission, as well
s to the specific position for which you are applying. Position offers exce
lent state benefits. To request accommodation, call (201) 684-7734. Websit
: http://www.ramapo.edu.
RAMAPO COLLEGE OF NEW JERSEY
505 Ramapo Valley Road
Mahwah, NJ 07430
"New Jersey's Public Liberal Arts College"
Ramapo College is a member of the Council of Public Liberal Arts Colleges (C
PLAC), a national alliance of leading liberal arts colleges in the public se
tor.
EEO/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
============================================================================
=
END OF AD COPY
--Boundary_(ID_3+0ASIdfiRPBmaV+xCHufQ)--
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 16:00:49 -0400
From: EnviroNetwork@NATURALIST.COM
Subject: Environmental Job Openings from EnviroNetwork
Title: Watershed Scientist
Company: The Nature Conservancy
Location: Coastal Georgia, Georgia
For more information click below:
http://www.environetwork.com/jobs/detail.cfm?temp=jobdetail&id=3107355
Title: Outreach Coordinator
Company: Working Group on Community Right-to-Know
Location: Washington, DC
For more information click below:
http://www.environetwork.com/jobs/detail.cfm?temp=jobdetail&id=3095355
Title: Residential Energy Efficiency Project Managers
Company: New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA)
Location: Albany, New York
For more information click below:
http://www.environetwork.com/jobs/detail.cfm?temp=jobdetail&id=3089355
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 16:51:31 -0500
From: Richard Baker <richard.baker@DNR.STATE.MN.US>
Subject: Entry Level Conservation Biology Position with Minnesota DNR
A one-year full-time appointment with the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources' Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program is open
for applications until 05/09/02. This position will assist the Animal
Research Coordinator and other NHNRP staff with a variety of projects
related to endangered species, nongame wildlife, and native plant
research and conservation. Work location is St. Paul, MN.
For information on duties, salary, qualifications, and how to apply, go
to:
http://webapps.dnr.state.mn.us/hr/jobDetail.jsp?id=1020333979283
<><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><>
Richard J. Baker
Animal Research Coordinator / Zoologist
Minnesota Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program
Division of Ecological Services
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
500 Lafayette Rd., Box 25
St. Paul, MN 55155
Phone: 651/297-3764
Fax: 651/296-1811
E-mail: richard.baker@dnr.state.mn.us
<><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><>
------------------------------
End of ECOLOG-L Digest - 2 May 2002 to 3 May 2002 (#2002-114)
*************************************************************
˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙
Thanks to discussion with TVR, I have decided to put a link to back files of the discussion group. This months back files.
The link to complete archives is available elsewhere.
This text was originally an e-mail. It was converted using a program
RUPANTAR- a simple e-mail-to-html converter.
(c)Kolatkar Milind. kmilind@ces.iisc.ernet.in