He found more than 40,000 journal entries and plotted the abundance of wildlife and native people day-by-day for the entire 863-day journey. He has quantified all the wildlife observations and encounters with native people recorded in the journals of the Lewis and Clark expedition. My colleague Charles Kay (2003), a wildlife ecologist, has shown how serious a misconception this is. Indeed, when it mentions Native Americans it depicts them as primitive savages, sometimes as “ecologically noble savages.” This concept seldom takes account of Native Americans. “Nature undisturbed” assumes that the American continents were a wilderness teeming with untold numbers of bison, passenger pigeons, and other wildlife—until Europeans despoiled it. In his book Discordant Harmonies, biologist Daniel Botkin (1990, 42) observed that the views underlying the environmental laws of the 1970s “represented a resurgence of prescientific myths about nature blended with early-twentieth-century studies that provided short-term and static images of nature undisturbed.” Therefore, the Endangered Species Act cannot restore a balance of nature by restoring species. Biologists today understand that there is no balance of nature, there is no ecological stasis, there is only change. The “balance of nature” is the idea that nature is characterized by constancy and stability. And its regulatory approach ignores the role of states and landowners in species protection. It is not even an endangered species act it is an endangered subpopulation and distinct population segment act. Enacted in 1973, the act is based on the myth of the balance of nature and, in particular, on a flawed understanding of the biological state of the Americas at the time of Columbus’s arrival. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is broken. Finally, consumers can help shape how policy is made and interpreted by following Cornucopia’s work and making their voices heard.A Yellowstone gray wolf. These areas help farmers by supporting beneficial insects and wildlife, providing water and air filtration, and imparting natural buffers.įarmers can obtain conservation easements to offset the economic burden of leaving land undisturbed. In the meantime, certifiers, farmers, and consumers should be educated about the benefits native ecosystems provide to everyone, so as to help discourage continued conversion. With hard work, the regulations that unintentionally catalyze the conversion of pristine lands can be revised. Overall, disincentives for the conversion of native ecosystems are necessary to prevent organic production from doing more harm than good. Once pristine lands are lost, they are gone forever. While organic farms support a much higher level of biodiversity than do conventional farms, native ecosystems provide far greater benefits to plants, animals, and the human environment. In the current organic regulations, land being converted to organic production must “ ave had no prohibited substances… applied to it for a period of three years immediately preceding harvest of the crop…”īecause native ecosystems are pristine, farmers can plow up native grassland, forest, scrubland, and riparian zones and immediately start farming them “organically.” In an unpredictable economic climate, this loophole can be attractive to farmers or large corporate agribusinesses wanting to expand quickly. Unfortunately, the organic regulations do not protect native ecosystems from being converted to organic farmland. Organic agriculture should, ultimately, attempt to “do no harm” by conserving and even rehabilitating biodiversity, building good soil, and decreasing chemical inputs. Wild spaces also provide “ecosystem services,” including flood control, water filtration, and carbon sequestration, benefitting the public as a whole. These native ecosystems are more than just wild spaces because they remain undisturbed environments, they are treasure troves of plant and animal biodiversity, and may even be vital to the survival of some species. In other words, it has not been tilled, logged, or significantly altered from its original character. Wild spaces are being lost at an unprecedented pace due to these pressures.Ī native ecosystem is one that is largely undisrupted by human hands. This land use, combined with increasing environmental pressures from climate change, pollution, and population growth, has a cumulative effect on the environment. Driven by higher demand, there is increasing pressure to convert even more land for use in food production. Industrial-scale agriculture is one of the primary causes of ecosystem and biodiversity losses. Why Not to Convert Native Land to Organic Managementįarm and Food Policy Analyst at The Cornucopia InstituteĪs consumers become more educated about the strain conventional agriculture places on human and environmental health, the organic market is also facing an increase in demand.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |