About Coyotes and Intelligent Tinkering

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --

Leopold's community methaphor for land-use is the basis for his Land-ethic. Leopolds words follow:

"All ethics so far evolved rest upon a single premise that the individual is a member of a community of interdependent parts. His instincts prompt him to compete for his place in the community, but his ethics prompt him also to co-operate (perhaps in order that there may be a place to compete for).

The land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and animals, or collectively: the land."

"In short, a land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it. It implies respect for his fellow-members, and also respect for the community as such."

Leopold shows how the "Economic" worldview can not protect the wildlife or the plants. His criticism shows the necessity of abandonment of a strictly economic worldview.

"One basic weakness in a conservation system based wholly on economic motives is that most members of the land community have no economic value. Wild-flowers and songbirds are examples. of the 22,000 higher plants and animals native to Wisconsin, it is doubtful weather more than 5 per cent can be sold, fed, eaten, or otherwise put to economic use. Yet these creatures are members of the biotic community, and if (as I believe) it stability depends on its integrity, they are entitled to continuance."

"The 'key-log' which must be moved to release the evolutionary process for an ethic is simply this: quit thinking about decent land-use as solely an economic problem. Examine each question in terms of what is ethically and esthetically right, as well as what is economically expedient.

A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it does otherwise."

I think this quote is the heart of the matter. Few landowners view there land as just an investment; for the most part it is home.

Yesterday I made a flippant comment about school taxes and being a yuppie. The comments that followed weren't what I expected, but I guess I should have been prepared.

I am guilty of sometimes writing just to stir up conversation, but I have to admit I get frustrated by those who have all the answers on topics like freedom, land use, individual rights, etc.

I especially liked this comment you provided by Aldo Leopold:
"In short, a land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it. It implies respect for his fellow-members, and also respect for the community as such."

As I get older I find myself having more and more questions to arguments I was sure I once knew the answers to. Because of this, I find myself in awe of the ignorance of those who are so sure of themselves.

Questions like "If seat belt laws are so stupid, why stop there.....why not get rid of stop signs....these violate my personal freedoms". (that was meant to illustrate the point....I don't really believe this. similar oservations can be made about gun use, property rights, shooting varmits, etc.).

Community is a compromise, it can't be any other way, thank God.

Take Care
Steve

Univ. of Wisconsin---I love it there! I just retired but several times in past years I attended seminars there and always looked forward to the trip.
Take care.