I meant "indeterminism"

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Perley [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, 20 February 2001 09:58
To: Discussion forum for environmental ethics.
Subject: RE: clearfells v wildfires - what constitutes harm?


Tony wrote

One more thing on fires -

A couple of years ago, in the journal Environmental Ethics, Callicott
amended the wording of Leopold's Land Ethic to include "appropriate scale of
disturbance" as desirable in an ecosystem. This was in response to the
emerging recognition that some disturbance is natural and desirable to
promote speciation.


Chris Perley here: Leopold knew about natural disturbance as a reality -
with both too little and too much being counterproductive to the health of
an ecosystem.  Your comment that this is an "emerging recognition" relates
to those who interpret Leopold rather than Leopold himself.  The recognition
that ecosystems are defined more by process, function and interdeterminism
(than stasis, structure and determinism) is one major support for a new view
on the environment (Read Botkin's Discordant Harmony for some history of
science background for ecology).  The other main point  "emerging" that
supports a "new view" is that humans need not be considered as set apart -
either as Madonna worshippers, or as utilitarian exploiters of property.
Leopold - I think - had a very good handle on both of these "emerging"
ideas.

The new view can be summed up in Botkin's passage (P 156)

“Under the old management, management for conservation and management for
utilisation (such as harvesting fish and cutting forests for timber)
appeared to be different and, in general, incompatible goals.  From an old
preservationist perspective, nature undisturbed achieved a constancy that
was desirable and was disrupted in an undesirable way only by human actions.
From an old utilisation perspective, the forest was there to cut, take
apart, replace, and put back together as one chose.  If nature was like a
watch, then one had to choose between the stereotyped preservationist’s
approach – appreciate the beauty of the watch, and use it to tell time – or
the stereotyped engineer’s approach – attempt to take the watch apart and
improve it, or use the parts for something else.

Under the new management, our role in conservation is active: for example
harvesting may serve the interests of conservation as well as utilisation,
and the goals of conservation and utilisation can be part of one approach.”

Note the reference to a "preservation's approach".

Chris Perley