From: donj@Ingres.COM (Don Johnson)
Subject: Re: What's Necessary?
Reply-To: donj@Ingres.COM (Don Johnson)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 17 Dec 92 03:04:11 GMT

In article <38511078@hpindda.cup.hp.com> alanm@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Alan McGowen) writes:
>Robert Patrick Thille writes:
>>Johan Ivar Kval| writes
>>>          Why do we need to protect species from extermination that aren't
>>>   vital for the ecosystem?
>>_All_ life is UNNECESSARY.
>>Something to think about.
>
>*None* of the species inventory of any ecosystem is "necessary" in the 
>sense that it *has* to exist. All of these things are products of 
>contingency -- of the *history* of life.  We too are products of that 
>contingency. 
>
>Nevertheless, the functioning of ecosystems results from all of the species
>that make them up, and in turn places selection pressures on each species. 

	Cut for brevity... (Alan is long winded)

>This results in a delicate balance, one with the property that it is fairly
>easily disrupted, and fairly good at repairing itself given enough time. 

        Cut for brevity... (Alan is long winded)

>On a human time resolution, removing species from ecosystems impairs them.
>Some species, particularly predators and large-bodied grazers, have
>so much influence over community structure that major disruption can
>result when they are removed. Such major disruptions almost invariably
>result in further extinctions as the entire food web rearranges itself.

        Cut for brevity... (Alan is long winded)

>taking heroic measures. And preventive medicine means protecting every bit
>of biological diversity. This is best done by protecting ecosystems as
>whole systems.
>
>------------
>Alan McGowen

Ahhh, but all species are not equal. Should we protect the smallpox virus
because it's nearly extinct and doesn't exist outside of laboratories?

One reason many "common folk" dismiss us is that they believe environmentalists
think more highly of owls than they do of humans. as a member of Greenpeace, The Sierra Club, etc. I care a great deal about Spotted Owls. But at some point
they aren't worth the effort.

Is the Spotted owl species worth 1 (one) job? I think so. Is it worth 1 (one)
human life? Probably. Is it worth 10 million jobs? Or ten million human lives?
The answer isn't so clear. If I haven't reached your limit yet kick it up
another magnitude or two, a hundred million human lives?

The answer, to me, is clear with Small Pox. It can go extinct. I'll help it
along if I can. Same with AIDS, TB, Polio and many more 'disease' organisms.

Nor would I vote to restore the California Grizzly Bear to its former glory.
It would cause more trouble than it would be worth (although I would be willing
to listen to contrary arguments).

I agree that the system is what we need to save. Not because we're intrinsically
trying to 'preserve nature', but because we're trying to preserve ourselves
and our own species. And, as Alan says, no species exists or evolves by itself.

But if we present ourselves, or let our opponents define us as, people who
believe that all species are equivalent, we'll be religated to the fringes along
with other "nutso" groups.

Learning how to manage ecosystems is a tough task. But we WILL have to learn
how to gauge the relative merits of species within ecosystems. Diversity, balance and stability within the system is what is important, not a particular
species.

Don Johnson.