[LEPS-L:8055] Re: How many years?

Anne Kilmer viceroy at gate.net
Thu Nov 30 18:37:55 EST 2000

"Kondla, Norbert FOR:EX" wrote:
> Yes, the focus on the habitat should be the prime consideration.  If we try
> to conserve every population of every organism we will be guaranteed to fail
> and will be fighting the biological reality that it is perfectly natural for
> populations to die out from time to time in environments that will continue
> to change even when we try to play God and maintain some particular present
> state. Best we can hope to achieve with present knowledge and finances is to
> maintain some options for the future in the form of a reasonably complete
> assemblage of habitats - such as we recognize them at least.
Yes. One thing many people don't realize is that habitats are supposed
to change, like shuffling a chess board, so that prairie is burned;
becomes pond; becomes cypress hammock. So we jump in and try to
stabilize an area so that a particular organism will be happy. Aaaargh!
Sure, the scientists know this, but try to teach it to the legislators
and their handlers. 
As for playing God, check out His style before you try to imitate him.
Change is His middle name. 
Change and disaster. Change-and-Disaster is His middle name. (Nobody
ever expects the Spanish Inquisition.)
But I digress. 
About this time every year, I hope all of you watch the Sorcerer's
Apprentice, as ably portrayed by Mickey Mouse, and think carefully about
the results of hubris. 
And, nevertheless, we have to do what we can, and hope it's right. But
there's no way the Florida Jay and its community can survive on the same
patches of parkland, kept just right for them, while the suburbs around
them grow grass and crotons. You've got to change the way suburban
communities garden, before your little patches of wilderness can grow
your endangered bugs. 
This can be done. 
Anne Kilmer
South Florida


   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:


More information about the Leps-l mailing list