aldo leopold - the land ethic ver. 1

8/14/2019 Aldo Leopold - The Land Ethic ver. 1

1/9

Aldo LeopoldWhen god-like Odysseus returned from the warsin Troy, h h a n g e d all on one ropc a dozen slave-girls of his Household w hora Ii e s u s p c c t e d of mis-b e h a v i o r d u r i n g hi s absence.

This hanging involved no question of propriety.T h e gir ls were property. T h e disposa l o f proper tywas then, as nw, a matter of expediency, not ofr i g h t a n d w r o n g .

Concepts of r ight and w r o n g were n ot l a c k i n gfrom Odysseus' Greece: witness the f ide l i ty of his 'w i fe th roug h th e long years before at last his b lack-p r o w e d galleys c!ove th e wi ne-dark seas fov home.Th e ethical s t r u c t u r e of that day covered wives,b u t h ad n ot yet been extended to h u m a n chattels .During the three t h o u s a n d years w h i c h have s i nceelapsed, ethical criteria have been extended tom a n y fields o f conduct, wi th correspon din gshrinkages in those judged by expediency only.

The Ethical Seuence

This extension of ethics, so far studied only byphi losophers, is actual ly a process in ecologicalevolution. Its sequences may be descr ibed in eco-logical as wel l as in p h i losophica l terms. An ethic,ecologically, is a l imi t a t ion on freedom of action inth e struggle for ex istence. An ethic, phi losophic-ally, is a different iat ion of social from anti-socialconduct. These ar two de f in i t ions of on e th in g .Th e t h i n g has i t s or ig in in the ten den cy of in ter-d e p e n d e n t i n d i v i d u a l s or groups to e v o l v e modes

of co-operation. The ecologist calls these symbi-oses. Politics and economics ar adyanced s y m b i -oses in w h i c h th e or ig in a l free-for-atl compet i t i onhas been replaced, in part, by co-operative mech-anisms with an ethical content,

T h e complesi ty of co-operatiye m e c h a n i s m s hasi n creased wi th populat ion d en s i ty , an d w i th thecf i i c i ency of tcols. It was s impler, for example, todefme the anti-sociai uses.of s t i cks and s ton es . inthe days of the mastodons than of bullets an dbi l lboards in the ag of motors.

T h e f i r s t ethics dealt wi th the re lat ion be tweeni n d i v i d u a l s ; the Mosaic Decalogue is an esample.Later accretions dealt with the relat ion betweenthe i n d i v i d u a l an d society. T he Golden R u l e triesto integrate the i n d i v i d u a l to society; democracy toi n teg ra tc social organization to the i n d i v i d u a l .

There is as yet no ethic dealing with man'srelation to lan d and to the an i mal s an d p l a n t sw h i c h grow u p o n it . Lan d, l ike Odysseus1 slave-girls, is st i l l property. The land-relation is st i l lstrictly economic, entailing privileges but not obii-gations.The r::ter-sion of ethics to this third element inh u m a n c n v i r o n m e n t is, if I read th e eridence cor-rectly, an evolu t ion ary poss ib i l i ty and an ecologicalnecessi ty . It i s the third step in a seuence. T hef irst two have already been taken. I n d i v i d u a lmin kers s ince the days of Ezekiel and Isaiah haveasserted that the despoliat ion of land i s not onlyi n e x p e d i e n t but wrong. Society, however, has notyet aff irmed their bel ief. I regard the present con-


2/9


3/9

Aldo Leopoldeually brave, resourceful, and persevering. Theimpact of occupan cy here brought no bluegrass, orother plant fitted to wi thstand th e b u m p s arid b u f -fet ings of hard use. This region, when grazed bylivestock, reverted through a series of mor an dmor worthless grasses, shrubs, and weeds to acondition of unstable euilibrium. Each recessionof plant types bred erosion; each increment to ero-sion bred a further recession of plants. The resulttoday i s a progressive an d m u t u a l deterioration, n otonly of p l a n t s and soi ls, but of the a n i m a l commu-n i ty subs i s t ing thereon. The ear ly se t t lers d id notexpect this: on the cienegas of New Mexico someeven cut ditches to hasten it. So subtle has been itsprogress that few residents of the region ar awareof it. It is u i te invisible to the tourist who f inds thiswrecked landscape colorful an d c h a r m i n g (asin deed i t i s, but i f b e a r s scant resemblance to w h a ti tw a s i n 1 84 8) .

This s a m e l a n d s c a p e w as "developed" o n c ebefore, b u t w i th u i t e dif ferent results. Th ePueblo Indians settled the Southwest in pre-Columbian times, but they happened not to beeuipped with rang livestock. Their civilizationexpired, but n ot becau se their land expired.

In India , reg ions devoid of any sod-forminggrass have been settled, apparen t ly w i t h o u twreck ing the land, b y the s imple expedient ofcarrying the grass to the cow, rather than v ice

-yersa. (Was this the result of some deep wisdom,or was it just good luck? I do not know.)

In short, tha plant succession steered the courseof history; th e p ioneer s imply demonstra ted, fo rgood or i ll, what success ions inhered in the land . I shistory taught in this spir i t? It will be, once theconcept of land as a commun i ty rea l ly pen etratesou r intellectual life.

The Ecoiogical ConscienceConservation is a state of harmony between menand land . Desp i te n ear ly a century of propaganda,conservation sti l l proceeds at a snaiPs pace; pro-grcss stil cosists targely of ietterhead pieties an uconvention oratory. On the back forty we sti l l sliptwo steps backward for each forward stride.

The usual answer to this dilemma is "morconservation education." No one will debat this,but is i t certa in that only the volume of educationneeds s tepp ing up? I s someth ing lack ing in thecontent as well?

It is di f f i cu l t to give a fa ir summary of itscontent in brief form, but, as I u n d e r s t a n d it, thecontent is substantia lly this: obey the law, voteright, join some organ iza t ions, and pract ice whatconservation is profi table on y o u r ow n land; th egovernment will do the rest.

Is not this formua too easy to accomplishanyth ing worth-while? It defines no right orwrong, assigns n o obl iga t ion, calls for no sacrifice,impl ies no change in the current ph i losophy ofvalues. In respect of land-use, it urges only en-l ightened self-interest. Just how far w i l l such edu-cation take us? An example w i l l p erhaps yield apart ial a n s w e r .

By 1930 it had become clear to all except theecologically blind that southwestern Wisconsin'stopsoil was sl ipping seaward. In 1933 the farmerswere told that i f they w o u l d adopt cer ta in remedia lpractices for f i ve years, the p u b l i c w o u l d d o n a teC C C labor to ins ta l l them, plus the necessarymachin ery and materials. The offer w as widelyaccepted, but the practices were widely forgottenwhen the five-year corttract period was up. Thefarmers cnntinued only rhoce practices that yieldedan immediate and v i s ib le economic gain for them-selves.

This le d to the idea that m a y b e farmers w b u l dlearn mor u i c k l y if they themselves wrote th ~ 'rules. Accordingly the Wisconsin'Legislature in1937 passed the Soil Conervation District Law.This said to farmers, in effect: We, the p ublic, will

furnish you free techmcal sernice and loan you spe-ciaUzed machinery, if you will write your own rulesfo r land-use. Each county may write i ts own rules,and these will have th e force of law. Nearly all thecounties promptly organ ized to accept the prof-fered help, bu t after a decade of opera t ion, n ocoumy has yet wtten a single rule. There has be nyisible progress m.such practices as stripcropping,pasture renovation, and soil liming, but n o n e infen c in g woodlots aga inst graz ing, and none in ex-c luding p low and cow from steep ^lopes. Thefarmers, in short, have selected those remedialpractices w h i c h were prof i tab le anyhow, an digi iored those which were prof i table to the com-

. m u n i ty , but not clearly prof i table to themselves.When one asks why no rules have been written,

on e is told that the communi ty is not yet ready tosupport them; educat ion must precede rules. Butth e educat ion actua l ly in progress makes no men-tion of ob l iga t ions to land over and above thosedictated by self-interest. The net result is tha t we

(40)


4/9

hav c mor educat ion b u t less soi l , fewcr heal thy\voods, and as m a n y floods as in 1937.

Th e puz z l in g aspec t of such si tuat ions i s thatth e existcnce of obligations ovcr and abovcself-interest i s taken for.granted in such r ur a l com-m u n i t y enterpr ises as the b e t i e r m e n t of roads,schools, churches, and baseball teams. Their exist-e n c e is n ot taken fo r grantcd, nor as yc t scriouslydiscussed, in bettcring th e bchavior of thewater th a t falls on thc land, or in ih c preserv ingof the beauty or div er s i t y o * ~ th c f arm kin dscape .Land-use cthics ar still govcrned wholly uycconomic self- intercst, ju s t as social cthics were acentury ago.

To sum up: we asked thc farmer to do what hc onve n ic n t ly could to save h is soil, and l ic hasdone ju s t t hat , and only that. Th c f armer w hoclcars the woods o l f a 75 per cent ',jpc, turns h i sc o w s in t o th e clear ing, ; . i id dumps it s ra infal l ,rocks, and soil into the community creek, is still{i f oth erwi se dccent ) a respccted mcmber of soci-ety. If h p u t s l imc on h i s fields an d plants hiscrops on contour, hc i s s t i l l cn t i t l cd to all thepr iv i l cges an d e m o l u m e n t s of his Soil Consma-tion District. The District is a beaut ifut piece ofsocial macl i inery, but i t i s coughing al on g on rwoc y l i n d e r s becausc w e h ave been too t i m i d , and tooanxius for quick success, to ti".i ;hc farmer thet ru m a g n i t u d c of h i s obl igat ion s . Obl igat ion s hav en o m c a n i n g wi th out consc i cnce, and thc problemw e facc is ihe cs ten s ion of the social conscicncei ro i i i p c &p l c .o S a > * > i .

No important change in ethics was evcrinte l lec tual emphas i s , loyalit ies, af fcct ions, an dcon v ic t ion s . T h c proof that conservat ion h as notyc t t o u c h t d these fo u n d a t i o n s of conduct lics inihe fact that philosophy and religion havc not yetheard of i t . In our a t t e m p t to m k conscmtioncasy, w e hav c mad i t t r i v ia l .

Substitmes for a Land ILthicWhen th e logie of history h ung crs for bread an dwe h and out a stone, we ar at pains to cxplain howm u c h th c stone rcsembles bread. I n w descr i besomc of thc stones wh i ch serve in lieu of a landethic.. One basie \ ve akne ss in a conscrvat ion systembased wholly on economic motivcs is that mostm e m b e r s of thc l an d commun i t y hav e n o cconom'ic

The Land Ethicvalue. Wildfiowcrs an d son gbi rds ar examplcs. O fth e 22,000 h i g h er p l a n t s an d a n i m a l s nat i ve toW i s c o n s i n , i t is d o u b t fu l whcther morc than 5per cent can be sold, fed, eatcn, or otherwise putto cconomic use. Yet these creatures arc membersof the b i o t i c c o m m u n i t y , and i f (as l believe) i tsstability depends on its integrity, they ar entitlcd

W h e n one of these non-cconomi c catcgories isthreatcned, and i f w e happen to love it, we i n v e n tsub te r f ug e s to givc i t cconomic impcr tan ce . At thebeginning of the ccntury soiigsird: v. er supposedto bc disappearing. Orni thologis ts jumpcd to thcrescue with somc dist inct ly shaky cv i dence tothe cffect that insects would eat us up if birds failedto control t hem. Th e ev i dence h ad to be economicir . order to b c v a l i d .

It is p i f r n f u l to read these circumlocution'" hear the morc hon es targument that predators arc members of thecommun i t y , an d that n o spec ia l in t e rc s t h asth e r ight to cx t crmin at e them for thc sake ofa bcnefit, real or fancied, to itself . U n f o r t u n a t c l yt h i s en l i gh tu n ed v iew i s s t i l l in the talk stagc. I nthc ficld thc extermination of predators goes mer-ri ly on : wi tnes s the i m p e n d m g e r a s u r c of ih et i m b c r wolf by fiat of Congress, thc Conscrva t i onBurcaus, and many state legislatures.Somc spccies of trees hav c been 'read out of thcparty ' by cconomics-minded forestcrs becausethey grow too slowly, or havc too Iow a sale valueto p ay as t imber crops: wh itc cedar, lamarack,cypress, beech, and hemlock ar examples. InEurop, wherc forestr)' is ccological ly mor ad -vanc e d, th e non-commercial trec species ar rccog-nized as members of ih e n a t i v e forest c o m m u n i t y ,to b c presemd as s u c h , wi t h in reason. Morcovcrsome (like beech) have been found to have avaluable function i n b u i l d i n g u p s o i l fer t i l i ty. T hc


5/9

Aldo Leopoldin terdependencc of the forest and its c o n s i i t u e n ttree species, ground f lora, and f a u n a i s taken forgrantcd.

ck of cconomic v a l u e is sometimes a charactern or on l y of species or groups , but of en t i re b io t i ccommun i t i e s : marshes, bogs, dun cs , an d 'desens'ar ex amples . Our formua in s u c h . cases is torefuges, monuments, or parks. T he d i f f i cu l ty isthat thesc communities ar usually interspersedw i t h mor valuablc pr i va te J a n d s ; thc g o v c r n m e n tc a n n o t possibly own or contral such scattcrcd par-cels. Tli n et cffect i s that w e have relegated somcof them to ul t imate ext i nct i on ovcr large areas. Ifthe pr ivatc owncr were ccological ly m i n d e d , hwould be p r o u d to bc the cus tod ian of a reason ableproport i on of such arcas, wh i c l i add diver s i ty an d

I n somc in s tan ccs , th e assumcd ck of prof i t inthcse 'waste' arcas has provcd to b e w ro ng , b u tonly after most of thcm had been don e away wi th .T he prcscn t sc ramblc to rcflood m u s k r a t marshesis a casc in point.

There i s a clcar tcn den cy in Amer ican con ser-vat ion to rc legate to govern men t all necessary jobsthat pr i vate lan down ers fail to pcrform. G o v c r n -mcn t own crsh ip, operation, s u b s i d y , or rcgu lat ionis n w widc l j ' p r c v a l c n t in forcstry, rangc man age-m c n t , soi l and watershcd m a n a g c m c n t , p a r k a n dwildcrncss conservation, f isheries management,an d migratory b i rd man agemen t, wi th mor tocomc. M o s t of this growth in governmc nta l con scr-vation is proper and logical, somc of i t is incvitable.T h a t I i m p l y n o disapprova l of i t i s impl i c i t i n thcfact that I h a v e s p e n t most of my l i fe w o r k i n g for i t.Nevcrtheless the ucs t ion arises: W h a t i s the u l t i m -ate m a g n i t u d c of thc cn terpr i sc? Wi l l the tax basecarry i ts c v c n t u a l ramif icat ion s? A t w h a t p o i n t . w i l lgovernmcnt, i l con servat ion , l ikc the mastodon ,become han dicapped by i t s own d i m e n s i o n s ? Thean swer , if there is an y, secms to be in a l a n d ethic, orthe pr i vate lan down er .

Industr ial landowncrs an d users, especial ly lum-bcrmcn an d s tockmen, ar incl incd to wai l l o n gan d l o u d l y about the extens i on of govcrnmento w n e r s h i p a n d regulation to l a n d , but (wi thn ot abl e cxcept ions) they show l i t t le disposi t ion todevelop thc only v i s i b le alternativc: th e v o l u n t a r ypractice of conserva t i on on t h e i r ow n lands.

W h e n the pr i vate lan down er i s asked to per formsome unprof i tab le act for the good of the commu-

n i ty , h today asscnts on ly wi th outs t rc tchcd palm.If thc act costs him cash this i s fair an d proper , b u twhcn i t costs only fore i h oug h r, o p e n -m i n d c d n e s s ,or t ime, th e i s sue is at least debatablc. The over-w h e l m i n g growth of land-use s u b s i d i e s in rcccntycars m u s t b e ascr ibcd, in large p a n , to thc goy-e r n m e n t ' s ow n agencies fo r con scrvat ion educa-t ion: th e lan d b u re a u s , thc agricultural colleges,an d th e e.\tens ion scmces. As far as I can dctcct,no cthical obligation toward land is taught in thesc

. i n s t i tu t i ons .To sum up: a system of conserva t i on based

solely on cconomic sclf- intcrcst i s h opelcs s ly lop-sidcd. I t t e n d s to ignore, an d t h u s e v c n t u a l l y toel i mi na tc, many c lemen ts i n th c l an d c o m m u n i t ythat c k commcrc ia l va luc, but that arc (as far asw e k n o w ) cssential to i ts h ea l th y f u n c t i o n i n g . I tassumcs, falsely, I think, that the econ omic par t s ofthe biotic clock w i l l fun c t ion wi thout the u n e c o -n omic parts . I t t e n d s to rclegate to g o v c r n m e n tm a n y funct i ons cvcntua l ly too large, to o complex,or to o widely dispersed to bc per formcd by gov-e rnm e nt .

A c th ica l obl i g a t i on on the part of the p r i v a teo w n c r i s thc on ly v i s i b le remedy for thcse s i tuat ion s .

Th e Land PyramidA eth ic t o s u p p l e m e n t a n d gu ide th e economicrclation to lan d presupposes the es i s tcnce of somemcnta l imagc of l a n d as a biot i c mcchan i sm. Weca n be ethical only in relation to something we cansce, feel, u n d e r s t a n d , lovc, or otherwise h a v c fa i th

cducation i s ' thc b a l a n c c of natur. ' For rcasonsto o l e n g t h y to de ta i l herc, this f igur of speech failsto descr ibe accurate ly what l i t t le we kn ow aboutth e l a n d m c c h a n i s m . A mucli truer image is theon e employed in ccology: the biot ic pyrarn id. Ishall first sketch thc pyramid as a symbol of lan d,and later devclop some of its impl i cat ion s in termsof land-use.Plants absorb encrgy from the s u . This energyf lows through a c ircui t callcd the biota, w h i c h m aybe representcd by a pyramid con s i s t in g of layers.The bottom layer is thc soil. A plant layer rests onth e soil, an in sec t layer on the p l a n t s , a b i rd an drodent layer on the in sec t s , an d so on up throughvar ious an i mal groups to the apex layer, whichconsists of the larger carn ivores .


6/9

T he species of a laycr arc al ike not in w h e r c t h e ycamc f rom, or in w h a t thcy look Hkc, but rather in\v h a i they cat. Each successivc laycr dcpcnds onchosc below it for food and oftcn for olher scrvices,those ab o ve . P ro cccdi n g u pward, each su ccess i velaycr decrcases in numcrical ab u n dan cc. Thus, fo rcvery carnivore there a r h u n d r e d s of his p rey ,thousands of thcir prcy, millions of insccts, un-c o unt a blc pl an ts . T he p y r a m i d nl form of thcsystem reflccts this numerical progression fromapex to basc. M an sh arcs an i n term edi ate layer\vi th thc bears, raccoons, and suirrels which catboth meat and veget ab lcs .

T he lines of dependency for food and otherservices ar called food chains. Thus soif-oak-

converied to soil-corn-cow-farmer. Each species,i n ctu di n g ourselvcs, is a l ink in m a n y ch ai n s . T h edeer cats a h u n dred pl an ts o th er rhan oak, and thcco w a h u n d red p l an ts o th er th an corn. Both, then,langle of ch ai n s so complex as to s e c m .d i s o r d c r ly ,yetthestabilityof th system proves it tobeahighlyorganizcd structurc. Its f u n c t io n in g depen ds onthe co-operatibn and compctition of its divcrscparts.

In thc bcginning, th c pyram i d of life w as Io wan d suat ; th e food c h a i ns sh o r t an d s implc. Evo-lut ion h a s added layer after layer, l ink after l ink.Man is one o f th o u san ds o f accrctions to thc heig htus many doubts, but i t has g i v c n us at least onecertainty : th c trend o f evolul ion is to elaboratc an ddivers i fy th e biota.

L a n d , then, is not mercly soi l ; it is n foumain ofenergy flowing through a circuit of soils, plants,an d an i m al s . F o o d ch ai n s ar th c l i v j n g ch an n el swhich conduct encrgy upward; denth and decayreturn i t to th c soil. T he ci rcu i t i s not closcd; som ecnergy is dissipated in dccay, so m e is added byabsorption from the air, some is storcd m soils,pcats, an d long-l ived forests; but it is a sustainedcircuit, like a s low ly augm entc d r c v o l v i n g f u n d oflife. There is a lw ay s a n e t loss by do w n h i l l wasr,b u t this is normal ly smal i an d offset b y thc decayof rocks. It is deposi tcd in the ocean and, in thccourse of geological timc, raiscd to form ncw l and sand new pyr amids .i The Yelocity and character of thc upward flow

j. pf en ergy depen d on the co m pl ex s t r uc t ur e of thcplant and animal community, much as thc upward

The Land Etnief low of sap in a trec depends on its complej;ccllular organization. Without this complcxity,normal circulation w o u l d prcsu m ab l y n ot occur.St ru ctu re rneans thc characteristic numbcrs, ns\ve l l as the characterist ic k i nd s and funct ions, o fth e component species. This i n t e r d c p e n d c n c e b e-tween the cornplcx structure of the land and i tssm ooth f u nc t i o ni ng as an energy uni i i s one of i tsbasie attributcs.

W h en a cha ngc occurs in one par t of the ci rcu i t ,many other parts must adjust thcmsclves to it.Ch an ge do es not nccessari ly obstruct or divcrtthc flow of cnergy; evolution is a long series ofscl f-induccd changes, the net result of w h i c h hasbeen to elaborate th e flow mechanism and tole ng t h e n th e c i rcu i t . Evolut ionary changes, how-cvcr, ar u su a l ly slow and local. Man's invention oftools has cnabled h im to mk changes of unpre-cedented violcnce, ra p id i ry , and scope.

One ch an ge is in the composit ion o f f loras andfaunas . T hc largcr predators ar lopped of f thcapex of thc pyramid; food chains, for the firstt ime in his tory, become shorter ra t h er th a n longcr.Domesticated species from other lands ar substi-tuted for wild oncs, an d wild ones arc rnovcd tonew hahitats. In this \vorld-widc pooling of faunasand f loras, some species get out o f b o u n d s as pestsand diseascs, othcrs ar cxtinguished. Such cffectsa r scldom intcnded, or forcseen; .they rep resentunp r c d i c t c d a nd oftcn untraceable rcad justmctin th c structurc. Ag r i c u l t ur a l scicncc is l a rg e ly arace be t w e e n thc cmergcncc of ncw pcsts and thcem ergc nc e of new t ec h n i u c s fo r t h e i r control .

A n o t h e r changc touchcs the f low of en ergythrough plants and an imals and i ts return to the -soil. F ert i l i t y is thc abil i ty of soil to rcceivc, stor,an d rclease cnerg)1. Agriculture, by overdTafts onth c soil, or by too radica l a suhst i tut ion of do m est i cfor native species in the superstructurc, may de-rangc thc c h a n n el s o f f low or deplete s torage. Soilsdepleted of thcir storage, or of thc organie matterwh i ch an ch o rs it , wash away faster than th ey form.

W aters , l ike soi l , arc part of the cne rgy circ uit .Ind ustry , by p o l lu t i ng \vaters o r o b s t r u c t i n g t h e m\ v i t h dam s, m a y excl u dc th e pl an ts a nd a n ima lsnccessary to V c c p energy in ci rcu l at i pn .

Transportation brings about another basiechangc: the plants or animals gr own in one regionarc no\v consumcd and returncd to thc soil inan o th er . Tra nsp orta tion taps the ene rgy stored inrocks, and in the air, and uses it elscwhcre; thus we


7/9

fertil ize th e garden wi th nitrogen g leancd b y tlig u a n o b i rds from the f i shes of seas on the others ide of the Euat or . Thus the formcrly localizedan d sel f-contained c i rcu i t s ar pooled on a world-wi dc sca l .

The proccs s of a l ter i ng the pyramid for h u m a occupat ion rcleases stored en crgy , an d th i s oftengives rise, during the pioneering period, to a de-c e p t i v e e x u b e r a n c c of p l a n t an d a n i m a l l ifc, bothw i l d an d tam. Thesc releascs of biot ic capital tendto becloud or postponc the pcna l t i es of v io l en cc .This t h u m b n a i l skctch of land as an cncrgycireuit conveys three basie ideas:(1) That l a n d i s not merely soi l .(2 ) T h a t the n a t i v c p l a n t s an d a n i m a l s k e p t th e

encrgy c i r c u i t open; oth ers may or m ay not.(3) That man-made changes arc of a diffcrcntorder than c v o l u t i o n a r y ch ang es , and h aveeffccts mor e o m p r e h e n s i y e t h a n i s i n tcnded

These ideas, collectively, raise two basie issues:Can th e l a nd adjus t i t sel f to the ncw order? Canthe dcs i red a l te r a t ions be accompKshcd w i t h lessyiience?

Biot as seem to differ in th c i r capac i t y t o sus ta inrioleni conversion. Western Europ, for cxample,carries a far d i f fe ren t pyrami d th an Caesar f o u n dh ave bccome mcadows or plow-land; m a n y n ewplant s and an imals arc i n t r o d u c e d , some of w h i c hescapc as pcsts; ih c r e m a i n i n g n a t i v e s ar grcat lych ang cd i n d i s tr i b u n o n a n d a b u n d a n c c . Y c t th e soilis still Uiere and, with the help of importcd nutri-ents, s t i l l fert i le; the wa tcrs flow n ormal l y ; t he n ews t r u c t u r e seems to fu n c t i o n an d to persist. T h e r e isn o vis ible s toppage or d e r a n g e m c n t of the c i rcu i t .

Western Europ, thc i i , has a r c s i s t a n t biota. Itsinncr proccsses arc tough, clastic, rcsistant tos t ra i n . No m at tcr h ow v i o l e n t th e alterat ions, thepyramid, so far, has dcvcloped some ncw modusvivendi wh i ch prcservcs i t s h a b i t a b i l i t y for ma,an d fo r most of the othcr natiyes.

Japan seems to present another instancc of rad-ical con v crs ion w i t hout di sorg an i za t i on .M o s t ot her c iv i t izcd regions, and some as yer

barely t ouchcd b y c iv i l i z a t ion , d i sp l ay v a r i o u ss tages of di sorganizat ion, v a r y i n g from in i t ia lan d North Africa diagn os i s i s confuscd by cl imat icchanges, which may h ave been e i th er th e cause or

tli effcct of a d v a n c e d wastage. In the Uni tedStates th e degree of disorganizat ion varies local ly;it i s worst in the Southwest, th e Ozarks, an d partsof the South, and least i n New Eng land and th eNorth wes t . Bertcr land-uscs m ay s t i l l arrest i i inth e less advanced reg i ons . In parts of Mexico,South America, Soudi A fr i ca , an d A u s t r a l i a a vic~Icnt and accelerating wastage is in progress, but Icannot assess th e prospects .

This almost w o r l d - w i d e di sp lay of disorganiza-an imal , cxccpt tha t i t n ev er c u l m i n a t c s in completedisorganization or death. The land recovers, but atsome rcduced lcvel of complexity, and w i t h areduccd c a r r y i n g capaci ty fo r people, plant s , an dan imal s . Many b i ota s c u r r e n t l y regarded as ' l an dsof o p p o r t u n i t y ' ar in fact a l rcady s u b s i s t i n g oncxploitative agriculture, i.e. they have alreadyCKceeded th c i r sus ta i ned carry i ng capac i ty . Mos tof South America i s o v e r p o p u l a t e d i n th i s sense .

I n arid regions w e at tempt to offset th e processof wastage by rcclamation, but i t is o n l y too evi -dent that the prospectivc longcvity of reclamationprojccts i s often sh ort . In our own West, th e bcstof th e m may not !ast a century.

The c o m b i n c d c v i d c n c e of h i s tory an d ccologysccrns to support one genera d c d u c t i o n : th e lessviolent the m n n m a d e changes, ihc greatcr the prob-ab i l i ty of s u c c c s s f u l r c a d j u s t m e n t in t he p y r a m i d .Yiolence, in tum, varics wi th h u m a n p o p u l a t i o nden s i t y ; a dense popu la t ion r e u i r e s a mor v i o l e n tconvcrs i on . In th i s respcct, North America has abettcr chancc for permanence than Europ, if shccan c o n t r i v e to l i m i t l icr dens i ty .This dcduction runs coimtcr to our currentphi l osophy w h i c h assumcs th a t because a smal iindefini te increase wi l l enrich it in de f in i t e l y . Ecol-og y k n o w s of no d e n s i t y re l a t ion sh ip that holds fo rindefmitely wide limiis. Al! gains from density arsub j ect to a law of d i m i n i s h i n g re turn s .

Wha t cv c r may be t he cuat ion for men an d land,i t i s i m p r o b n b l e that we as yet k n o w all i ts tcrms.R e c e n t di scovcr i es in m i n era an d \reveal unsuspected depcndencics ii n c r c d i b l y mi nut quant i t i es of ced e t e r m i n e th e v a l u e of soi ls to p laa n i m a l s . Wh at of th e down-c i rcu i t

up-circuit:substanccs, of plant s toW h a t of the

v a n i s h i n g specics, ih c prescrva t i on of wh i ch wenw regard as an esthctic Iuxury? Thcy helpcdb u i l d th e soil; in w h a t u n s u s p e c t e d w a y s m ay theyb e e s sc nt ia l to its m a i n t e n a n c c ? Profcssor W c a v c r


8/9

proposes that we use prairie flowers 10 reflocculatet hc wast in g soils of the dust b o w l ; w h o knows forwhat purpose crancs an d condors, otters an dgrizzlies may somc day be used?

Land Health and the A-B CleavageA land cthic, then, reflects the esistence of anecological conscicnce, and this in tum rcflccts aconvicr ion of i n d i v i d u a l respons i b i l i t y for thehealth of the land. Health \s the capacity of theland for sel f-rencwal . Conscrva t i on i s our effort toun ders t an d an d prcserve th i s capaci ty.

Conscrvat ionist s ar notorious for thcir dissen-sions/Superficially thesc secm to add up to mcrcoin fus ion , bu t a mor careful s c r u t i n y reveals as ingle pian of cleavagc common to t n a n y spccial-izcd fields. In each field one group (A ) regards th cland as soil, and its function as commodity-pro-duct ion; another group (B ) rcgards th c land as abiota, an d i ts funct ion as s o m e t h i n g broader . H owmuch broader is admittcdly in a state of doubt an dconfusion.

In my ow n field, forestry, group A is ui tccontent to grow irces l ike cabbages, w i t h cel lu loseas th e basie forcst commodity. Ir feels n o inhib-i t ion against violencc; its idcology is agronomie.Group B, on the othcr hand, secs forestry as fun-damenta l ly d i f ferent from ag ronomy b e c a u s e i temploys naiural spccics, and manages a natural

pr in c ip l e . It worrics on biocic as \vell as econ omicgroundsabout the loss of species likc chestnut, andth e th r c a te nc d loss of the wh i tc p i ncs . I t worriesabout a wh ole series of sccondary fores t func t i ons :wildlife, recrcat ion; watcrsh cds , wildcrness arcas.To my mind, Group B fccls the stlrrings of.anecological consciencc.

In th c wildl i fe field, a paralle l cleavagc exists. ForGroup A thc basie commodities ar sport and meat;the yardsticks of production arc ciphers of take inpheasamsan dt rout . Ar t i f i c ia l propagat ion i saccept - ;able as apcrrnanent as \vcll as a t emporary rccourse -if its uni t costs pcrmit. Group B, on thc othcr hand,worrics about a wholc series of biotic side-issucs.What i s the cost in prcdators of producing a gamcrop? Should w e hav e f ur th c r recou rse to exot ics?Howcan managcment restorc the shrinkingspecies,l ikc prairie grousc, already hopeless as shootable

gam? How can manag cment restore th e threatened

The Land Ethicraritics, likc trumpetcr swan and whooping crane?Can manag cment pr i nc i p lcs bc ex tcndcd to wi ld-f lowers? Her agaln it is clear to me that we h ave th esame A-B,cleavage as in forestry.

In the larger field of agriculture I am less com-p e t c n t to speak, b u t thcre seem to be somcwh atparallel cleavages. Scienti f ic ag r i cu l ture was ac-tively developing before ecolog>- was born, hencea slower pcnetration of ccologica! conccpts mightbe expected. Moreovcr the farmer, by the veryn a t u r of h is tcchniques, must modify thc biotamor radically than the foresler or the wildlifemanag er . Nevertheless, there arc many discontentsin agric ultu re which ' seem to add up to a n ewvi s ion of 'biotic farming. 1

Pcrhaps the most important of thcse is thc ncwc v i d e n c e th a t poundag e or tonnagc is no measureof th e food-value of farm crops; th e product s offert i le soil may be qual i tat ivcly as wcll as quant i ta-t ivcly superior. We can bolster poundage fromdcplctcd soi ls b y p o u r i n g on importcd fcrt i l i ty ,bm w e ar n ot necessari ly bols tering food-value.The possiblc ult imate ramif icat ions of this idea arso immense rhat I must lcavc thcir exposition toabler pen s .

T h c d i s c o n t e n t that labcls i tself 'organiefarming,' while bearing somc of thc earmarks of acult, is ncyertheless biotic in its direction, part i cu-larly in its ins i s tence on thc imporlance of soi l floraan d fa u n a .The ccological fundamcntals of agriculture arcj u s t as poorly k n o w n to ihc pub l ic as in othcr f ieldsof land-use. For examplc, f c w ' c d u c a t e d peoplerealizc that th c mar v co us advanc.cs i n t cch n i uemad during rccent decadcs arc improvcmcnts in -th e pump, rathe r than th c wcll . Acrc fo r acre, thcyhav e barc l y suff iced to offset th c s i n k i n g level offerti l i ty.

In al l of thcse cleavagcs, we sec repcated thesame basie paradoxcs: ma th c con ueror wrsusma th e bio t ic ci tizen; sc icncc the sh arpener of hissword versns sciencc th c scarch-light on his uni -vcrse; land the slave and servant remis land thecol lect ive org an i sm. Robinson's i n j u n c t i o n toTri s t ram m ay wcl l h appl iecl , at th i s jun c t ure , t oH omo saptfiii as a species in gcological dm:

Whether you w i l l or notY ou ar a King, Tristram, for you ar on eOf the timc-tested fcw that leave the world,W h c n thcy ar gone, not the same place i t w as.Mark what you lcavc.


9/9

The OutlookIt is i n c o n c e i v a b l e to me chat an cth i c a l rc la t ion tol a n d c an ex i s t wi th out lovc, rcspcct, an d admir-ation fo r l and, and a h i g h rcgard for its value. B ymer economic value ; I mean v a l u c in thc phi lo-soph ica l sensc.

Pcrhaps the most ser ious obstacle i m p c d i n g th ecvolut i on of a land cthic i s the fact r h a t ou r cduca-t iona l an d econ omi c sys tem i s hcadcd away f rom,l a n d . Y o u r t r u modern i s scparated from th eland b y m a n y m i d d l e m c n , a n d b y i n n u m c r a b l ephys ica l gadgets . H had n o v i ta l re la t i on to it; tohim i t is the space bc tween cities o n w h i c h cropsgrow. Turn him loosc for a day on the l a n d , and i fth e spot does n ot h appen to be a golf l i n k s or a'scenie' area, h is borcd s t i f f . I f crops could b eraised b y h y d r o p o n i c s instead of f a r m i n g , i t w o u l ds u i t h im very well . Synthet ic s u b s t i t u t e s for wood,leather, wool, an d oth er na tura ! l and products s u i th i m bet ter th an the or iginals. In short, l a n d i ss o m e t h i n g li c h as ' o u t g ro w n. '

A l m o s t c u a l l y serious as an obstacle to a landc t h i c i s the at t i tudc of thc fa rmer for whom thel and is s t i l l an adversary, or a ta skmas tcr th a t keepsh im in slavery. Th corct i ca l ly , th c m c c h a n i z a t i o n off a r m i n g o u g h t to nit th e fa rmcr ' s ch a i ns , b u tw h e t h c r i t rcal ly does i s debatable.

O n e of the requis!tes for an ccological compre-hen s ion of land is an u n d c r s t n n d i n g o f c c o l o g y , an dthis i s by n o m c a n s co-extcnsivc w i t h ' educa t ion ' ; infact, m u c h h i g h er educa t ion seems del i b cra te ly toavoi d ecological concept s . A n u n d e r s t a n d i n g ofccology does n ot neccs sar i ly or ig in atc in coursesb e a r i n g ecolog i ca l labcls; it is u i t e as l i ke ly to belabeled gcograpliy, b o t a n y , agronomy, history, orcconomics . This is as it sh ould b c , b u t \vh a tcver th clabel, ecological t ra in in g i s scarcc.

Th e casc for a land ethic would appcar hopelessbut for the m i n o r i t y w h i c h is in obv ious rcvol tagainst these 'modern 1 trends.T h e 'kcy-log' w h i c h m u s t b e m o v e d to releascthc evolu t ion ary process for an cthic i s s i m p l y th i s :q u i t t h i n k i n g a b o u t d e c e n t l a n d - u s e as solely an

economi c prob lem. Ex amin e cach u c s t i o n intcrms of w h a t i s ethical ly an d cs t he t ica l l y r i g h t ,as well as wh at i s economically e x p e d i e n t . A t h i n gi s right w h c n i t tcnds to prcserve thc in tcgr i ty ,s tab i l i ty , an d b c a u t y of t h c b i o t i c c o m m u n i t y . I t i swrong wlien i t t e n d s othcrwisc.

I t of course gocs w i t h o u t s a y i n g that economicf eas ib i l i t y l i m i t s th e tcther of w h a t can or cannotbe donc for l and. I t always has and i t a lways w i l l .Th e fa l lacy th e e c o n o m i c d e t c r m i n i s t s h a v e t ieda r o u n d ou r co l l ec t iv e neck, an d w h i c h w e n wneed to cast off, i s the belief that economics detcr-m i n e s all l anduse. This is s i m p l y not true. Ani n n u m c r a b l e host of act i ons an d att i tudes, com-p r i s i n g pcrh aps th e bu lk of all land rdations, i sdetermi ned by the land-users' tastcs a n d prcdi lcc-t ions, rathcr th an by h i s purse. Thc b u l k of a!l l a n drc l a t ion s h i n g e s on invc5tments of t ime, forc-th o u g h t , ski l l , and f f l i t h r a t h e r than on i n v e s i m c n t sof cash. As a land-uscr t h i n k e t h , so is h .

I h a v c purposc ly prcscntcd th e land u t n i e as ap r o d u c t of soc i a l cYolut i on because n o t h i n g soi m p o r t a n t as an e t h i c is ever 'w r i t t e n . ' On ly themost s u p c r f i c i a l s t u d e n t of h i s tory supposes th a tMoses 'wrote' the Decalogue; i t 'evolvcd in the

say t cn ta t i vc because cvolut i on n e v e r stops.Th e cv o l u t ion of a l and eth i c is an intcl lcc-

tual as w c l l as emorional process. Con servat ion i spaved w i t h good i n t e n t i o n s w h i c h prove to befut i le, or even dangerous, because they ar devi dof cr i t i ca l unders tandi ng c i th er of thc land, or ofeconomi c land-use. I t h i n k i t is a trui srn t h a t asth e ethical f ront ier advances f rom th c i n d i v -i d u a l to the commun i ty , i t s inte l lec tuaf contcntincrcases .

Th e m e c h a n i s m of opera t i on i s thc s a m e fo r an yeth i c : soc i a l approbat i on for r i g h t act i ons : soc ialdi sapprova l for w r o n g a c t i o n s .

By and largc, our prescnt prob lem i s one ofa t t i tudes an d i m p l c m c n t s . W e ar r e m o d e l i n g th eA l h a m b r a w i t h a s teamshovel , an d we ar p r o u d ofou r yardage. W e sh a l l h ard ly rc l i nqui sh th e shovel ,which after al l has m a n y good points , but we ar i nneed of g ent lcr an d mor ob ject ive criteria for itssuccessful use.

aldo leopold - the land ethic ver. 1

Documents