In general I agree with you Charlie, but I must disagree on points.   I
completely understand how the market adjusts to shortages, and how it has
worked to date.  But there are clear limits.  Water is, or will be a
limiting factor for agriculture in many areas.  Parts of California's San
Joaquin Valley are being permanently taken out of agricultural production
for this reason.  It is highly unlikely that the demand for food will ever
justify the amount of energy required to provide the water needed to
properly irrigate the San Joaquin Valley.

Ditto with energy.  When the energy used to produce a crop exceeds the
energy of the harvested crop, that practice will likely be unsustainable in
the long term.

And contrary to Eiseley, we are, from a biological perspective, indeed an
invasive species.  The "cool and fantastic" agricultural system that
Charlie waxes poetic about has resulted in the extinction of countless
species--our coinhabitants of this planet.

Such extinctions are not temporary--they are forever.

Virtually everywhere that humans have invaded, a portion of the megafauna
shortly go extinct.  Yes, this can be called part of the evolutionary
process, but I have a hard time justifying it as ethical.

Humans, IMHO, are in a different class from all other species, in that we
have the ability to have an overall awareness of our impact upon the
environment and all other species.

In my own operation as a beekeeper, bears and skunks are problematic.  But
I don't kill either--I learn to live with them, and to train them not to
harm my colonies (with great success).  Ditto with the other wildlife on
the property that I steward (although I'm having trouble with birds eating
my fruit, and in a quandary what to do, as netting is getting expensive).

So although one can argue that our modification of habitat to promote
humans, and our extirpation of those species that depend upon that habitat
is simply an evolutionary process, that argument certainly reflects upon
one's ethics.

We humans have never balked at extirpating our human competitors, from the
Neanderthals to the Native Americans.  Nor or extirpating animal or plant
species that compete with us.

But there are those of us who question whether we humans have the "right"
to so cavalierly cause the extinction of those species (or other human
groups).  It may seem unrealistically idealistic, but some of us feel that
if we make some sacrifices in our lifestyles, that the process of evolution
can proceed due to  environmental factors other than the impact of humanity
alone.
--
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html