[Taxacom] when is a common species critically endangered?
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Wed Jun 27 18:20:05 CDT 2012
>But what's the difference between a plane and a beaver dam?<
Well, it is difficult to fly to London on a beaver dam! :)
Interestingly, I maintain both that the mite isn't endangered (i.e., that it is not "Nationally Critical") *and* that the manmade vs. natural distinction is meaningful ...
From: Mark Wilden <mark at mwilden.com>
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Sent: Thursday, 28 June 2012 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] when is a common species critically endangered?
Obviously, my "naive" question related to the mite, and whether it's
endangered. It's clearly not - no matter how it makes its living. If
humans and their artifacts (such as plant cultivation) are considered
as just another ingredient in the environment, then this mite issue
goes away, it seems to me.
Take a 747 airliner. No one would call it a "part of nature". But
what's the difference between a plane and a beaver dam?
Web Applications Developer
California Academy of Sciences
(Of course, there may be other reasons for us to desire a higher
population of the mite in certain areas than simply to perpetuate its
species, but that's not what "endangered" means.)
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
(1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org/
(2) a Google search specified as: site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom your search terms here
More information about the Taxacom