Click to enlarge

 

One way to enjoy nature is to photograph it. Ron Marquart is a nature photographer who lives in Boise, Idaho and photographs images of the natural life and scenic beauty around us. A sampling of images includes birds, reptiles, amphibians, mammals, insects, spiders, snails, flowers, trees, rocks, barns, windmills and scenic views. Several years ago I decided to create an Internet website* of my images with a brief natural history to educate people about the beauty and importance of the diversity of life. For me, nature photography is its own reward. For those who want to buy my images , this is an extra reward not expected. These images are available for sale as color prints.

Over the years it has been difficult for me to put into words the way I feel about nature photography. I discovered a poem printed in a newspaper by the U.S. poet laureate Ted Kooser. The following poem by Kentucky poet/farmer Wendell Berry puts into words what I could not:

THE PEACE OF WILD THINGS

When despair for the world grows in me
and I wake in the night at the least sound
in fear of what my life and my children's lives may be,
I go and lie down where the wood drake
rests in his beauty on the water, and the great heron feeds.
I come into the peace of wild things
who do not tax their lives with forethought
of grief. I come into the presence of still water.
And I feel above me the day-blind stars
waiting with their light. For a time
I rest in the grace of the world, and am free.

It's an exciting adventure being in our natural areas to record on film the wonder and beauty of nature. I am, however, filled with deep sadness by the degradation and loss of our native forests, grasslands, wetlands, sagebrush lands, deserts, lakes, and free-flowing rivers. Increasing extinction of species caused by activities of an increasing number of people shows that we are not making enough effort to share the Earth with our native plants and animals, and this diminishes us all. This loss of biodiversity and fragmented ecosystem decay speaks disgracefully of our stewardship with nature.

Before documenting the biodiversity crisis, let me begin by quoting the best summary I've found concerning the present condition of life on Earth. In the preface of his recent book Life in the Balance: Humanity and the Biodiversity Crisis, Niles Eldrege tells us:

"Life is beautiful. The living world surrounds us, and we human beings are a part of it. We depend on the living world for our food and medicines, the oxygen that we breathe, and the elements that form our bodies. Earth is our home, and all Earth's species are our family, for we have evolved along with every other living thing.

Yet all is not well with life on Earth. We are losing roughly 30,000 species of plants and animals a year as ecosystems are disturbed and individual species are overhunted or overharvested. We need to ask ourselves, What does the living world mean to us? Why should we care if ecosystems degrade and species are lost? What is causing species extinction? And what can we do to stem the tide of this latest crisis in the living world?"

THE PROBLEM

During the process of creating this website, I read many books in my field guide collection for documentation. I view field guides as a collection of nature's masterpieces courtesy of natural selection. During my study I came across this statement in the introduction of the Peterson Field Guide Freshwater Fishes, 1991, p.13:

"Each species on Earth is the product of millions of years of evolution and as such is fine-tuned to its environment. Only a few species (e.g., dog, starling, carp) can long survive the enormous changes in the environment that humankind currently is causing. Unless the human race succeeds in making major changes in its values and lifestyles, conservation efforts now underway can at best only delay the extinction of most of the species on Earth. To conserve the diversity of life, we must reduce our own population, reduce our consumption, and set aside large ecosystems as preserves. We will be able to accomplish those changes only through education and an awareness of the value of diversity."

Ernst Mayr provides in depth thinking in his essay on "The Origins of Human Ethics" in his book Toward A New Philosophy Of Biology, 1988 by presenting ethical problems of our modern mass society:

"The third great ethical problem of our day is posed by the discovery of our responsibility toward nature as a whole. Growth, whether economic growth, populational growth, or whatever other kind of growth, used to rank very high in our value system. Even though certain influential people like the Nobel Prize-winning economist Hayek and the Pope have so far failed to appreciate the danger of overpopulation, I cannot see how it can be ignored any longer. Certain of our societies, like those of China and Singapore, have courageously tackled this problem by a reordering of ethical values. The sooner other societies follow, the better it will be for the ultimate good of mankind.

The dilemma we are facing is the conflict between traditional values and newly discovered values. Let me remind you of the conflict between man's right to unlimited reproduction and to the unlimited exploitation of the natural world, as against the needs of human posterity as well as the right to existence of the millions of species of wild animals and plants. Where is the proper balance between personal freedom and regard for the welfare of the natural world?

The concept that mankind has a responsibility toward nature as a whole is an ethical concept that seems to have originated remarkable late. In recent times Aldo Leopold, Rachel Carson, and Garrett Harden have been particularly articulate in their championship of a conservation ethic or a community ethic. But much of what these modern Americans consider ethically valuable is not for the immediate benefit of the individual and is therefore resisted. And yet if mankind and the world as a whole are to have a future, it will be necessary that we reduce the selfish tendencies in our ethics in favor of a higher regard for the community and for the whole of Creation…Every generation of mankind is the current caretaker not only of the human gene pool but indeed of all nature on our fragile globe.

Evolution does not give us a complete codified set of ethical norms such as the Ten Commandments, yet an understanding of evolution gives us a world view that can serve as a sound basis for the development of an ethical system that is appropriate for the maintenance of healthy human society, and that also provides for the future of mankind in a world preserved by the guardianship of man."

In his book The Diversity of Life, 1993, Edward O. Wilson tells us:

"The raging monster upon the land is population growth. In its presence, sustainability is but a fragile theoretical construct. To say, as many do, that the difficulties of nations are not due to people but to poor ideology or land-use management is sophistic. If Bangladesh had 10 million inhabitants instead of 115 million, its impoverished people could live on prosperous farms away from dangerous floodplains midst a natural and stable upland environment."

Jared Diamond in his book The Third Chimpanzee, 1993 documents the facts of biodiversity extinction and concludes: "Thus, the claimed extinction crisis is neither a hysterical fantasy nor just a serious risk for the future. Instead, it's an event that has already been accelerating for fifty thousand years and will start to approach completion in our children's lifetimes." He goes on to write in the chapter… "Nothing Learned, and Everything Forgotten?" that: "Even if every human now alive were to die tomorrow, the damage that we have already inflicted on our environment would ensure that its degradation will continue for decades. Innumerable species already belong to the "living dead," with populations fallen to levels from which they cannot recover, even though not all individuals have died yet. Despite all our past self-destructive behavior from which we could have learned, many people who should have known better dispute the need for limiting our population and continue to assault our environment. Others join that assault for selfish profit or out of ignorance… Nor is it true that the average citizen is powerless. There are many causes of extinction that citizen groups have helped scale back in recent years – for instance, commercial whaling, hunting big cats for fur coats, and importing wild-caught chimpanzees, to mention just a few examples. In fact, this is one area where it's particularly easy for a modest donation by the average citizen to have a big impact, because all conservation organizations now have such modest budgets."

In Paul and Anne Ehrlich's book Betrayal of Science and Reason, 1996, they report the findings of a 1,149-page "Global Biodiversity Assessment" study by the United Nations Environment Programme. This is a peer-reviewed document by 1,500 scientists around the world that represents a clear consensus of the scientific community:

"Biodiversity represents the very foundation of human existence. Yet by our heedless actions we are eroding this biological capital at an alarming rate. Even today, despite the destruction that we have inflicted on the environment and its natural bounty, its resilience is taken for granted. But the more we learn of the workings of the natural world, the clearer it becomes that there is a limit to the disruption that the environment can endure.

Besides the profound ethical and aesthetic implications, it is clear that the loss of biodiversity has serious economic and social costs. The genes, species, ecosystems and human knowledge which are being lost represent a living library of options available for adapting to local and global change. Biodiversity is part of our daily lives and livelihood and constitutes the resources upon which families, communities, nations and future generations depend." 

The college textbook Evolutionary Biology, 3rd Ed., 1998 by Douglas J. Futuyma in Chapter 25 tells us that the next mass extinction is happening now. None of the mass extinctions of the past were caused by the actions of a single species, but this one is being caused by the human species. Douglas Futuyma goes on to explain:

"If mass extinctions have happened naturally in the past, without humans, why should we be so concerned about this one? Different people have different answers, ranging from utilitarian to aesthetic to spiritual. Some will point to the many thousands of species that are used by humans today, ranging from familiar foods to the innumerable species used by peoples throughout the world for fiber, herbal medicines, and spices; some will note that thousand of species support small industries that cater to tropical fish hobbyists, orchid fanciers, gardeners, and shell collectors; others will cite the economic value of ecotourism(the most important source of income for Costa Rica, for example) and the enormous popularity of bird-watching in some countries. Biologists will argue that among the invertebrates, plants, fungi, and microorganisms are thousands of species that may (as many already have) prove useful as pest control agents or as sources of medicinal compounds (such as taxol, a compound in yew trees that is used for treating cancer) or industrially valuable materials (for example, the polymerase chain reaction, the basis of DNA amplification and a key procedure in biotechnology, uses DNA polymerase from archaebacteria that inhabit hot springs). 'Biological prospecting,' searching for medically or industrially useful compounds in plants and other organisms, already shows promise of developing into an important (and controversial) business.

These utilitarian concerns, however, are only part of the rationale for conserving diversity. Many people (including this author) cannot bear to think that future generations will be deprived of tigers, sea turtles, and macaws. And they share with millions of others, who care little for such taxonomic distinctions, a deep renewal of spirit in the presence of unspoiled nature. Still others, turning entirely away from a human-centered perspective that values nature only for its economic or aesthetic returns, feel that it is in some sense cosmically unjust to extinguish, forever, the species with which we share the earth. 

Conservation is an exceedingly complicated topic; it requires not only a concern for other species, but compassion and understanding of the very real needs of people whose lives depend on clearing forests and making other uses of the environment. It requires that we understand not only ecology and other biological disciplines, but also global and local economics, politics, and social issues ranging from the status of women to the reactions of the world's peoples and their governments to what may seem like elitist, if not imperialistic, Western ideas. Anyone who undertakes work in conservation must deal with some of these complexities. But everyone can play a helpful role, however small. We can try to waste less; influence people about the need to reduce population growth (surely the most pressing problem of all) by means of birth control and economic development; support conservation organizations; patronize environment-conscious businesses; stay aware of current environmental issues; and communicate our concerns to elected officials at every level of government. Few actions of an enlightened citizen of the world can be more important."

Many scientists tell us that five major mass extinctions of plants and animals have occurred during the history of life on Earth. The causes of these extinctions have been large momentous events in the physical environment such as climate change -- until now. In the book Life in the Balance: Humanity and the Biodiversity Crisis, 1998, Niles Eldredge explains the cause of the presently occurring Sixth Major Extinction on Earth.

"In the current wave of mass extinctions, the driving force is biological: a single species, our own, is disrupting ecosystems and driving species extinct all around the world. And yet, some might ask, given what we now know about the role of disturbance in the evolution of new species, why not just let this mass extinction run its course? The answer is simple: new species can evolve – that is true – and ecosystems can be reassembled, but only after the cause of the disruption and extinction is removed or stabilized. For recovery to begin, we humans will have to cease acting as the cause. And eventually we will, but whether through determined action or through our own demise is less clear."

In his 1999 article "Biotic Holocaust," Norman Myers, a British ecologist and environmental economist tells us:

"We are into the opening stages of a human-caused biotic holocaust – a wholesale elimination of species – that could leave the planet impoverished for at least five million years. That's the worst news. The better news is that this horrifying destruction still lies mostly ahead of us. There is time, though only just enough, to slow and stem the process."

E.O. Wilson estimates that primarily because of worldwide tropical rainforest destruction we are losing three species per hour. This rate of loss is probably on the low side. Conservation gurus such as Paul Ehrlich of Stanford University and Peter Raven of the Missouri Botanical Garden estimate that the extinction rate in tropical forests is more like 50-150 species per day.

In the last chapter of his book, Human Natures Genes, Cultures and the Human Prospect , 2000, Paul R. Ehrlich examines the past history and the present condition of human interaction with our natural resources: 

 "The question of how much and what kind of human alteration of the environment is appropriate, especially in a context of preserving nature's services for future generations, was not widely considered and ethical issue until the 1970s. It deserves our attention because it will almost certainly be and increasingly central issue in the decades to come. Some already think they see an evolutionary ethical explanation of one aspect of environmental disruption. Recall that there is a school of thought that our ancestors were, because of genetic or cultural evolution or both, natural conservationists. In this view, European and American industrial societies should look to the behavior of tribal peoples to learn how to be proper custodians of natural systems. The implication is that the current assault on biodiversity—the greatest extinction crisis in the past 65 million years—would not be occurring had modern people retained the ethics of their hunter-gatherer forebears instead of evolving new ones to suit urbanizing civilizations. As we have seen, however, there is little reason to believe that hunter-gatherer groups evolved automatic resource-conservation behavior, and the degree to which the interests of indigenous peoples today are congruent with effective conservation policies is a matter of debate.

Until recently, people have not paid much attention to the long-term environmental effects of their behavior but rather have focused on the satisfaction of their immediate needs. It appears that like the Inuit, our hunter-gatherer ancestors did not restrain themselves much in the exploitation of environmental resources. They could not afford the luxury of long-term planning. They changed their environments to the degree that their technological capabilities would permit—helping to exterminate many species of large animals at the end of the Pleistocene epoch and, in so doing, changing the biological communities of much of Earth…

Evolving human natures also permitted enlargement of the scale of the human enterprise to the point that it is destroying the life-support systems on which all our lives depend. They made it possible to condemn society to gradual extinction from loss of ecosystem services, to repeat on a global scale the fates of the civilizations of the Tigris and Euphrates valleys, Easter Island, the classic Maya, and the Anasazi. The technological advances combined with lagging social evolution of human natures have caused overpopulation and continuing population growth, overconsumption and continuing economic growth among the rich, and widespread use of environmentally malign technologies. Those problems have been exacerbated by inefficient, inequitable, and often iniquitous social, political, and economic arrangements. All of these factors are already denying another billion or more people a decent life and inexorably depleting the natural capital that sustains civilization. Despite all the good things that have come out of human evolution, one thing is clear to me and to many of my colleagues who spend their time examining that predicament: our evolving human natures may be heading us toward the worst catastrophe in the history of Homo sapiens. 

It is not too late for humanity to avert a vast ecological disaster and make the transition to a sustainable society, but the task will not be simple. The required strategic actions are evident. Population growth should be halted and a slow decline begun to a population size that, in a couple of centuries, might be environmentally sustainable. Such reduction toward an 'optimum' population size might also help to ameliorate social problems. Wasteful consumption in rich countries must be reduced to allow for needed growth in poor countries. Fortunately, a reduction in consumption accompanied by an increase in quality of life is technologically feasible. For instance, physicist John Holdren's scenarios, in which the rich become much more efficient and the poor consume more, offer a possible path toward more equitable and efficient patterns of energy use that could close the gap between rich and poor and reduce environmental damage compared with that which will result if current trends continue. We might be able to reach those goals while temporarily supporting the substantially larger human population that is inevitable before growth can be halted. But technological feasibility is not enough. Our sociopolitical systems also must undergo dramatic revision in the direction of increasing equity at all levels if sustainability is to be achieved. They will also have to deal with differences in the cultural attitudes and capabilities of Homo sapiens, which fuel the trend toward ethnic fragmentation worldwide at one level even as economic globalization is occurring at another—contrasting trends that are, at the least, disturbing. The cooperation that will be needed to solve global environmental problems is unlikely to be achieved in a world divided into haves and have-nots and riven by ethnic antagonisms."

In the Society for Conservation Biology's recently published book Conservation Biology Research Priorities for the Next Decade, 2001, Michael Soule and Gordon Orians tell us:

"The continued rapid growth of the human population, combined with increasing per capita consumption of resources, is generating unprecedented demands on Earth's renewable and nonrenewable resources. Three decades ago, the greatest threat to sustainable use of natural resources was believed to be the high rate of use of nonrenewable resources. The impending exhaustion of those resources was expected to drive up prices and create serious shortages of materials. As it has turned out, technology has been remarkably successful in finding substitutes for many nonrenewable resources, reducing demands on their use and extending the estimates of the lifetimes of their effective supplies.

What has emerged instead as being of most concern are serious problems associated with unsustainable use of Earth's renewable resources. Among these vital resources are physical processes, such as rates of soil formation and the capacities of Earth's oceans, fresh waters, and atmosphere to decompose and dissipate wastes generated by human activities. Humans are exerting substantial influences on the major biogeochemical cycles of carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulfur, and on renewable biological processes, such as the dynamics of populations of Earth's biota, that is, the species whose activities generate the goods and services on which human society depends."

Soule and Orians go on to explain that:

"Conservation science is employed in the service of an ethical goal, the maintenance of Earth's biodiversity...Averaged over hundreds of thousands of years, speciation rates have exceeded extinction rates, with the result that Earth's current biota may be richer than it has ever been…The current loss of species richness among Earth's existing biota is believed to be driven primarily by a striking increase in extinction rates…Indeed, the U.S. Endangered Species Act is fundamentally an ethical statement. It specifies appropriate behavior that is not simply a matter of economic convenience. The combination of this ethical stance with the estimated current high rates of extinction of species gives a sense of urgency to the activities of conservation biologists…In a world where human beings receive more that 99 percent of the developmental aid and charity, it is increasingly difficult to find resources to help the other species with whom we share the Earth…Even though human behavior poses the fundamental threat to biodiversity preservation, only people can act to reduce the threats to Earth's biodiversity."

In his most recent book The Future of Life, 2002 on pp. 59-61, Edward O. Wilson updates the present state of Earth's degraded ecosystems:

"A frightening aspect of the area-species principle is that while removal of 90% of the habitat area allows about half of the species to hang on, removal of the final 10% can wipe out the remaining half in one stroke. In fact, the number of natural habitats reduced to fragments this size or smaller is increasing rapidly all around the world.

The headquarters of global biodiversity are the tropical rainforests. Although they cover only about 6% of the land surface, their terrestrial and aquatic habitats contain more than half the known species of organisms. They are also the leading abattoir of extinction, shattered into fragments that are then being severely adulterated or erased one by one. Of all ecosystems, they are rivaled in rate of decline only by the temperate rainforests and tropical dry forests.

He goes on to tell us:

Of twenty-five "hotspots" on the land—places with the most species at risk of extinction—fifteen are covered primarily by tropical rainforests…Together with the remaining terrestrial hotspots, covered mostly by savanna and coastal sagebrush, they take up only 1.4% of the world's land surface. Yet, astonishingly, they are the exclusive homes of 44% of the world's plant species and more than a third of all species of birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. Almost all are also under heavy assault. The rainforests of the West Indies, Brazil's Atlantic coast, Madagascar, and the Philippines, for example, retain less then 10% of their original cover.

Large numbers of species have already been lost forever from the forest hotspots. Many more are endangered. In a nightmare scenario, battalions of loggers armed with bulldozers and chainsaws could wipe these habitats of the face of Earth in a few months—and with them a large part of the world's biodiversity. On the flip side, it is heartening in compensating degree to realize that by protecting this tiny fraction of the planet's land area, millions of species can be saved for posterity."

In her book The Work of Nature, 1998, noted science writer Yvonne Baskin summarizes the work of hundreds of scientists around the world in the project SCOPE(The Scientific committee on Problems of the Environment). She writes:

"Our oldest faiths and deepest symbols reflect a primal connection to the natural world, to a living planet that long ago imprinted on the human consciousness a cyclic sense of death and decay, rebirth and renewal. We do not question that flesh and bone and leaf litter will decay to dust, that seeds will sprout season after season and find renewed nourishment in the soil, that rivers can flow endlessly without running dry, that we can breathe for a lifetime without depleting the air of oxygen. Despite our fascination with other worlds and our hopeful probing of outer space, we've found no other planet where any of these things are true. What humans have not fully appreciated until recently is that these services are the work of nature, performed by the rich diversity of microbes, plants, and animals on the earth.
It is this lavish array of organisms that we call 'biodiversity,' an intricately linked web of living things whose activities work in concert to make the earth a uniquely habitable planet. But today, as never before, the species in this web are under siege, threatened by human activities that encroach on their habitats. At the same time, ecologists are increasingly aware that the impoverishment of species—the planet's work force—threatens to erode the basic life-support services that render the earth hospitable for humanity. Indeed, we are approaching a crossroads in time, when the survival and extinction of other species may well delimit the future of Homo sapiens…
…Together, plants, animals, and microbes perform an array of vital services. They generate and preserve fertile soils.  They break down organic wastes, from leaf litter to feces and flesh, recycling the mineral nutrients, carbon, and nitrogen needed for new plant growth. They absorb and break down pollutants; help maintain a benign mix of gases in the atmosphere; regulate the amount of solar energy the earth absorbs; moderate regional weather and rainfall; modulate the water cycle, minimizing floods and drought and purifying waters; blunt the impact of the seas that batter the land margins; pollinate crops; and control the vast majority of potential crop pests and carriers of human disease…
…If we are realistic about our dreams for tomorrow, our goal is not really 'saving the planet' in some minimalist form, but perpetuating its atmosphere, climate, landscapes, and living services in a state that allows human civilizations to prosper. For that to occur, we need to preserve natural systems that are rich, healthy, and resilient enough to continue to support human welfare and economic activity for the next decade, the next century, and beyond…
…We are in the midst of a biodiversity crisis, and ongoing epidemic of species losses that British conservation scientist Norman Myers has labeled 'biodepletion.' The richness and complexity of the natural world is declining at an ever-accelerating rate, as the earth's burgeoning human population strives for a steadily rising technological standard of living.  Natural diversity is being brutally simplified to make way for a dizzying blend of artificial landscapes—villages, housing developments, parking lots, roads, factories, mines, shopping malls, schools, parks, gardens, golf courses, plantations, and croplands.
 
The biggest threats to the diversity of life on the earth are habitat loss, introduction of alien species into communities, and fragmentation of natural areas caused by bulldozing, paving, plowing, draining, dredging, trawling, dynamiting, and damming. Humans are also plundering natural communities by overharvesting, overgrazing, dousing them with excessive pesticides and herbicides, raining acids and other pollutants onto them, altering the mix of gases in the air, and even thinning the ultraviolet radiation shield on which terrestrial life depends.

Many of these assaults are so massive they wipe out entire ecosystems and disrupt natural processes immediately and directly. For example, draining and filling wetlands or permanently stripping the forest from a watershed instantly eliminates the flood and erosion control, water filtration and purification, and other services those ecosystems provide. Dynamiting a coral reef to extract fish not only destroys the ecosystem, but also exposes the now-unprotected shoreline to storms and so threatens coastal habitats. The impacts of such obvious forms of destruction are immediate and direct. Of equal concern to many scientists, however, is the slower, usually more insidious chipping away of functioning that accompanies the loss of species and impoverishment of their habitats. This erosion of service is harder to spot until it's well underway—easier for developers and government officials and the public to ignore for the moment. After all, what's so serious about losing a few more hectares of land to a few more houses?…
…Extinction rates today exceed by one hundred to one thousand times those seen in the fossil record. Ecologists point out that these rates will be ten times higher if all the species now officially listed as threatened or endangered actually disappear in the next century. With the human population growing exponentially, demanding more land, more food, more resources, millions of species may go extinct before they can be identified and their importance determined.

Skeptics may still argue that massive losses, mostly among obscure species in localized areas of the tropics and other 'hot spots' of high diversity, will have little impact on the human enterprise, especially in temperate regions. Yet the complete extinction of species is only one aspect of the biodiversity crisis. A more urgent but lesser known problem already eroding the structure of communities and the provision of ecological services is the dwindling of numerous plant and animal populations…Ten sockeye salmon struggling up the Snake River into Idaho don't serve bears, bald eagles, or fishermen the way 10 million once did…
…Most of us give little thought to this impoverishment because we are increasingly estranged from the workings of the natural world. Nearly half of us live in urban settings, and that figure is climbing. North America and Europe were more than half urban by mid-century, and the shift of people from the countryside into the cities is increasing across Asia, Africa, and Latin America. By 2025, some 60 percent of the world's population will live in cities, increasingly remote from the natural communities that serve us. We humans traditionally have trouble grappling with issues that we cannot see firsthand. Cloistered in our homes and offices, moated away from wildness by clipped lawns and pavement, nourished on piped water and shrink-wrapped foods, it's easy to lose sight of our reliance on plants, animals, insects, and microbes, as well as the cyclical processes they drive…
…Until recently, the functional role of organisms has seldom been invoked as a basis for conservation. Indeed, ethical and moral pleas for saving species still predominate, bolstered by spiritual traditions in most cultures that include some moral embrace of the life of the planet. At its best, the conservation ethic in the Western world is based on a sense of stewardship, and obligation to protect and care for our only known companions in the universe. Yet for all its noble intent, that moral commitment has proven a slippery foundation for conservation. We continue to degrade and impoverish biological communities at an unprecedented pace.

The reasons for such folly are complex, ranging from economic desperation to simple ignorance or even sheer unconcern about the impacts of our actions. Human societies have a sad history of setting moral burdens aside while acquiring more comfortable or prosperous lifestyles.

Because of this, some ecologists and conservationists have been heartened as the economic benefits of biodiversity have started to become apparent. In recent decades, the direct economic value of the natural world as a source of everything from antibiotics and novel medicines to Brazil nuts, salmon, spices, mushrooms, mahogany, oils, and ecotourist dollars has been touted.

Like the service function of biodiversity, however, this growing emphasis on the practical value of species and natural systems is disquieting to many who harbor a deep affection for the natural world. To some, it seems superfluous on one hand that a creature as marvelous as a moose might have to pin its survival on human self-interest. On the other hand, it hardly seems demeaning to recognize that a moose strongly shapes the character of the very soils and trees in its forest. Such knowledge is likely to raise the general level of respect for less charismatic organisms in the moose's ecosystem, such as fungi, termites, and plankton, which have few advocates, even among traditional conservationists…

…Ecologist have only recently begun to investigate the functional role of biodiversity at all levels, from genes to species, communities, ecosystems, and landscapes. Although the field is young, clearly organisms have profound effects on the ecological processes that supply human beings with food, water, energy, clean air, and other services. It is not just numbers of species but their identity, locations, and interactions that are key to the workings of the earth's life-support systems…
…policymakers tend to behave as though the survival of most non-human organisms is an amenity, one that future generations of humans can live without. Everything scientists are learning about the earth's life-support processes argues against this view. It's time to complement our sense of obligation as stewards of the earth with a somewhat humbler sense of self-preservation, to acknowledge that despite our increasing estrangement from nature, even urban societies are profoundly dependent on it…

…Since scientists know so little about which organisms are critical to maintaining vital ecosystem services, the most prudent course for a survival-minded human species would be to exercise caution and work to preserve all of them. That's a social and economic choice many of us would prefer. Right now, the natural level of diversity is the best proxy scientists have for healthy functioning, and all species losses are warnings of a potential malfunction.

Unfortunately, it may not be feasible to prevent all further losses of biodiversity, even with the best intentions, Only 3 percent of the global land surface is set aside in ;parks and protected areas. More than 95 percent is already under direct human influence, whether plowed, paved, and managed intensively, or sparsely occupied by rural or indigenous peoples. Seventy percent of the globe is covered by oceans and seas, yet only one-quarter of 1 percent of these are formally protected from exploitation and degradation. Nearly all of those protected waters are on the continental shelves rather than the continental slopes and deep seas that cover two-thirds of the earth. With the human population increasing exponentially, our species is hardly likely to take up less space or exploit fewer resources in the future. Now, more than ever, we need to learn how to use lightly and sustainably the natural systems that survive in our midst, from swamps, coastal waters, savannas, and tropical forests to hedgerows and remnant woodlands along urban stream. The more we plunder them, the more likely we are to lower the earth's human carrying capacity—that is, its ability to support Homo sapiens."

For a comprehensive review of information concerning the biodiversity crisis of the Sixth Major Mass Extinction of life on Earth, visit the website: www.well.com/user/davidu/extinction.html.

THE SOLUTION

In his article "Saving Our Future" in WorldArk magazine (May/June, 2004) Dr. David Suzuki, a scientist and professor emeritus of Sustainable Development Research at the University of British Columbia, offers solutions for the human condition and quality of life on Earth:

     "All these resources that we take for granted have to come from somewhere.  Human ingenuity has helped harness them, but they all still come from one place—the Earth. The oil coal and gas that heat our homes, power our vehicles and industries, and provide the electricity for our lights all come from nature.  It took millions of years for these fossil fuels to form, and once we use them up, they are gone for good. 

     Energy isn't the only resource we depend on nature to provide. We also depend on nature's services to clean our air and water, keep our soils fertile and our climate stable. We depend on nature to absorb our wastes and provide food, medicines, recreation and inspiration.  We depend on nature for our health, well-being and quality of life.

     If we want future generations to have the opportunities that we have had, we have to change.  We are consuming too much, too fast—especially in developed nations. According to University of British Columbia professor Bill Rees, if everyone in the world used the same amount of resources as we do in North America, it would require the resources of four or five more Earths!  The path we are currently on is clearly unsustainable.  Our planet simply isn't big enough to provide the resources for, and absorb the wastes of, 6 billion people living as we do in North America.

     Does this mean that to become a sustainable society North Americans will have to accept a lower standard of living and reduced quality of life?  No, not at all.  Why?  Well, the reason North Americans (and many others in the developed world) consume so many resources is not because it is necessary to do so to have a high quality of life, but because we have become complacent.  We live in a land of plenty, so we assume 'there's plenty more where that came from.'  As a result, we have become very wasteful.

     To become a sustainable society, we must stop wasting our resources.  That means letting innovation drive efficiency.  It means encouraging the switch to renewable energy resources, like wind and solar power, that don't pollute our air or change our climate. It means encouraging public transportation and better fuel efficiency. It means designing our cities better and using the best possible agricultural practices.  By becoming smarter and more efficient in the way we use resources, we will actually improve our quality of life.  In other words, sustainability means doing things better, not doing without.

     Unfortunately, developing nations will be least able to adapt to this changing world. Already, these nations bear the brunt of natural disasters.  Such disasters are already on the increase, and scientists tell us that extreme weather events are expected to become much worse as climate change progresses.

     For humanity to chart a course to a sustainable future, we must address these inequities.  To ignore them will condemn a good portion of the world's people to a continued cycle of poverty, which breeds unrest, contempt and violence.  This will further degrade local ecosystems and cause political instability.  No single country can achieve sustainability in such a world.  Rather, a sustainable and just future for humanity requires countries to work together to alleviate poverty, improve sanitation, medical care and education, and promote the transfer of locally appropriate, efficient technologies that will benefit developing nations.

     With an estimated population of 9 billion on Earth by 2050, time is running out for humanity to develop sustainable practices that will enable society to thrive, while protecting the natural systems on which we ultimately depend.  It is not an impossible task, but it will take a new vision of the future and a concerted global effort from our leaders, our neighbors and ourselves.

     Here are ten simple things we can do to protect the environment:

    1.  Reduce home energy use by 10 percent.

    2. Choose an energy-efficient home and appliances.

    3. Replace dangerous pesticides with alternatives.

    4. Eat meat-free meals one day a week.

    5. Buy locally grown and produced food.

    6. Choose a fuel-efficient vehicle

    7. Walk, bike, carpool or use public transit.

    8. Choose a home close to work or school.

    9. Support car-free alternatives.

    10. Learn more and share with others." 

Dave Foreman, a leading conservation activist, in his recent book, Rewilding North America, 2004, tells us he is not optimistic about modern society, but he has hope. Many people have hope, but hope is not a plan. He is director of the Rewilding Institute located in Albuquerque, New Mexico and offers solutions by having both hope and a plan. He has a visionary policy and strategy for mitigating the biodiversity crisis and fostering a better quality of life for this generation and future generations based on the science of conservation biology. Here are some excerpts from chapter 15 of his book: 

   "The point of religion, society, ethics, and good manners is to check those parts of human behavior that harm the community. Aldo Leopold believed that history could be seen as a progressive extension of ethics to include more and more people in the community. He wrote: 'All ethics so far evolved rest upon a single premise: that the individual is a member of a community of interdependent parts… The land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and animals, or collectively: the land… In short, an land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it. It implies respect for his fellow -members, and also respect for the community as such.'

   Moreover, much of the damage we do to Earth comes from our seemingly inherent inability to plan more than a couple of decades into the future and our inability to fully understand the consequences of our actions. Perhaps our shortsightedness can be explained in evolutionary terms. Thinking is a function of our brain. Like any other organ, the brain is a product of evolution. Given short individual life spans and slow ecological change for most of our evolutionary history, we should not assume that our intelligence is adapted to long-term thinking and prediction of the effects of our actions. In 1992, J. T. Heinen and R. S. Low proposed that 'humans have evolved to be concerned primarily with short -term costs and benefits on a restricted temporal and spatial scale.'

   How then do we act according to our ethics? How then do we begin to behave in keeping with the recognition that our actions have long-term consequences? How do we become responsible?

   I think that the best way to act according to our ethics is to consciously act according to our ethics. For example, I am finding that my memory fails me more and more as I grow older. Therefore, I compensate for my weakening memory by consciously helping it with reminders and by making notes for myself, or by doing things as soon as I think of them instead of thinking I'll remember to do them later. Consciously, deliberately, physically acting to heal ecological wounds may be a way to overcome the gulf between a land ethic and land caring. Assuming that we have to thoughtfully work to practice our ethics toward nature may lead to better behavior. We might be able to practice our land ethic only by consciously practicing it. Physically restoring streams, pulling exotic weeds, helping with native species reintroductions, closing harmful roads—such actions may be how we become consciously responsible. We need to create a hopeful vision for the future and consciously work to gain it, not naively assume that humans will unconsciously move in the right direction. 

   I am not optimistic. I think that the exuberant optimism that drives modern society is irrational. But I do have hope. Tom Butler, editor of Wild Earth, writes that 'hope is natural. To early hominids…who constantly faced an inconsistent ability to exploit food resources, hope would have been a powerful advantage. It might have been a key factor in getting through the hungry times. Hope is wild.' Conservationists can rewild nature only if they are lifted up by wild hope.

   Since around 1990, conservation biology has wrought a revolution. The goal for nature reserves has move beyond protecting scenery to protecting all nature—the diversity of genes, species, ecosystems, and natural processes. No longer are conservationists fulfilled with protecting remnant and isolated roadless areas; more and more we have come to agree with Reed Noss, who says, 'Wilderness recovery, I firmly believe, is the most important task of our generation.'

   Wilderness and wildlife, both as natural realities and as philosophical ideas, are fundamentally about human humility and restraint. Remember that in Old English wil-der-ness means self-willed land and wildeor means self-willed beast. Our war on nature comes from trying to impose our will over the whole Earth. To develop and practice a land ethic, we must hold dear both wil-der-ness and the wideor. Only by making the moral leap to embrace, celebrate, love, and restore self-willed nature can we stop the war on nature and save ourselves. Recycling, living more simply, and protecting human health through pollution control are all important. But it is only by rewilding and healing the ecological wounds of the land that we can learn humility and respect; that we can come home, at last. And that the grand dance of life will sashay on in all its beauty, intergrity, and evolutionary potential.

Terry Tempest Williams in her book, An Unspoken Hunger, 1994, offers a solution when she writes poetically about love and love of wildlands in her celebration of the Winter Solstice at a wetlands preserve in Utah:
 
"…But what kind of impoverishment is this to withhold emotion, to restrain our passionate nature in the face of a generous life just to appease our fears? A man or woman whose mind reins in the heart when the body sings desperately for connection can only expect more isolation and greater ecological disease. Our lack of intimacy with each other is in direct proportion to our lack of intimacy with the land. We have taken our love inside and abandoned the wild…
The Winter Solstice turns in us, turns in me. Let me plant my own prayer stick firmly in the mud of this marsh. Eight hundred acres of wetlands. It is nothing. It is everything. We are a tribe of fractured individuals who can now only celebrate remnants of wildness…
Wildlands' and wildlives' oppression lies in our desire to control and our desire to control has robbed us of feeling. Our rib cages have been broken and our hearts cut out. The knives of our priests are bloody. We, the people. Our own hands are bloody…
…says D. H. Lawrence. 'Oh, what a catastrophe for man when he cut himself off from the rhythm of the year, from his unison with the sun and the earth. Oh, what a catastrophe, what a maiming of love when it was made a personal, merely personal feeling, taken away from the rising and setting of the sun, and cut off from the magical connection of the solstice and equinox. This is what is wrong with us…'
The land is love. Love is what we fear. To disengage from the earth is our own oppression. I stand on the edge of these wetlands, a place of renewal, an oasis in the desert, as an act of faith, believing the sun has completed the southern end of its journey and is now contemplating its return toward light…"

Aldo Leopold(considered to be the "father" of wildlife management) in his book, A Sand County Almanac, 1949, offers a solution in his quote on a land ethic:
"…an ethic is simply this: quit thinking about descent land-use as solely an economic problem. Examine each question in terms of what is ethically and esthetically right, as well as what is economically expedient. A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise…"

My experience as an amateur naturalist and photographer tells me that an increasing number of people causes a deterioration and loss of our country's native forests, grasslands, and floodplains and that in turn causes a loss of our native wildlife biodiversity. Too many masterpieces have already been destroyed forever. I'm convinced it's true that "there are two ways to have enough – either you get more or you need less!" If the number of people is eventually maintained at a sustainable level, and we need less, there will be hope for our biodiversity of masterpieces. I hope my images bring the beauty of nature that surrounds us into people's lives and inspire someone to help preserve what's left of our remaining natural heritage.

One way to help preserve our natural resources is to join environmental organizations working to protect our natural heritage. Here is a list of some environmental groups that are not as well known as popular mainline groups, but are just as (or more) effective at being good stewards of the environment. Some are up and coming young organizations with the potential of accomplishing great things in conserving our natural heritage.

-- Biodiversity Conservation Alliance is a lean, efficient non-profit organization with a guiding principle that all species and ecosystems deserve protection. They work with, but are not affiliated with, other conservation groups. They use outreach and education to foster support for biodiversity and wild areas in Wyoming and surrounding states. Science and the law are used to hold public managers and decision-makers accountable for protecting our nation's natural heritage and upholding the public trust. Located at: P. O. Box 1512, Laramie, WY 82073. Phone: (307) 742-7978. Fax: (307) 742-7989. Email: Travis@voiceforthewild.org. Website: www.voiceforthewild.org.

-- The Turtle Conservation Project is a nonprofit organization dedicated to saving what's left of our native reptiles and amphibians. This includes preserving and restoring their natural habitats, hands-on rehabilitation and release of those injured or displaced by development, or carelessly taken from the wild for commercial exploitation in the pet and food trade. Through advocacy, research, and education we hope to enhance the quality of life for people and nature. Membership is $15 per year. You will receive our conservation booklet, annual report, newsletters, and a free poster.  Join by contacting Angie Byorth at her phone: 1-402-450-4024 or Email: nebraskaturtlelady@hotmail.com.

-- The Grassland Foundation is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to preserving endangered and threatened species and habitats through research, education, and advocacy. Located at P.O. Box 22809, Lincoln, NE 68542-2809. Phone 402-474-1325. Website: www.grasslandfoundation.org.

-- Predator Conservation Alliance is a nonprofit organization dedicated to conserving and restoring ecosystem integrity by protecting predators and their habitats. Viable populations of diverse predator species are critical to preserving our natural heritage of wildlife and wildlands. Conservation biologists know that grizzly bears, wolves, lynx, wolverines, and black-footed ferrets indicate healthy ecosystems. Simply stated, we need predators to maintain intact ecosystems. Phone: (406) 587-3389 Fax: (406) 587-3178 Website: www.predatorconservation.org.

-- Defenders of Wildlife is a nonprofit national educational organization dedicated to the conservation of all forms of wildlife. Located at 1101 Fourteenth St, N.W., Suite 1400, Washington, D.C. 20005. Phone 202-682-9400. Website: www.defenders.org.

-- Environmental Defense is a not-for-profit membership organization incorporated by the laws of the state of New York . The "e" from the name is their logo as a symbol of Earth and of recurring themes in their work -- environment, economy, equity, and empowerment. Located at 257 Park Ave. South, New York, NY 10010. Phone 1-800-684-3322. E-mail: members@environmentaldefense.org.

-- American Rivers, founded in 1973, has a mission to protect and restore America's river systems and to foster a river stewardship ethic. Located at 1025 Vermont Ave., N.W., suite 720, Washington, D.C. 20005. Phone 202-347-7550. FAX: 202-347-9240. E-mail: amrivers@amrivers.org. Website: www.amrivers.org.

-- Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is a national nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting the world's natural resources and ensuring a safe healthy environment for all people. Located at 40 West 20th St. New York, NY 10011. Phone 212-727-2700. E-mail: nrdcinfo@nrdc.org.

-- The Alaska Wilderness League is a non-profit organization that supports legislative and administrative initiatives to protect Alaska's lands and waters, promotes national and local recognition of Alaska's spectacular environment through public education, strengthens grassroots activism on behalf of Alaska's environment, and provides leadership within the environmental community on selected issues. Their current projects are the permanent protection of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the sustainable future of Alaska's Rainforest. Located at: 122 C Street, NW, Ste 240; Washington , D. C. 20001. Tel: (202) 544-5205. Website: www.alaskawild.org. Email: info@alaskawild.org.

-- Alaska Conservation Foundation works to protect the integrity of Alaska's ecosystems and to promote sustainable livelihoods among Alaska's communities and peoples. This is their mission. ACF raises and strategically grants charitable funds and offers technical support to non-profit groups or individuals whose work promotes their mission. Located at: 441 West 5th Ave., Suite 402; Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2340. Tel: (907) 276-1917. Website: www.akcf.org.

-- Native Forest Council is a nonprofit organization founded by business and professional people alarmed about the willful destruction of our national forests. They believe a sound economy and a sound environment are compatible, but current public land management is devastating to both. Their mission is to provide visionary leadership and to assure the integrity of public land ecosystems without compromising forests or people. Located at P.O. Box 2190, Eugene, OR 97402. Phone 541-688-2600. FAX: 541-689-9835. E-mail: info@forestcouncil.org. Website: www.forestcouncil.org.

The private sector is making a wonderful effort of stewardship on private land that fosters restoration and protection of habitats to conserve native plants and animals. R.E. "Ted" Turner and his son, Beau Turner, are in the forefront of this conservation biology project. In June 1997, their family formed the Turner Endangered Species Fund (TESF) and Turner Biodiversity Divisions (TBD). Their projects involve private citizens, universities, nongovernmental organizations, state, and federal agencies.

They believe the extinction crisis is caused primarily because of a habitat loss crisis mostly on private land, in the name of development and economic growth. As the largest private landowners in the U.S. (1.7 million acres), they want to demonstrate that it is possible for threatened and endangered species to coexist on private land through the science of conservation biology. The Turners are committed to the idea that the solution to the extinction crises depends on the genius and determination of people. According to Beau Turner: "We are determined to contribute by establishing a new measure for conserving the wonderous diversity of life on Earth."

And last, but not least, support Planned Parenthood!

-- Planned Parenthood believes in the fundamental right of each individual to manage his or her fertility, regardless of income, marital status, age, national origin, or residence. They believe that reproductive self-determination must be voluntary and preserve the individual's right to privacy. This will contribute to the enhancement of the quality of life, strong family relationships, and population stability. Toll-free phone 1-888-751-8284. Website: www.plannedparenthood.org.

Other important ways to be good stewards of our natural resources are: conserve water in your home and yard, landscape wisely by growing native plants, help prevent flooding and protect rivers and streams by not building in the floodplain, never pour unwanted chemicals on the ground, clean up after your pets, maintain and pump your septic system regularly, use non-toxic environmentally-friendly products, recycle used oil and antifreeze, drive the car less often, ride the bus, walk or ride a bicycle, maintain a compost pile, and above all, get actively involved and protect our natural areas.

ANGELIKA T.L. BYORTH: Nebraska photographer a hardworking, humble hero
Posted from the Daily Nebraskan Issue: 9/12/05

angie
Angelika T. L. Byorth
Graduate education and German student

Who are your heroes?

I'm inspired by artists who never give up and by those who never sell out. There's one such true artist right here in Lincoln . Maybe you know him. He shed blood, sweat and tears for decades, creating thousands of intriguing memorable and sometimes hauntingly beautiful nature photos while people ignored his efforts.

The hardworking man held down a day job, believing his photo-art would never garner a wider audience here in Nebraska, let alone in the country. Yet he continued to toil away at his passion, doing it only for himself and the Goddess of Nature. Next year, the persevering and unassuming Ron Marquart will retire and begin to collect his Social Security.

But he won't have time to be idle.

Perhaps because Marquart's images became so free of an artist's ego and therefore touched by true genius, they suddenly attracted attention and awards. This recognition came not only from Nebraska but also from a national front.

For two years in a row, Marquart's entries at the state fair have won "Best Nature Slide Photo," and magazines like Nebraska Life and Outdoor Nebraska have featured his winning works. Soon after, the Crane Meadows Nature Center near Grand Island started to exhibit Marquart's nature images.

Most recently, a breathtaking photo of Honeycomb Buttes in Wyoming's Red Desert won a contest sponsored by the National Landscape Conservation System. You can find the photo at www.wilderness.org.

For countless other visual pleasures and stunning, award-winning photographs of our natural environment, visit Marquart's "Natural Images" Web site at www.mnimages.com.

Intrigued by his emerging success, I asked Ron Marquart for an interview, and he gracefully obliged.

Byorth: What sets you apart from other nature photographers? What is special about your approach?

Marquart: I do not photograph landscapes, plants or animals. I photograph Light. The greatest artist of all time is Light, and I try and capture the beauty of the great artist with my camera. Light produces some of its best works of art during the crepuscular hours, which is the time during twilight of sunrise and sunset. There is magic in the air during this brief dance of Light which lasts for only a few minutes.

Byorth: By being there, during those few minutes, is this how you catch the essence of natural things?

Marquart: My sense is that there is no essence of anything. The science of nature tells us that everything is in constant change, including reflections of Light. The only constant thing is probably the speed of Light. All I can do is hope to be there at the right time and in the right place so as to capture the artistic and ephemeral beauty of the great artist Light.

Byorth: What is the strategy you use to create your successful images?

Marquart: I work hard on three things: Photograph Light, Be There and Luck. When I concentrate on the Light that surrounds a subject rather than on the subject as an object, the quality of my photographs improves dramatically. I have to travel into nature often and just be there to get good pictures.

Byorth: What about this Luck thing?

Marquart: Sometimes lots of effort, excellent equipment and frequent travel into nature are not enough. Many times just being lucky makes all the difference in getting that outstanding photograph. Being prepared and being ready with good photo equipment greatly helps improve the chance for good luck.

Byorth: What motivates you?

Marquart: I hope that my images of nature will increase awareness and appreciation of the beauty of nature. I also want to draw attention to the fact that our earth is presently in a major biodiversity crisis. Too many plants and animals have already been lost forever. The home page of my Web site, www.mnimages.com, documents this and offers solutions to curb the crisis.

Byorth: What keeps you going?

Marquart: The hope to make a difference through my photo-art.

And I hope that when the emerging new Nebraska talent in nature photography receives his first Social Security check next year, he will blow it all on rolls upon rolls of the finest quality film this little planet we call Earth has to offer.

* I want to acknowledge the hard work of my son, J.R. Marquart, whose expertise in web design put together the technical aspects of this website.