David Herrera
ANTH 1020
11/21/12
Ethics of Species conservation by a Definition
Introduction
If you are reading this, you most like have heard or are familiar with the concept
of the endangered species list. In the United States the U.S Fish and Wild life
Service is in charge of monitoring species getting close to becoming extinct
thanks to the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (1); they also raise awareness and
provide funding for such endeavor. Where does anthropology fit in this mess?
There isn’t a simple answer or just one answer; as I thought about the subject,
multiple definitions and topics came to mind: taxonomy, species definition,
lumping, splitting, natural selection, survival of the fittest, cladistics, speciation,
culture, inter/intra specific relations and even race in the human species (that in
itself it’s a whole different paper to cover so I won’t attempt to explain it all).
Nonetheless, one article I read recently made me think of this subject more
along the lines of defining species and the endangered list; the article is titled:
What is a species? by Carl Zimmer(2). The author brings up the debate of how
and what is considered species, and if we can or should even consider having
one definition for the term. To make the subject more interesting he quotes
biologist John Marshall, who explains how there are at least twenty six definition
of specie currently circulating. To tie everything again to endangered species, if
we don’t have a solid definition, some species get to be put in in the list while
others get put out and so forth.
David Herrera
ANTH 1020
11/21/12
Specie
One of the most common definitions of the term species is the one referred to as
biological species which states: a depiction of species as groups of individuals
capable of fertile interbreeding but reproductively isolated from other such
groups. (3)
But unfortunately this definition has a downfall; for example many individuals
argue that it doesn’t take into account asexual organisms which on their own can
be different enough to be its own species.
Lumping
When it comes to designating species, there are two predominant methods. The
first one is referred to as lumping. As the name refers to it, researches, scholars
etc. try to combine as many species under one. They try to avoid defining new
species based on every new or possible variation that might arise. For example
look at a common pet among humans (and I know what you’re thinking, not
your little brother or sister) the domesticated dog. At first glance you might think
every breed might have its own specie, but it turns out that despite how
different and how much variety seems to exist among them, they all fall under
the classification Canis Lupus Familiaris.
David Herrera
ANTH 1020
11/21/12
This point of view is very valid, since in science there is always new data being
collected and new things being discovered, thus it simplifies and avoids the pitfall
of prematurely designating every living things into its own classification and later
on finding out it belonged somewhere else etc. The downside with this method is
that it can become overly simplistic.
Splitting
The method of splitting is quite the opposite of the previous one. The whole
point of this system is to find and separate species on the bases of as many
differences as possible. For instance in a book titled Ecological Risk Assessment
of Contaminants in Soil, provides a useful example of how the insect
“Entomobrya Nivalis was described under at least 81 species and subspecies
names before 1960” (4)
Splitting can be beneficial in certain aspects, such as identifying organism that
cause certain diseases, which must be correctly identified be effectively treated
against, but I can become exhausting and never ending process.
Splitting, Lumping and Endangered species
The ethical issue with the endangered species (whether it be plants or animals)
is that in order for a species to be recognized into it and receive funding and so
on, it needs to be in fact its own species based on whatever the definition of
specie might be; otherwise it brings up the point of why invest money in
David Herrera
ANTH 1020
11/21/12
protecting an organisms that technically won’t be extinct because there are
similar ones. Likewise the argument can be that by being more inclusive, more
organisms can be saved since they are in the same category.
Thus by not having a concrete definition, the efforts to save the biodiversity of
the planet becomes increasingly hard.
The Bottom Line
From and excerpt from the article Duties to endangered species, “Destroying
species is like tearing pages out of an unread book, written in a language
humans hardly know how to read” (5) In my opinion the big problem it is not
whether or not we have a good definition of species, but the fact that as humans
we are destroying the planet with little regard, especially considering how we
have the so called advantage of reasoning and larger brains. The problem is that
we are creating an artificial selection and survival of species and organism. At
this point in time the definition of species becomes relevant as one of the
strategies to stop the damage we have done to the biodiversity of the planet.
Unfortunately many species of animals and plants have been lost unnecessarily
due to our negligence and greed (Just look at Africa and the poaching of Ivory).
We need to protect the planet as a whole, not determined on the rankings and
classifications, we create. After all every living organism in this planet share one
thing in common: we live in the same planet.
David Herrera
ANTH 1020
11/21/12
Sources
1. Habitat Conservation Plans Under the Endangered Species Act, April 2011 Pg 1.
2. What is it a Species? Zimmer, Carl. Scientific American Inc. June 2008 pg. 72-79
3. Essential of Anthropology by Jurmain, Robert; Kilgore Lynn; Trevathan Wenda.
2013. Page 105
4. Ecological Risk Assessment of Contaminants in Soil, edited by Van Straalen,
Nico. 1997. Pg. 76.
5. Duties to Endangered Species by Holmes, Rolston III. Bio Science Vol. 35 No. 11
pg. 718