Re: Not so "native" introductions
- From: Malcolm <Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:32:48 +0000
X-No-Archive: yes
In article <1201621326.21547.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, BAC <casswalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
Not entirely!
<amacmil304@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:pobup3tq72k3nakk591uj1ai5ulloo4bi4@xxxxxxxxxx
Not so "native" introductions
One of the key criteria for determining if a species is "native" is
that it should have evolved with all other species within its own
environment and not have been introduced or assisted by man to arrive
at what is regarded as its natural location. In short, it should have
got to where it is by its own efforts and evolved naturally.
Given that virtually every part of the planet's surface has been (and
continues to be) significantly altered by the activities of humanity, to the
extent that some people believe we are no longer in the eocene, but the
anthropocene, it seems somewhat pointless to argue too much about
'nativeness' being invalidated by human 'assistance'.
However, in practical conservation terms, people tend to conserve that
which, for whatever reason, they consider worthy of conservation, whether in
the field of the built environment, art, or fauna and flora. Regardless of
scientific definitions :-)
But Angus has constructed a complicated and needlessly overblown argument all in a futile attempt to prevent some grey squirrels from being killed. Were he to be successful (which he certainly won't be, and he knows it, which makes his argument all the more futile), the inevitable result would be the extinction of the red squrrel in the UK, except perhaps on a few islands (either offshore or remote patches on the mainland). Angus cares not :-(
In order to construct his argument, he is as selective with the facts, as usual, i.e. making the claim that the red squirrel was subject to "virtual extermination", or in other words, they were not completely exterminated, which he gets as close to claiming as he can, and then grossly exaggerates the scale of imports from mainland Europe which took place. He also repeats his tired and completely unproven claim that red squirrels were not here continuously for the last 10,000 years. Prove it, Angus, and don't ask anyone to prove they *were* here. They were, until proved otherwise.
How much simpler to regard the red squirrel as a native species, which has been here continuously for the last 10,000 years, had its population slightly boosted from Europe in the 19th century and is now rapidly disappearing because of the introduced and definitely non-native grey squirrel from North America.
Fortunately, governments and organisations who actually know something about squirrels are putting necessary resources into trying to save the native red squirrel by preventing the non-native grey squirrel from invading the red's last strongholds. And it is good to read reports that this is having some success.
--
Malcolm
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Not so "native" introductions
- From: amacmil304
- Re: Not so "native" introductions
- References:
- Not so "native" introductions
- From: amacmil304
- Re: Not so "native" introductions
- From: BAC
- Not so "native" introductions
- Prev by Date: Re: Not so "native" introductions
- Next by Date: Re: Here we go again!
- Previous by thread: Re: Not so "native" introductions
- Next by thread: Re: Not so "native" introductions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|