Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A call for ecumenical conservation

A call for ecumenical conservation People are motivated to protect nature for a wide variety of reasons. Some want to sit in meditative repose in the cathedral‐like silence of a forest. Others feel deeply that all creatures have an equivalent moral claim to existence. And some want to shoot animals and put their heads on the wall. Miller, Soulé and Terborgh ( ) want to label certain motivations as good and worthy and others as self‐interested and venal. Since all conservation is a human endeavor, it strikes us as enormously counterproductive for conservation biologists to reject the impulse to protect nature in humans whose rationales they do not personally share. We are certain conservation will be more successful if it embraces the full gamut of motivations and stops acting as the arbiter of moral purity. We are surprised to find this view so controversial. Based on the number of editorial attacks we have elicited (e.g. Soulé, ; Cafaro & Primack, ), it is clear that the idea of embracing a wider range of approaches is deeply threatening to some in the conservation community. We do not get it: why are people who love the diversity of plants and animals and habitats so afraid http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Animal Conservation Wiley

A call for ecumenical conservation

Marvier, M.
Animal Conservation , Volume 17 (6) – Jan 1, 2014
Download PDF
2 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/a-call-for-ecumenical-conservation-pw726Ysxbe

References (18)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Animal Conservation © 2014 The Zoological Society of London
ISSN
1367-9430
eISSN
1469-1795
DOI
10.1111/acv.12130
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

People are motivated to protect nature for a wide variety of reasons. Some want to sit in meditative repose in the cathedral‐like silence of a forest. Others feel deeply that all creatures have an equivalent moral claim to existence. And some want to shoot animals and put their heads on the wall. Miller, Soulé and Terborgh ( ) want to label certain motivations as good and worthy and others as self‐interested and venal. Since all conservation is a human endeavor, it strikes us as enormously counterproductive for conservation biologists to reject the impulse to protect nature in humans whose rationales they do not personally share. We are certain conservation will be more successful if it embraces the full gamut of motivations and stops acting as the arbiter of moral purity. We are surprised to find this view so controversial. Based on the number of editorial attacks we have elicited (e.g. Soulé, ; Cafaro & Primack, ), it is clear that the idea of embracing a wider range of approaches is deeply threatening to some in the conservation community. We do not get it: why are people who love the diversity of plants and animals and habitats so afraid

Journal

Animal Conservation – Wiley

Published: Jan 1, 2014

There are no references for this article.