Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Thing is Right

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Protected Land

Part of the book series: Springer Series on Environmental Management ((SSEM))

  • 860 Accesses

Abstract

The modern concept of the ecosystem is by no means a settled question. Though no one denies that the physical and chemical conditions of an environment change over time or that species migrate in more or less independent ways, there are still those who maintain that the ecosystem is best conceptualized as a holistic unit and protected in its ideal state. Others are equally insistent that there are serious ­deficiencies with the holistic ecosystem concept and associated management goals. The varieties of ecosystem perspectives in between these extremes make it plain that the possibilities are not a dichotomy but a continuum. In this chapter I present ecosystem views that are representative of the two ends of the conceptual ­continuum, and then I consider some key tenets of the modern “ecosystem approach” to conservation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Belovsky, G. 2002. Ecological stability: reality, misconceptions, and implications for risk assessment. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 8:99–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callicott, J. 1995. A review of some problems with the concept of ecosystem health. Ecosystem Health 1:101–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callicott, J. 2000. Harmony between men and land: Aldo Leopold and the foundations of ecosystem management. Journal of Forestry 98:4–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callow, P. 1992. Can ecosystems be healthy? Critical considerations of concepts. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Health 1:1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, S. 2000. Disturbance frequency and community stability in native tallgrass prairie. The American Naturalist 155:311–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R., Norton, B. G., and Haskell, B. D. 1992. Ecosystem Health: New Goals for Environmental Management. Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronk, J. K., and Fennessy, M. S. 2001. Wetland Plants: Biology and Ecology. Boca Raton: Lewis Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • DeKeyser, E., Kirby, D., and Ell, M. 2003. An index of plant community integrity: development of the methodology for assessing prairie wetland plant communities. Ecological Indicators 3:119–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elton, C. 1927. Animal Ecology. London: Sidgwick & Jackson, LTD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elton, C. 1958. The Ecology of Invasions by Plants and Animals. London: Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich, P., and Ehrlich, A. 1983. Extinction: the causes and consequences of the disappearance of species. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frey, D. 1977. Biological integrity of water: an historical approach. In The Integrity of Water. Proceedings of a Symposium, March 10–12, 1975, ed. Ballentine, R. K., and Guarraia, L. J., pp. 127–140. Washington: United States Environmental Protection Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, A. 2000. Ecological integrity and the Darwinian paradigm. In Ecological Integrity: Integrating Environment, Conservation, and Health, ed. Pimentel, D., Westra, L., and Noss, R. F., pp. 45–60. Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ives, A., and Carpenter, S. 2007. Stability and diversity of ecosystems. Science 317:58–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grimm, V., and Wissel, C. 1997. Babel, or the ecological stability discussions: an inventory and analysis of terminology and a guide for avoiding confusion. Oecologia 109:323–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golley, F. 1996. A History of the Ecosystem Concept in Ecology: More than the Sum of the Parts. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson, L., and Holling, C. 2002. Panarchy synopsis: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. 1981. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries 6:21–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. 1991. Biological integrity: a long-neglected aspect of water resource management. Ecological Applications 1:66–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. 2000. Health, integrity, and biological assessment: the importance of measuring whole things. In Ecological Integrity: Integrating Environment, Conservation, and Health, ed. Pimentel, D., Westra, L., and Noss, R. F., pp. 209–226. Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J., Fausch, K. D., Angermeier, P. L., Yant, P. R., and Schlosser, I. J. 1986. Assessing biological integrity in running waters: a method and its rationale. Special publication No. 5. Champaign: Illinois Natural History Survey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, M., and Whitton, B. 1995. The trophic diatom index: a new index for monitoring eutrophication in rivers. Journal of Applied Phycology 7:433–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krebs, C. J. 2009. Ecology: The Experimental Analysis of Distribution and Abundance. San Francisco: Pearson Benjamin Cummings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lackey, R. 2001. Values, policy, and ecosystem health. BioScience 51:437–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leopold, A., and Schwartz, C. W. 1966. A Sand County Almanac, with Other Essays on Conservation from Round River. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leopold, A., Callicott, J. B., and Freyfogle, E. T. 1999. Aldo Leopold: For the Health of the Land: Previously Unpublished Essays and Other Writings. Washington: Island Press/Shearwater Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loucks, O. L. 2000. Pattern of forest integrity in the eastern United States and Canada: measuring loss and recovery. In Ecological Integrity: Integrating Environment, Conservation, and Health, ed. Pimentel, D., Westra, L., and Noss, R. F., pp. 177–190. Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur, R. 1955. Fluctuations of animal populations and a measure of community stability. Ecology 36:533–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mann, C. C. 2005. 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, K. 2000. The diversity-stability debate. Nature 405:228–233.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Micacchion, M. 2004. Integrated Wetland Assessment Program. Part 7: Amphibian Index of Biotic Integrity (AmphIBI) for Ohio Wetlands. Ohio EPA Technical Report WET/2004-7. Columbus: Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Surface Water, Wetland Ecology Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell, T., Jackson, L., and Brooks, R. 1998. A bird community index of biotic integrity for the mid-Atlantic highlands. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 51:145–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odum, E. P. 1969. The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164:262–270.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, R. 2001. Is it time to bury the ecosystem concept? (with full military honors, of course!). Ecology 82:3275–3284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parrish, J., Braun, D., and Unnasch, R. 2003. Are we conserving what we say we are? Measuring ecological integrity within protected areas. BioScience 53:851–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Partridge, E. 2000. Reconstructing ecology. In Ecological Integrity: Integrating Environment, Conservation, and Health, ed. Pimentel, D., Westra, L., and Noss, R. F., pp. 79–98. Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, G., Allen, C., and Holling, C. 1998. Ecological resilience, biodiversity, and scale. Ecosystems 1:6–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel, D., Westra, L., and Noss, R. F. 2000. Ecological Integrity: Integrating Environment, Conservation, and Health. Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapport, D., Costanza, R., and McMichael, A. 1998. Assessing ecosystem health. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 13:397–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sagoff, M. 2005. Do non-native species threaten the natural environment? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18:215–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaeffer, D., Herricks, E., and Kerster, H. 1988. Ecosystem health: I. Measuring ecosystem health. Environmental Management 12:445–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, S., Thompson, G., and Withers, P. 2008. Rehabilitation index for evaluating restoration of terrestrial ecosystems using the reptile assemblage as the bio-indicator. Ecological Indicators 8:530–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, B.H., and Salt, D. 2006. Resilience Thinking: Sustaining Ecosystems and People in a Changing World. Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker, R. H. 1972. Evolution and measurement of species diversity. Taxon 21:213–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wicklum, D., and Davies, R. 1995. Ecosystem health and integrity? Canadian Journal of Botany 73:997–1000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, J., and Loucks, O. 1995. From balance of nature to hierarchical patch dynamics: a paradigm shift in ecology. The Quarterly Review of Biology 70:439–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US EPA. 1990. Biological Criteria: National Program Guidance for Surface Waters (EPA-440/5-90-004). Washington: United States Environmental Protection Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vane-Wright, R., Humphries, C., and Williams, P. 1991. What to protect? Systematics and the agony of choice. Biological Conservation 55:235–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Denison University, Granville, OH, 43023, USA

    Douglas J. Spieles (Associate Professor of Environmental Studies)

Authors
  1. Douglas J. Spieles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Douglas J. Spieles .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Spieles, D.J. (2010). A Thing is Right. In: Protected Land. Springer Series on Environmental Management. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6813-5_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation