[Taxacom] when is a common species critically endangered?

[Stephen Thorpe]

>But what's the difference between a plane and a beaver dam?<

Well, it is difficult to fly to London on a beaver dam! :)
 
Interestingly, I maintain both that the mite isn't endangered (i.e., that it is not "Nationally Critical") *and* that the manmade vs. natural distinction is meaningful ...
 
Stephen
 

________________________________
From: Mark Wilden <mark at mwilden.com>
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu 
Sent: Thursday, 28 June 2012 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] when is a common species critically endangered?

Obviously, my "naive" question related to the mite, and whether it's
endangered. It's clearly not - no matter how it makes its living. If
humans and their artifacts (such as plant cultivation) are considered
as just another ingredient in the environment, then this mite issue
goes away, it seems to me.

Take a 747 airliner. No one would call it a "part of nature". But
what's the difference between a plane and a beaver dam?

///ark

Mark Wilden
Web Applications Developer
California Academy of Sciences

(Of course, there may be other reasons for us to desire a higher
population of the mite in certain areas than simply to perpetuate its
species, but that's not what "endangered" means.)

_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org/

(2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here