Talk:Northern Arizona University/Environmental Ethics

Could someone please have a look ?
Hello, could someone from the course members or teacher please take care of these ?


 * two possible cases where might be copyright problems ?
 * Aldo Leopold and Mary Austin.


 * The 4 short papers link to the same page
 * It would be great, if all participants from the course could sign and date; it helps everyone keep track of who is writing messages. The signature icon [[Image:Signature_icon.png]] in the edit window makes it simple.
 * Does this belongs to the course ? I ask because the "return back" is different, it goes to: "Northern Arizona University: Philosophy of Law Main Page".

I will also try to find the email of the professor or of the university.

BTW: I have structured the course now. All pages are now at subpages of Northern Arizona University: Environmental Ethics. E.g. Jeff Downard's journal became Northern Arizona University: Environmental Ethics/Journals/Jeff Downard's journal. With this people outside of the course can easily see to where this page belongs. Erkan Yilmaz ( evaluate me!, discussion ) 18:42, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Found a person with the name Jeffrey Downard here and emailed this person. Erkan Yilmaz ( evaluate me!, discussion ) 18:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Jeff just contacted me by mail. He will have a look into the issue. Thanky aou again Jeff for the fast answer. See you. Erkan Yilmaz ( evaluate me!, discussion ) 22:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

exercises
1. Identify a philosophical claim being made in the text. Explain the point of the claim.

“An ethical obligation on the part of the private owner is the only visible remedy for these situations,” is a very explicit claim made by Leopold (page 251). Specifically, he is referring to the trend Americans have to depend on the government to regulate land conservation. Landowners (with exceptions) are all about the economical gain from their land and not for conservation. And, if legislation dictates to landowners to manage their properties with conservation, then landowners obliges “only with an outstretched palm.” (page 250). Therefore, Leopold is suggesting that the only feasible solution is to empower the landowners to think mindfully about their ethical obligation to their community and land, and act accordingly with conscience.

2. Raise a question that is critical to the claim. Clarify and question.

Should a landowner be expected to always hold to environmental obligations, at all costs? Specifically, should a landowner (i.e. farmer) be forced to choose between conservation methods and feeding his family? What I am wondering is how can you educate a farmer to conserve his land and lose profits that will feed/house/clothe his family for the better of the community? A specific instance I think of is in South America, Costa Rica I think. Due to the rapid logging and farming of rain forests, the Costa Rican government has offered to compensate any land owner who is willing to allow their land to resume it’s original vegetative state, then maintain and protect it within that state. There are many farmers who have taken this opportunity. But, if the government compensation fails it will force the farmer to clear cut his land for profit and farming. How can you expect a farmer to not feed his family? How can you expect a poor farmer to remove himself from the vicious cycle of land use should be profitable?