1.

Leopold says, A system of conservation based solely on economic self-interest is

hopelessly lopsided Explain.

According to Leopold, the land community such as wildflowers and songbirds may not
have economic value to us but those community plays a vital role in maintaining the
balance of the ecosystem. For example, he had highlighted that 22,000 higher plants and
animals native to Wiscousin are not part of economic profit. However, they are part of
the biotic community.
Apart from that, songbirds initially was almost to extinction until ornithologists came
up with strong evidence that if these songbirds vanish, the population of insects will
grow and affect humans. It means that overgrowth of insect may destroy agricultural
crops which lowers our food supply and economic income. This may also lead to use of
pesticides to control the insects population which will deteriorate the nature. Therefore,
if we tend to look at each community in terms of their economic value, we will end up
losing some rare species of the biotic community which are essential to maintain the
ecological balance by the time experts could come up with strong evidences that proves
those biotic community are part of our economic advantage .

2. According to Leopold, the biggest obstacle to the success of the land ethic is our anged
for the educational system and our economy, which he says are headed away from . . .
an intense consciousness of land. He wrote these words more than half a century ago.
Have things changed for the better? Are schools and businesses today more ecologically
conscious?

Unfortunately, the changes are occurring at a very slow pace. As mentioned by Leopold,
the conservation still proceeds at a snail's pace. Changes are permanent. Today, schools
are cultivating 3R programs among upcoming generations in order to change their
attitude towards environment. The use of synthetic materials such as plastics are being
reduced in the environment. As for businesses, they are still profit-oriented. The
businesses are only concern on what they need to do to the land to preserve their
economy advantages. This is showing that they have no emotional attachment towards
the environment as there is no internal change in their intellectual. Besides, the business
 are more towards law oriented. As quoted by Leopold, 'obey the law...; the government
will do the rest. Besides, he had highlighted that land bureaus and the agricultural
colleges do not teach ethical obligation towards land.

3. Leopolds land ethic adopts the principle A thing is right when it tends to preserve
the integrity stability and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends
otherwise. Do you see a problem with this as a general definition of right and wrong?
If you do, how would you modify in ways that make it more acceptable?

The statement does not include the element of sustainability of natural resources and
economic feasibility. However, the economic value solely does not determine all the
land use. Besides that, the land ethic is an evolution of our intellectual and emotional
process. So the principle can be modified to include the aspect of sustainable
development.
For example, a thing is right when it tends to meet the needs of the present, without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It also includes
preserving the diverse needs of current and future biotic community thus avoiding the
depletion of natural resources in order to maintain the balance in ecosystem.

4. Leopold implies that the land ethic is more enlightened than the Judo-Christian ethic.
Yet, others argue that the Judeo-Christian ethic, with its emphasis on benovelence and
justice, was a great advance over ancient systems that were in many ways more
respectful of nature, but tolerated cruelty as a natural phenomenon. Who do you think
is right?

In my understanding, Leopold is right because land ethic compromises of elements such

as love, respect and admiration for the nature. It includes the emotional experience with
nature that further leads to continuous development of ethical sensitivity. Unlike Judeo-
Christian's tolerance towards cruelty as a natural phenomena, land ethics focuses on
conservation that creates harmony between men and land. Even in the context of respect,
Judeo-Christian is more of self-interest as how we see the nature through ourselves.
Instead, land ethics involves each elements in nature including humans as a community
and every elements are valuable in the ecology.
5. Leopold suggests that an adequate land ethic must accept the principle that plants, soils,
and animals along with human beings are worthy of and must be treated with respect.
Does this trivialize the idea of respect? What alternative conception of a responsible
attitude to the environment might be less demanding and more reasonable?

This does not trivialize the idea of respect as Leopold explains clearly that human are
part of the ecosystem in which we must respect the existence of nature and how we
interact with them as a whole community. He also explained that our role is to become
the member of the land community instead of being a conqueror.

In land ethics, we have to view our worthiness for the environment instead of looking
at how environment are worthy for us. It also includes our responsilbility in maintaining
an ecological balance. This involves the continual improvement of our ethical idea
intellectually and emotionally upon our interaction with it as we are part of the land
community. We need to change our attitude by always putting the ecological balance as
the main priority than the profits which focused on self-interest. This changes shows
our friendliness and respect to all members in the land community.