California Mountain Kingsnake - "Don't bull-dose me"

Do ecosystems have rights? Should they? Can they? We would all agree that there are numerous complicated environmental laws that attempt to protect ecosystems and its biodiversity from indiscriminate manipulation or destruction. But do these laws work, and are they adequate? These are easy questions to pose but very difficult to answer, and I am not considered an expert in the "legalese" that must be interpreted into the even more complicated process of deciding when an ecosystem is to be protected, or when it is sentenced to be permanently changed. However, as the Idyllwild Environmental Group begins its process of challenging the logging activities of the US Forest Service, perhaps it is appropriate to define what the most basic goals that we might intend to accomplish.

One way to think about developing goals is to simplify the issues down to the most basic set of "rights" that society might apply to an ecosystem. One of the very first books to explore the issue of whether a non-human thing can have "rights" was David Stone's book "Do Trees Have Standing." In this he made the argument that just as artificially devised corporations are given legal definition and rights to due processes within the courts, so can natural resources be assigned rights to judicial decision-making. This issue is particularly contentious in the situation of the "commons" or resources and land that is shared by everyone in a society (or at least all the taxpayers). In the state of California, plants and wildlife are considered commons that the state manages, even on federally owned and privately owned property. But as much as federal and state environmental laws describe a process to determine the ownership and the best "uses" for natural resources, in the final analysis, decisions can be very arbitrary and not at all "fair" to the ecosystem or the stakeholders who choose to be involved.

  1. Any project or management action that affects piece of the landscape larger than 2 hectare (5 acres) in area shall be granted the following due process:

  2. An ecosystem shall be surveyed at all appropriate seasons for at least one full year before it is manipulated for any new purpose.

  3. A survey of the ecosystem shall include the following information:

a. thematic site maps based upon a recent aerial image with sufficient resolution to identify individual trees or dominant vegetation, and including the best available coverages for topography, hydrological features, soil types, fire history, vegetation types, and land use features.

b. a list of all species that are known or expected to be part of the ecosystem. When site specific sources are not available, then the California Wildlife Relationships Database should be consulted, as well as local field guides.

[Note: This essay appears to be an incomplete draft]