Editorial

Truth, Reality, Belief, Faith: Science In• Public Debate

remember debating the values and importance TRUTH, reality, belief and faith are some of of tree hollows. Debate continued for many the tools we take with us into any negotiation meetings before consensus was met to preserve process even those involving science. For me a hollow bearing trees. But despite the many truth is something we can all agree on, whether pamphlets handed out, landholders misunder­ it is something undeniable or not; reality is stood and thought a hollow bearing tree was a something that is undeniable and has presence hollow tree, that is, it no longer had heart wood despite our definition; belief is something that from bottom to top. If they were aware that we individually have evidence for, but which we hollows only needed to be entrances at the end have not established as a truth; and faith is of branches or cracks in stems, it would have something for which we have no evidence, but significantly changed the nature of the debate. we feel is right. Although these tools of thought With even common ecological terms such as are used equally, most scientists would find it diversity and richness often misunderstood by hard to admit how often we are unsure which practicing ecologists, it is no wonder non­ one we are using. Unfortunately science and its scientists get confused. methods are not easily understood by the uninitiated. Despite OUf insistence on scientific Definitions should be as clear, distinct and as rigour, too few of us are willing to acknowledge close to reality as possible. Yet, boundaries are that many of the methods we use to condense often unclear in agreed definitions and easily and express OUf ideas still revert to intuition, manipulated by sectional interests. For example, feelings, personal biases and misinformation. rainforests are usually defined by ecologists as This is no more so than when we attempt to communities containing rainforest species. develop policy, act as members of committees Or Rainforest species are of course those that occur are called upon to consult on environmental in rainforests (ditto for wetlands), but rainforests issues. often contain residual eucalypts from an earlier successional stage. An ecologist might still Science as a culture consider this a rainforest, but others, seeing the eucalypts, consider them to be eucalypt forests. Scientific knowledge is to many a different The distinction might not matter except when culture with a difficult language, and sometimes there is a policy to protect "rainforest" from a remarkably different set of beliefs and guiding logging, but allow logging in "eucalypt forest". principles. Even when we use common terms, It was a semantic argument over the meaning they can mean vastly different things to us than of "rainforest" which led to the infamous Terania to our partners in decision making. We should Creek debate in northern New South Wales and treat initial contact as if we were from a vastly ultimately to the reservation of most of that different culture. Like all such encounters one State's northern rainforests as World Heritage. of the worst things we can do is to preach the An analogous debate concerns "old growth" undeniable truth and superiority of our way of forest and its conservation. Early definitions for life (like believing we have a more powerful the purpose of conserving forest classed as "old god). We need to tread carefully; otherwize we growth" required that there had been no post­ may find that whatever we say is dismissed out colonial anthropomorphic disturbance. However of hand. It is important to remember that policy allows minimal farming or logging activities opposing opinions about the environment have within old growth, which subsequently makes the relevance as much as do alternative viewpoints forest no longer "old growth" by definition. of religion. Showing our ideas are compatible In the context of existing policy, the definition and mutually beneficial on at least some level adopted was unworkable for the purposes of often helps. conservation.

Are we on the same page? Limits of our knowledge and data Do we all have the same concept of the object We are often forced to use models when data or idea being discussed? Most often the answer are deficient. No matter how complex the is no. Although Socrates assailed this problem algorithms, if you are not aware of the nearly 2 500 years ago, it is still one of the limitations of the information that goes in, you greatest issues in our modern day world. I are using faith and belief if you try and force ------""""--""""~""~"~"-"~~"-"

2 PACIFIC CONSERVATION BIOLOGY

its outcomes on others. When modelling, the Do not lose sight of the whole picture universe stops where data stops, whereas in real life there are no limits. I remember trying to It is easy to be caught up with a single issue reconcile modelled forest corridor placement to and to forget that information about systems is real forest patches. Many significant forest often inadequate. If we end a landscape patches did not have corridors linking them in management practice, that does not mean that the modelled system because these patches lay systems will either return to what they were or just outside the boundary of the model and did remain stable. For example, in northeastern not "exist". Similarly in vegetation mapping, forests of New South Wales, past logging and where ground based surveys have been sparse, grazing practices were associated with high models are often highly suspect, with accuracy frequency (every 2-5 years), but low intensity falling away logarithmically from ground based fires. However, the natural fire regime may have sites. So often models are discarded despite the been anything (depending on the assemblage) effort that has gone into them because of the from between 15 to 300+ years with a mix of insistence that they present the truth (they are high and low intensity fires. Many of these lands doctrine), yet they are eventually shown to be have been taken under the National Parks flawed in some way. This is no truer than in reserve system after regional forest agreements, debates about vegetation mapping. To the but although the overstorey may be what it has uninitiated and even to many practitioners, always been, the recruiting eucalypts may only maps and boundaries become reality. be a small selection of species that were able to survive a high fire frequency. Weeds that were Ecologists try and limit the applicability of not a problem under previous grazing and their work to the system under investigation. burning regimes now present management Despite our training, when faced with limited problems. Yet, is the best management policy an information and limited time, we are forced attempt to return to pre-European conditions to provide management guidelines based on (assuming these are even known) or is it better information from entirely different systems. to allow natural successional processes to As scientists we believe that what we are proceed unimpeded? Biological systems are seeking is truth and reality, but forget that these often driven by large scale temporal process in (especially when involved in emotional issues climate. Despite the seeming persistence of like forest logging) are just models which are many dominant floristic elements over short based on the amount and quality of current time spans, natural turnover in dominance may information. We should acknowledge the limits occur over decades or even centuries particularly of our data and understanding; otherwise our in semi-arid and arid areas. Management on products and thoughts become doctrine and these time scales is difficult, if not impossible. dogma. The strength of the scientific method is that knowledge increases with time and effort. Communicating We should not criticize others for revising their It would be good if we could all be trained in ideas or attitudes to issues with new knowledge expressing our knowledge to the public. as this is something we should all be doing. Unfortunately, our universities do not value this Scientists should provide public comment, but skill and in my own training, it was discouraged need to remember the limits of their knowledge by some as an unworthy task. Thus, too many and not feel that providing caveats or of us learn on the job and make mistakes as we precautionary comment is a weakness. go. For many, the process is so disheartening that they never attempt to speak to the public, Maximization is not the onIy answer often for fear of criticism from their colleagues. Our culture is driven by the paradigm that The failure of our education system should not more is better. More is not always better, yet we be a reason to dissuade us from taking part in strive to produce benchmarks and management decision making processes and to provide good decisions that maximize increases within a information and opinion where necessary. We locale. This is very similar to a farmer practicing should always remain true to what it is to be a greater returns per unit area, or greater stock scientist and enable logic and the scientific numbers per paddock. I think most ecologists method to be upheld. Remember however, that would think such farming decisions are njave for we are not all-knowing and there is a need to believing that there will not be negative distinguish between faith, belief, truth and consequences associated with such actions. Yet as reality. We are only human and that holistically, ecologists we often fall into the same trap: for science and scientists are just one ingredient. example, that greater richness per site (species density) or greater vegetation cover is the Dr John T. Hunter primary goal or that such scores are meaningful School of Human & Environmental Studies, in a positive way. This is a belief or faith that University of New England, Armidale, more is better. New South Wales 2351.