Encyclopedia ofEnvironmental Biology, vol. 1 (Academic Press, 1995), pp. 517-528 Duties to Endangered

Holmes Rolston III Colorado State University

I. Ethical Duties and Biological Species II. The Threat of Extinction III. Questions of Fact: What Are Species? IV. Questions of Duty: Ought Species Be Saved? V. Species in Ecosystems VI. Natural and Human-Caused Extinctions VII. Respect for Rare Life

Whether humans have duties to endangered comprehensive question ofthe conservation of species is a significant theoretical and urgent biodiversity, how humans can achieve a practical question. Few persons doubt that we sustainable relationship to the natural world.. have some obligations concerning endangered species, because persons are helped or hurt by the condition of their environment, which I. ETHICAL DUTIES AND includes a wealth of wild species, currently BIOLOGICAL SPECIES under alarming threat of extinction. The U.S. Congress, deploring the lack of "adequate A rationale for saving species that centers on concern [for] and conservation [of]" species, their worth to humans is anthropocentric, in has sought to protect species through the which species have instrumental values; a Endangered Species Act. Congress has also rationale that includes their intrinsic and entered into a Convention on International ecosystemic values, those values theymayhave Trade in Endangered Species. The United in themselves or in their functions in Nations has negotiated a Biodiversity ecosystems, in addition to or independently of Convention, signed by over 100 nations. persons, is naturalistic. Some say there are no Taking or jeopardizing endangered species (at duties to endangered species, only duties to least the listed ones) is illegal and, many think, persons. The preservation of species, by the immoral. usual utilitarian account, is commended only But these might be all obligations to persons insofar as human beings have or might have who are benefited or harmed by species as interests at stake. This includes duties to future resources. Is there a human duty directly to human beings, duties derived from our species, in addition to obligations that humans stewardship role as keepers of the planet for have to other humans, fellow members oftheir later people. Any duties concerning species own species? This would be part of an will then be a matter of finding out whatever interspecific environmental ethics, and human values are at stake with the loss of involves a challenging mix of science and species and of applying classical duties to conscience. An answer is vital to the more persons to protect these values. [See MASS humans, when out of a sense of duty an value, and ifhumans encounter and jeopardize individual defers to the values of fellow such value, it would seem that humans ought humans. But it is true interspecifically, since, not destroy values in nature, at least not under this rationale, Homo sapiens treats all without overriding justification producing other species as "rivets," resources, study greater value. We might make a humanistic materials, or entertainment. mistake if we arrogantly take value to lie Ethics has always been about partners with exclusively in the satisfaction of our human entwined destinies. But it has never been very preferences. What is at jeopardy and what are convincing when pleaded as enlightened self­ our duties? interest (that one should always do what is in one's intelligent self-interest), including class II. THE THREAT OF EXTINCTION self-interest, even though in practice altruistic ethics often need to be reinforced by Although projections vary, reliable estimates self-interest. To value all other species only for are that ~20% of Earth's species may be lost human interests is rather like a nation's arguing within a few decades, ifpresent trends go un­ all its foreign policy in terms of national reversed. These losses will be about evenly dis­ self-interest. Neither seems fully moral. tributed through major groups of and Nevertheless, those who try to articulate a animals in both developed and developing na­ deeper environmental ethic often get lost in tions, although the most intense concerns are in unfamiliar territory. Natural kinds, if that is tropical forests. At least 500 species, sub­ what species are, are obscure objects of species, and varieties offauna have been lost in concern. Species, as such, cannot be directly the since 1600. The natural rate helped or hurt, although individual tokens of would have been about 10. In Hawaii, of 68 the species type can be. Species, as such, don't species of birds unique to the islands, 41 are care, although individual animals can care. extinct or virtually so. Halfofthe 2200 native Species require habitats, embedded in eco­ plants are endangered or threatened. Covering systems that evolve and change. Ninety- eight all states, a candidate list of plants contains percent ofthe species that have inhabited Earth over 2000 taxa considered to be endangered, are extinct, replaced by other species. Nature threatened, or of concern, although relatively doesn't care, so why should we? All of the few ofthese have been formally listed. A can­ familiar moral landmarks are gone. We have didate list of animals contains about 1800 moved beyond caring about humans, orculture, entries. Humans approach, and in places have or moral agents, or individual animals that are even exceeded, the catastrophic rates ofnatural close kin, or can suffer, or can experience any­ extinction spasms ofthe geological past. thing, or are sentient. Species are not valuers Throughout the Endangered Species Act, with preferences that can be satisfied or frus­ from the title onward, the mood is one of trated. It seems odd to say that species have danger. The Act laments the irretrievable ex­ rights, or moral standing, or need our sym­ tinction of any species, climaxing in a "no­ pathy, or that we should consider their point of jeopardy" clause. That clause has proved the view. None of these elements has figured toughest part ofthe Act, where nearly all ofthe within the coordinates of prevailing ethical litigation has arisen. This instructs all federal systems. agencies to take whatever action is necessary In fact, ethics and biology have had uncertain "to insure that actions authorized, funded, or relationships. Anoften-heard argument forbids carried out by them do not jeopardize the moving from what is the case (a description of continued existence ofsuch endangered species scientific facts) to what ought to be (a pre­ or threatened species." Existence is at stake, scription of moral duty); any who do so both ofspecies and ofhabitats that are critical commit, it is alleged, the naturalistic fallacy. for them. On the other hand, if species are of objective It may be thought that, although the terms are maleficent, humans are not in jeopardy; only facts (a scientific issue-about species), one is the plants and animals are. Humans have about values (an ethical issue-involving duties). important, but not life-jeopardizing, benefits to It is difficult enough to argue from an is (that a be gained from saving species. Congress did species exists) to an ought (that a species ought want to protect values at stake to the nation and to exist). Matters grow worse ifthe concept of its people. Yet, in the snail darter case species is troublesome to begin with, and there (Tennessee Valley Authority versus Hill), the are several differing concepts ofspecies within U.S. Supreme Court found in the Act "repeated biology. Perhaps any concept is arbitrary, con­ expressions ofcongressional concern overwhat ventional-a mapping device that is only theo­ it saw as the enormous danger presented by the retical. Darwin wrote, "I look at the term eradication of any endangered species." species, as one arbitrarily given for the sake of Although Congress has not said that humans convenience to a set of individuals closely re­ have duties to species (such an ethical sembling each other." Is there enough factual judgment might not be the prerogative of reality in species to base duty there? [See Congress), the Court insisted "that Congress SPECIATION.] intended endangered species to be afforded the No one doubts that individual organisms highest of priorities." All of this suggests exist, but are species discovered? Or made up? considerable peril, and responsibility Indeed, do species exist at all? Systematists proportionate to the peril. regularly revise species designations and Nor is this simply an Act for the utilitarian routinely put after a species the name of the con servation ofimportant economic resources. "author" who, they say, "erected" the taxon. If Congress declared that species have "esthetic, a species is only a category or class, boundary ecological, educational, historical, recreational lines may be arbitrarily drawn, and the species and scientific value" but refused to put on the is nothing more than a convenient grouping of list that value that has since become the one its members, an artifact of the classifier's most often given: economic value. Rather, thoughts and aims. Some natural properties are revealing what Congress thought was at stake, used-reproductive structures, bones, teeth, or economic value is sharply set opposite to these perhaps ancestry, genes, ecological roles. But others. Congress laments "economic growth which properties are selected and where the and development untempered byadequate con­ lines are drawn are decisions that vary with cern and conservation," and it has consistently systematists. refused to allow the economic benefits or costs Botanists are divided whetherIliamna remota, ofthe preservation ofa species to be one ofthe the Kankakee mallow in Illinois, and Iliamna criteria that determine whether it is listed. corei in , which are both rare, are Since economic concerns must sometimes be distinct species. Perhaps all that exists con- sidered, Congress III the 1978 objectively in the world are the individual amendments authorized a high-level mallow plants; whether there are two species or interagency committee to evaluate difficult one is a fuss about which label to use. A cases, and, should this committee deem fit, to species is some kind offiction, like a center of permit economic development at the cost of gravity or a statistical average. Almost no one extinction of species that impede such proposes duties to genera, families, orders, and development. But it clearly places a high phyla; biologists concede that these do not burden of proof on those who wish to put exist in nature, even though we may think that species at peril for development reasons. two species in different orders represent more biodiversity than two in the same genus. Ifthis III. QUESTIONS OF FACT: approach is pressed, species can become WHAT ARE SPECIES? something like the lines of longitude and latitude or like map contour lines, or time of There are problems at two levels: one is about day, or dates on a calendar. Sometimes en- EXTINCTION, BIOTIC AND ABIOTIC.]

Persons have a strong duty not to hann others to read, about the place where we live. This is (called a duty of nonmaleficence) and a called the Rosetta stone argument (named after weaker, though important, duty to help others the famous obelisk found at the town of (called a duty of beneficence). Many Rosetta in Egypt in 1799, which enabled the endangered species-which ones we may not deciphering of forgotten languages of the now know-are expected to have agricultural, ancient past). Humans need insight into the full industrial, and medical benefits. Relatively few text ofnatural history. Theyneed to understand plants have been tested for their usefulness. the evolving world in which they are placed. It Loss of the wild stocks of cultivars leaves is safe to say that, in the decades ahead, the humans genetically vulnerable, so it is prudent quality oflife will decline in proportion to the to save native materials. According to this loss of biotic diversity, although it is reasoning, the protection ofnature is ultimately sometimes thought that one must sacrifice for the purpose ofthe enlightened exploitation biotic diversity to improve human life. of nature. Norman Myers urges "conserving Following this logic, humans do not have our global stock." duties to the book, the stone, or the species, but Where they are not directly useful, wild to ourselves-duties both of prudence and species may be indirectly important for the education. Such anthropogenic reasons are roles they play in ecosystems-as part of the pragmatic and impressive. Theyare also moral, human life support system. They are "rivets" in since persons are benefited or hanned. But are the airplane, the Earthship in which we humans there also naturalistic reasons? Can all duties are flying, and one ought not to pop rivets in concerning species be analyzed as duties to people's planes. The loss ofa few species may persons? Many endangered species have no have no evident results now, but the loss of resource value, nor are they particularly many species imperils the resilience and important for the other reasons given above. stability of the ecosystems on which humans Beggar's ticks ( spp.), with their stick­ depend. The danger increases exponentially tight seeds, are a common nuisance weed with subtractions from the ecosystem, a through much of the United States. However, slippery slope into serious troubles. Even one species, the tidal shore beggar's-tick species that have no obvious or current direct (Bidens bidentoides), which differs little from value to humans are part of the biodiversity the others in appearance, is increasingly en­ that keeps ecosystems healthy. [See dangered. It seems unlikely that it is either a ECOLOGICAL ENERGETICS OF rivet or a potential resource to humans. So far ECOSYSTEMS.] as humans are concerned, its extinction might On the benefit side, there are less tangible be good riddance. benefits. Species that are too rare to play roles Are there completely worthless species-not in ecosystems can have recreational and good for anything at all? If so, is there any aesthetic value-even, for many persons, reason or duty to save them? Are the religious value. Species can be curiosities. The humanistic reasons exhaustive? A primary en­ rare species fascinate enthusiastic naturalists vironmental ethics answers that species are and are often key scientific study species. They good in their own right, whether or not they are may serve as indicators of ecosystem health. any good for humans. The duties-to-persons­ They provide entertainment and new know­ only line of argument leaves deeper reasons ledge, regardless of their stabilizing or eco­ untouched. The deeper problem with the nomic benefits. They can be clues to under­ anthropocentric rationale is that its standing natural history. Destroying species is justifications are submoral and fundamentally like tearing pages out of an unread book, exploitive and self-serving, even if subtly so. written in a language humans hardlyknow how This is not true intraspecifically among dangered species designations have altered cretionary. We can expect that one species will when systematists decided to lump or split modify into another over evolutionary time, previous groupings. To whatever degree spe­ often gradually, sometimes more quickly. But cies are artifacts ofthose doing the , it does not follow from the fact that speciation duties to save them seem unconvincing. is sometimes in progress that species are There are four main concepts of species: (l) merely made up, instead of found as morphological, asking whether organisms have evolutionary lines articulated into diverse the same anatomy and functions; (2) biological forms, each with its more or less distinct (so-called), asking whether organisms can integrity, breeding population, gene pool, and interbreed; (3) evolutionary, asking whether role in its ecosystem. It is quite objective to organisms have the same lineage historically; claim that evolutionary lines are articulated and (4) genetic, asking whether they have a into diverse kinds oflife. What taxonomists do, common genome. But these concepts are not or should do, is, as Plato said, to "carve nature mutually exclusive; organisms that have at the joints." enough common ancestry will have a similar G. G. Simpson concluded, "An evolutionary mor- phology and function; they will be able to species is a lineage (an ancestral-descendant interbreed, and they can do so because they sequence of populations) evolving separately have similar genomes. from others and with its own unitary All of these concepts combine for a more evolutionary role and tendencies." Niles realist account than the artifact-of-taxonomy Eldredge and Joel Cracraft insist, with em­ subjectivist account. A species is not just a phasis, that species are "discrete entities in time class that taxonomists decide on; it is a living as well as space." As convincing an account as historical form (Latin: species), propagated in any finds that species, though not individual individual organisms, that flows dynamically organisms, are another natural kind of over generations. Species are dynamic natural historical individual, each a unique event in kinds, historicallyparticular lineages. A species natural history, and that species names are is a coherent ongoing natural kind expressed in proper names. The various criteria for defining organisms that interbreed because that kind is species (recent descent, reproductive isolation, encoded in gene flow, the genes determining morphology, and distinct gene pool) come the organism's morphology and functions, the together at least in providing evidence that kind shaped by its environment. In this sense species are really there. What survives for a species are obj ectivelythere as living processes few months, years, or decades is the individual in the evolutionary ecosystem-found, not made animal or ; what survives for millennia is by taxonomists. Species are real historical the kind as a lineage. Life is something passing entites, interbreeding populations. Bycontrast, through the individual as much as something it families, orders, and genera are not levels at possesses on its own. Even a species defends which biological reproduction takes place. So itself; that is one way to interpret reproduction. far from being arbitrary, species are the real The individual organism resists death; the evolutionary units. This claim-that there are species resists extinction through reproduction specific forms oflife historically maintained in with variation. At both levels, biological their environments over time-is not fictional, identity is conserved over time. but, rather, seems as certain as anything else we believe about the empirical world, even though at times scientists revise the theories and taxa IV. QUESTIONS OF DUTY: OUGHT with which they map these forms. SPECIES BE SAVED? Species are more like mountains and rivers, phenomena that are objectively there to be Why ought species be protected? Beyond a mapped. The edges of such natural kinds will humanistic set of answers, when we confront sometimes be fuzzy, to some extent dis- the objective history of speciation and evolution of speCIes, IS there some of wonder? It seems unexcellent-cheap and nonhumanistic reason to save endangered philistine-to say that excellence of human species? One reply here is that nature is a kind character is what we are after when we ofwonderland. As curiosities and relics ofthe preserve these endangered species. We want past, even species that are presently not good virtue in the human beholder that recognizes for anything in particular can be given an value in the endangered species. Excellence of umbrella protection by saying that humans human character does indeed result, but let the ought to preserve an environment adequate to human virtue come tributary to value found in match their capacity to wonder. nature. An enriched humanity results, with But nature as a wonderland introduces the values in the species and values in persons question of whether preserving resources for compounded-but only if the loci of value are wonder is not better seen as preserving a not confounded. remarkable natural history that has objective A naturalistic account values species and worth-an evolutionary process that has speciation intrinsically, not as resources or as a spontaneously assembled as its products mil­ means to human excellence. Humans ought to lions of species. Valuing speciation directly, respect these dynamic life forms preserved in however, seems to attach value to the evo­ historical lines, vital informational processes lutionaryprocess (the wonderland), not merely that persist genetically over millions of years, to subjective experiences that arise when overleaping short-lived individuals. It is not humans reflect over it (the wonder). It will be form (species) as mere morphology, but the better, beyond our pragmatic self-enlightened formative (speciating) process that humans strategies for conservation, beyond our obli­ ought to preserve, although the process cannot gations to other humans, beyond even our be preserved without some ofits products, and wonder, to know the full truth of the human the products (species) are valuable as results of obligation, to have the best reasons for saving the creative process. An ethic about species species, as well as the good ones. sees that the species is a bigger event than the We might saythat humans ofdecent character individual organism, although species are will refrain from needless destruction of all always exemplified in individual organisms. kinds, including destruction of species. Biological conservation goes on at this level Vandals destroy ing art objects do not so much too, and in a sense this level is more hurt statues as do they cheapen their own appropriate for moral concern, since the species character. By this account the duty to save is a comprehensive evolutionary unit but the endangered species is really a matter of single organism is not. [See SPECIES DI­ cultivating human excellences. It is philistine VERSITY.] to destroy species carelessly; persons of A consideration of species is both revealing character will not do it. It is uncalled for. But and challenging, because it offers a biologically such a prohibition seems to depend on some based counterexample to the focus on indi­ value in the species as such, for there need be viduals-typically sentient animals and usually no prohibition against destroying a valueless individual persons-that has been so charac­ thing. Is there not here some insensitivity to a teristic in Western ethics. As evolution takes form of life that (unlike a statue) has an place in ecosystems, it is not mere individuality intrinsic value that places some claim on that counts. The individual represents (re-pre­ humans? sents) a species in each new generation. It is a Why are such insensitive actions "uncalled token ofa type, and the type is more important for" unless there is something in the species than the token. Though species are not moral itself that "calls for" a more appropriate agents, a biological identity-a kind ofvalue-is attitude. If the excellence of character really here defended. The dignity resides in the dy­ comes from appreciating somethingwonderful, namic form; the individual inherits this, ex­ then why not attach value to this other, so full emplifies it, and passes it on. The evolutionary history that the particular individual has is exists but ought to exist. A naturalistic ethic something passing through it during its life, refuses to say this exclusively ofa late-coming passed to it and passed on during reproduction, highly developed form and extends this duty as much as something it intrinsicallypossesses. more broadly to the other species-although not Having a biological identity reasserted gene­ with equal intensity over them all, in view of tically over time is as true ofthe species as of varied levels ofdevelopment. the individual. Respecting that identity gene­ The wrong that humans are doing, or are rates duties to species. allowing to happen through carelessness, is When a rhododendron plant dies, another one stopping historical gene flow in which the replaces it. But when Rhododendron chap­ vitality of life is laid, and which, viewed at manii-an endangered species in the U.S. another level, is the same as the flow ofnatural Southeast-goes extinct, the species terminates kinds. A shutdown of the life stream is the forever. Death ofa token is radically different most destructive event possible. Although all from death of a type; death of an individual, specific stories must eventuallyend, we seldom different from death of an entire lineage. The want unnatural ends. The difference between deaths of individual rhododendrons in natural extinction and human-caused extinction perennial turnover are even necessary if the is something like that between death by natural species is to persist. Seeds are dispersed and causes and murder. Humans ought not to play replacement rhododendrons grow elsewhere in the role ofmurderers. The duty to species can the pinewood forest, as landscapes change or be overridden, for example, with pests or succession shifts. Later-coming replacements, disease organisms. But a prima facia duty mutants as well as replacements, are selected stands nevertheless. [See EVOLUTION AND for or against in a stable or changing EXTINCTION.] environment. Individuals improve in fitness What is wrong with human-caused extinction and the species adapts to an altering climate or is not just the loss ofhuman resources, but the competitive pressures. Tracking its loss ofbiological sources. The question is not, environment over time, the species is What is this rare plant or animal good for? But, conserved, modified, and continues. What good is here? Not, Is this species good With extinction, this stops. Extinction shuts for my kind, Homo sapiens? But, Is Rhodo­ down the generative processes, a kind of dendron chapmanii a good ofits kind, a good superkilling. This kills forms (species)-notjust kind? True, we are censuring insensitivity in individuals. This kills "essences" beyond persons, but we are appreciating an objective "existences," the "soul" as well as the "body. " vitality in the world, one that precedes and This kills collectively, not just distributively. overleaps our personal or cultural presence. To To kill a particular plant is to stop a life of a care directly about a plant or animal species is few years, while other lives of such kind to be quite nonanthropocentric and objective continue unabated, and the possibilities for the about botanical and zoological processes that future are unaffected; to superkill a particular take place independentlyofhuman preferences. species is to shut down a story of many Never before has this level ofquestion been millennia and leave no future possibilities. faced. Previously, humans did not have much A species lacks moral agency, reflective self­ powerto cause extinctions, orknowledge about awareness, sentience, or organic individuality. what they were inadvertently doing. But today Some are tempted to say that specific-level humans have more understanding than ever of processes cannot count morally. But each the natural world they inhabit, ofthe speciating ongoing species defends a form of life, and processes, more predictive powerto foresee the these forms are, on the whole, good kinds. intended and unintended results of their Such speciation has achieved all the planetary actions, and more power to reverse the richness of life. All ethicists say that in Homo undesirable consequences. Increasingly, we sapiens one species has appeared that not only know the natural histories of flora and fauna; we find that, willy-nilly, we have a vital role in a wild biome. They only lock up a collection of whether these stories continue. The duties that individuals; they amputate the species from its such power and vision generate no longer habitat. The species can only be preserved in attach simply to individuals or persons but are situ; the species ought to be preserved in situ. emerging duties to specific forms oflife. That does move from scientific facts to ethical A consideration of species strains any ethic duties, but what ought to be has to be based on fixed on individual organisms, much less on what can be. sentience or persons. But the result can be Neither individual nor species stands alone; biologically sounder, although it revises what both are embedded in an ecosystem. Plants, was formerly thought logically permissible or which are autotrophs, have a certain inde­ ethically binding. When ethics are informed by pendence that animals and other heterotrophs this kind ofbiology, it is appropriate to attach do not have. Plants need only water, sunshine, duty dynamically to the specific form of life. soil, nutrients, and local conditions ofgrowth; The species line is the more fundamental living animals, often mobile and higher up the trophic system, the whole, ofwhich individual organ­ pyramid, may range more widely, but in this isms are the essential parts. The species too has alternate form ofindependence depend on the its integrity, its individuality; and it is more primary production of plants. Every natural important to protect this than to protect form of life came to be what it is where it is, individual integrity. The appropriate survival shaped as an adaptive fit, even when species unit is the appropriate level ofmoral concern. acquire a fitness that enables them to track into differing environments. (Aproblem with exotic V. SPECIES IN ECOSYSTEMS species, introduced by humans, is often that they are not good fits in their alien A species is what it is inseparably from the ecosystems.) The product, a species, is the environmental niche into which it fits. A outcome of entwined genetic and ecological species is what it is where it is. Particular processes; the generative impulse springs from species may not be essential in the sense that the gene pool, defended by information coded the ecosystem can survive the loss ofindividual there. But the whole population or species species without adverse effect. But habitats are survives when selected by natural forces in the essential to species, and an endangered species environment for a niche it can occupy. often means an endangered habitat. Species In an ethic ofendangered species, we want to play lesser or greater roles in their habitats. admire the evolutionary or creative process as Integrity in the species fits into integrity in the much as the product. This involves regular ecosystem. The species and the community are species turnover when a species becomes unfit complementary goods in synthesis, parallel to, in its habitat, goes extinct, or tracks a changing but a level above, the way the species and environment until transformed into something individual organisms have distinguishable but else. On evolutionary time scales species too entwined goods. It is not preservation of are ephemeral. But the speciating process is species that we wish, but the preservation of not. Persisting through vicissitudes for 2.5 species in the system. It is not merely what they billion years, speciation is about as long-con­ are, but where they are that we must value tinuing as anything on earth can be. correctly. This limits the otherwise important role that VI. NATURAL AND HUMAN zoos and botanical gardens can play in the CAUSED EXTINCTIONS conservation of species. They can provide re­ search, a refuge for species, breeding programs, It might seem that for humans to terminate aid on public education, and so forth, but they species now and again is quite natural. Species cannot simulate the ongoing dynamism ofgene become extinct all the time in natural history. flow over time under the selection pressures in But although extinction is a quite natural event, there are important theoretical and practical infrequent catastrophic extinction events, a­ differences between natural and anthropogenic nomalies in the record, each succeeded by a (human-caused) extinctions. Artificial extinc­ recovery of previous diversity. Although tion, caused by human disturbance or en­ natural events, these extinctions so deviate croachments, is radically different from natural from the normal trends that many extinction. In natural extinction a species dies paleontologists look for causes external to the out when it has become unfit in habitat, and evolutionary ecosystem-supernovae or other existing or future species appear in its collisions with asteroids. Typically, however, place. There are replacements. Such extinction the biological processes that characterize Earth is normal turnover in ongoing speciation. are both prolific and with considerable powers Although harmful to a species, extinction in ofrecovery after catastrophe. Uninterrupted by nature is seldom an evil in the system. It is accident, or even interrupted so, they steadily rather the key to tomorrow. The species is increase the numbers ofspecies. employed in, but abandoned to, the larger An ethicist must be circumspect. An argument historical evolution oflife. might commit what logicians call the genetic By contrast, artificial extinction typically fallacy to suppose that present value depended shuts down future evolution because it shuts on origins. Species judged today to have down speciating processes dependent on those intrinsic value might have arisen anciently and species. One opens doors, the other closes anomalously from a valueless context, akin to them. Humans generate and regenerate nothing; the way in which life arose mysteriously from they only dead-end these lines. Relevant dif­ nonliving materials. But in an ecosystem, what ferences make the two as morally distinct as a thing is differentiates poorly from the death by natural causes is from murder. generating and sustaining matrix. The Anthropogenic extinction differs from individual and the species have what value they evolutionary extinction in that hundreds of have to some extent inevitably in the context of thousands of species will perish because of the forces that beget them. There is something culturally altered environments that are awesome about an Earth that begins with zero radically different from the spontaneous and runs up toward 5-10 million species in environments in which such species evolved several billion years, setbacks notwithstanding. and in which they sometimes go extinct. In Were the sole moral species, Homo sapiens, to natural extinction nature takes away life, when conserve all Earth's species merely as resources it has become unfit in habitat, or when the for human preference satisfaction, we would habitat alters, and typically supplies other life not yet know the truth about what has been, is, in its place. Natural extinction occurs with or ought to be going on in biological con­ transformation, either of the extinct line or servation. related or competing lines. Artificial extinction is without issue. VII. RESPECT FOR RARE LIFE From this perspective, humans have no duty to preserve rare species from natural Duties to endangered species will be especially extinctions, although they might have a duty to concerned with a respect for a rare life. Such other humans to save such species as resources respect must ask about the role of rarity in or museum pieces. No species has a "right to generating respect, if this differs from a more life" apart from the continued existence ofthe general respect for common life. Rarity is not, eco- system with which it cofits. But humans as such, an intrinsically valuable property in do have a duty to avoid artificial extinction. fauna and flora, or in human experiences (even Over evolutionary time nature, though extin­ though people take an interest in things just guishing species, has provided new species at because they are rare). Certain diseases are a higher rate than the extinction rate, hence the rare, and we are glad ofit. Monsters and other accumulated global diversity. There have been sports ofnature, such as albinos, are rare, and of no particular intrinsic value for their rarity terms of rights. Aldo Leopold, advocating re­ (curiosities though they sometimes become). spect for the fauna and flora on the landscape, Indeed, if a species is naturally rare, that says"A land ethic ofcourse cannot prevent the initally suggests its insignificance in an alteration, management, and use of these ecosystem. Rarity is no automatic cause for 'resources,' but it does affirm their right to respect. Nevertheless, something about the continued existence, and, at least in spots, their rarity of endangered species heightens the continued existence in a natural state." They element ofrespect, and accompanying duty. "should continue as a matter of biotic right." Naturally rare species, as much as common or Charles S. Elton, an ecologist, reports a belief frequent species, signify exuberance in nature; that he himself shares: "There are millions of each species presents an actual unique people in the world who think that animals expression ofthe prolific potential driving the have a right to exist and be left alone." This evolutionary epic. A rare species may be barely appeal to a biotic right must be taken as hanging on, surviving by mere luck, and we evidence ofthe strength ofconvictionthat there have already noticed that there is no duty to are duties to species. Nevertheless, many save species going extinct naturally. But a rare philosophers have concluded that the species maybe quite competent in its niche, not vocabulary ofrights, though useful rhetorically, at all nearing extinction ifleft on its own; it is is not the most appropriate category ofanalysis only facing extinction when made artificially for values at the species level. "Rights" is best more rare by human disruptions. The rare developed as a category for protecting personal flower is a botanical achievement, a bit of values; rights are not objectively present in the brilliance, an ecological problem resolved, an natural world. But endangered species are evolutionary threshold crossed. The endemic obj ectivelyvaluable kinds, good inthemselves; species, perhaps one specialized for an unusual they do have their own welfare. Respect for life habitat, represents a rare discovery in nature, ought to be directly based on this value. before it provides a rare human adventure in The seriousness of respect for rare life is finding it. further illustrated when the idea approaches a Rhododendron chapmanii is a particular "reverence" for life. As noticed earlier, when evolutionary achievement. Though rare, it is a the U.S. Congress declared that species have satisfactory fit, well placed in its niche in the multiple values, it left economic value off the transition zone between the dry longleaf pine list. Another notable omission is religious forests and the moist Cyrilla thickets. Millions value. Congress would have overstepped its ofyears ofstruggle lie behind it; the results of authority to declare that species carry religious that history are now geneticallycodedwithin it. value. Nevertheless, for many, Americans and Rare species-if one insists on a restricted others around the globe, this is the most evolutionary theory-are random accidents (as important value at stake. Species are the are the naturally common ones), resulting from creation itself, the "swarms ofliving creatures" a cumulation ofmutations. But this mutational (biodiversity) that "the earth brought forth" at fertility generates creativity, and, equallybythe the divine imperative; "God saw that it was theory, surviving species must be satisfactory good" and "blessed them." Noah's ark was the fits in their environments. Sometimes they live aboriginal endangered species project; God on the cutting edge of exploratory probing; commanded, "Keep them alive with you." sometimes they are relics of the past. Either God's name does not appear directly in the way they offer promise and memory ofan in­ Endangered Species Act but nevertheless ventive natural history. Life is a many­ occurs in connection with the Act. The high­ splendored thing; extinction of the rare dims level interagencycommittee maypermit human this luster. From this arises the respect that development at the cost of extinction of generates a duty to save rare lives. species. In the legislation this committee is This respect for life is sometimes expressed in given the rather nondescript name "The En- dangered Species Committee," but almost at responsibility for nature, as reflected by much once it was nicknamed "the God Committee." ofthe conservation movement." Ifanything at The name mixes jest with theological insight all on Earth is sacred, it must be this enthralling and reveals that religious value is implicitly creativity that characterizes our home planet. lurking in the Act. Humans are trustees of Species are a characteristic expression ofthe creation and ought to "play God" with extreme creative process. The swarms of species are care. Any who decide to destroy species take, both presence and symbol offorces in natural fearfully, the prerogative ofGod. When one is systems that transcend human powers and conserving life, ultimacy is always nearby. utility. Generated from earth, air, fire, and Extinction is forever; and, when danger is ulti­ water, these fauna and flora are an archetype of mate, absolutes become relevant. The moti­ the foundations ofthe world. Earth is a fertile vation to save endangered species can and planet, and in that sense the genesis on Earth is ought to be pragmatic, economic, political, and the deepest valuational category of all, one scientific; deeper down it is moral, philo­ classically reached by the concept ofcreation. sophical, and religious. Species embody a fer­ Many find it impossible to be a conservation tility on Earth that is sacred. biologist without a respect for life. Whatever This genesis is, in biological perspective, biologists may make of the mystery of life's spontaneous and autonomous; and biologists origins, they almost unanimouslyconclude that find nature to be prolific, whether or not the the catastrophic loss ofspecies that is at hand God question is raised. Whether the conviction and by our hand is tragic, irreversible, and rises to a reverence for life or not, the respect unforgivable. That generates duties to endan­ for life injeopardybecomes intense. Life is the gered species. peculiar value on our planet, among the rare On the scale of evolutionary time, humans phenomena in the universe, indeed, not yet appear late and suddenly, a few hundred thou­ elsewhere known. Natural history is a vast sand years on a scale ofbillions ofyears, ana­ scene of birth and death, sprouting, budding, logous to a few seconds in a 24-hour day. Even flowering, fruiting, passing away, passing life more lately and suddenly, they increase the on. Biologists know, better than others, that extinction rate dramatically, in this one century Earth has brought forth the natural kinds in several thousand years ofrecorded history. exuberantly over the millennia. Ultimately, What is offensive in such conduct is not merely there is a kind of creativity in nature senseless destabilizing, not merely the loss of demanding at least that one spell nature with a resources, but the maelstrom of killing and capital N, ifone does not pass beyond nature to insensitivity to forms oflife. What is required detect some deeper sacred presence. is not prudence, but principled responsibility to Biologists today are not inclined, nor should the biospheric Earth. Only the human species they be as biologists, to look for explanations contains moral agents, but conscience ought in supemature, but biologists meanwhile find a not be used to exempt every other form oflife nature that is superb! This commands a deep from consideration, with the resulting paradox respect. Science, many think, eliminates from that the sole moral species acts only in its nature any suggestions of teleology, but it is collective self-interest toward all the rest. not so easy for science to dismiss genesis. Several billion years' worth of creative toil, What has managed to happen on Earth is several million species of teeming life, have startling by any criteria. Ernst Mayr concludes, been handed overto the care ofthe late-coming "Virtually all biologists are religious, in the species in which mind has flowered and morals deeper sense of the word, even though it may have emerged. Onthe humanistic account, such be a religion without revelation. ... The species ought to be saved for their benefits to unknown and maybe unknowable instills in us humans. On the naturalistic account, the sole a sense ofhumility and awe." "And ifone is a moral species has a duty to do something less truly thinking biologist, one has a feeling of self-interested than count all the products ofan evolutionary ecosystem as human resources; Ehrlich, P., Ehrlich, A. (1981). "Extinction." rather, the host ofspecies has a claim to care in Random House, . [A comprehensive its own right. There is something Newtonian, study of extinctions, with the rationale for not yet Einsteinian, besides something morally saving species.] naive, about living in a reference frame in which one species takes itself as absolute and Eldredge, N., Cracraft, J (1980). "Phylogenetic values everything else relative to its utility. Patterns and the Evolutionary Process." Columbia University Press, New York.

Elton, C. S. (1958). "The Ecology ofInvasions Glossary by Animals and Plants." Wiley, New York.

Anthropogenic extinction Extinction caused Ghiselin, M. (1987). Species concepts, in­ by human-introduced causes, as distinguished dividuality, and objectivity. Bio!. Phi/os. 2, from natural extinction. 127-144. Catastrophic extinction Extinction at ex­ tremelyhigh rates, differing from normal rates, Hull, D. L. (1978). A matter of individuality. at unusual periods in natural history. Philos. Sci. 45, 335-360. Instrumental value Value as a means to an end. Species have instrumental value for hu­ Leopold, A. (1968). "A Sand County mans if they have medical, industrial, agri­ Almanac." Oxford University Press, New cultural, recreational, or other uses. York. Intrinsic value Value that is inherent in some­ thing, without necessary reference to its in­ Mayr, E. (1982). "The Growth of Biological strumental value. Intrinsic value in species Thought." Harvard University Press, Cam­ claims that natural kinds are good in them­ ridge, Massachusetts. selves, whether or not they are useful to hu­ mans. Mayr E. (1985). How biology differs from the Natural extinction Extinction that takes place physical sciences. In "Evolution at a due to natural causes, without humancauses, as Crossroads" (J. Depew and B. H. Weber, eds.). has occurred throughout evolutionary history. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Naturalistic fallacy An alleged fallacy when one argues from statements offact in premises Myers, N. (1979a). "The Sinking Ark." to statements of duty in conclusions, from Pergamon, Oxford, England. [A descriptions to prescriptions. comprehensive study of species losses worldwide.]

Bibliography Myers, N. (1979b). Conserving our global stock. Environment 21(9),25-33. Council on Environmental Quality and De­ partment of State (1980). "The Global 2000 Norton, B. G., ed. (1986). "The Preservation of Report to the President." U. S. Government Species." Princeton University Press, Printing Office, Washington D.C. [Includes Princeton, NewJersey. [Oriented to policy and projections ofimpending losses ofspecies.] philosophical issues.]

Darwin, C. (1872/1968). "The Origin of Opler, P. A. (1977). The parade of passing Species." Penguin, Baltimore, . species: A surveyofextinctions in the U.S. Sci. Teach. 44, 30-34. Rolston, H., III(1985). Duties to endangered species. Bioscience 35, 718-726.

Rolston, H., III (1988). Life injeopardy: Duties to endangered species. In "Environmental Ethics," Temple UniversityPress, Philadelphia.

Simpson, G. G. (1961). "Principles ofAnimal Taxonomy." Columbia University Press, New York.

U.S. Congress (1973). Endangered Species Act of 1973, 87 Stat. 884, Public Law 93-205.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1990). Review of plant taxa for listing as endangered or threatened species. Fed. Regist. 55,(35), 6184-6229.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1991). Animal candidate review for listing as endangered or threatened species. Fed. Regist. 56,(225), 58804-58836.