Tyler Poppe

BIOL-1120
June 14, 2015
The Land Ethic
Part I
The Land Ethic addresses the importance of taking care of the natural resources
that exist in the world. The author states many interesting facts and suggests many things
that seem to be true. There were two parts that were the most important for me; ethics
exist for relationships among men and not with land, and that land use is still governed by
economic interests. These two points will be the focus of my summary.
The first subtitle in The Land Ethic is The Ethical Sequence. This section
focuses on ethics and what they are. It gives two definitions on what ethics are. The first
is the ecological definition, which states that an ethic is a limitation on freedom of action
in the struggle for existence. The second is the philosophical definition, which states that
an ethic is a differentiation of social from anti-social conduct. The word ethic is
commonly used and respected among men, but mainly just the philosophical definition.
Ethics exist in a community of men; it is the way that men are expected to treat other
men. This is the socially acceptable way to treat each other within a community. Ethics
between men and land however is often overlooked. There does not seem to be any rules
and what men should and should not to do with land. This is the first important point that
I recognized.
Throughout the rest of the article there is a major theme. On page 209 of the
reading it says Land-use ethics are still governed wholly by economic self-interest
This is the theme found in much of the reading. A farmer can do almost whatever he

wants as long as he is providing the products that are demanded and he is making profit.
It is often found to be unreasonable to ask a farmer to do something that will hurt him
financially in order to help the land. It may be unethical but as long as there is financial
gain the farmer will continue to do whatever it takes to make the profit. Economic selfinterest continues to take precedence over conservation.
Part II
1. How would you characterize your own conservation philosophy? How did
you come to hold these beliefs?
I would summarize my conservation philosophy with a saying that I
learned in Boy Scouts, which is leave it as you found it. This statement
means that we have a responsibility to leave things as we found them.
This can be short and long term. Short term would be picking up after
yourself and long term would be not doing anything that will permanently
harm the land.
2. Consider this statement: A land ethic changes the role of humans from
conqueror of the land community to plain members and citizens of it. It
implies respect for his fellow-members, and also respect for the
community as such. How would you apply this ethic in practice?
I would apply this principle with consistency. It is not my place to decide
which part of land it all right to harm. I should treat everything well and not
do any harm to the land or nature.
3. Leopold wrote in the 1940s, The land-relation is still strictly economic,
entailing privileges but not obligations. What would you say is our landrelation today?
Our land relation continues to evolve but at a slow pace. It is still one of
little obligation and many privileges. It has improved but not by much.
4. Leopold says the land ethic is extending a communitys sensibilities to all
members of the community, nonhuman as well as human. What would
that mean in your life or community?
My community has a fair amount of agriculture. This would be doing what
is right in trying to earn a profit. This would be sacrificing harm to the land,
even if it would be for our own self-interest.

5. Do you agree with this passage from the Land Ethic: 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. Was Leopold suggesting
that the integrity of the biotic community supersedes the concerns for its
individual members? What are the implications of this concept for you?
I believe that he is right. It seems that he is referring to long-term
perspective towards the biotic community. If we harm the biotic community
in any way then we are also harming future generations.
6. In the Land Ethic, Leopold said, It is inconceivable to me that an ethical
relationship [with land] can exist without love, respect, admiration, and a
high regard for its value. Which is more motivating for you: beauty
(aesthetics) or duty (ethics)?
Beauty is more important for me. This is what makes life so great and as
we damage the world that we have life will lose some of its meaning.
7. In thinking about your land ethic, does it emanate primarily from self
interest, or from a true interest in non-human elements?
My land ethic more emanates from self-interest. I like the land and want
to preserve it for many selfish reasons. This is unfortunate but it at least
helps me think about conservation more.
Part III
I found this assignment to be very interesting and brought up some
interesting ideas. The reading was straightforward and for the most part easy to
understand. It left me thinking about how I treat the world and ways that I can
improve. The part that I liked most was Part I. This really made me go through
the reading in order to see what was most important to me. After analyzing it I
found those two ideas that I listed above which I could really relate to. The
questions were well written and for the most part thought provoking, but a few
seemed a little obvious and monotonous. I would recommend this assignment for
future classes because it brings up an issue that is often overlooked. I havent
seen any studies on how much the land is being abused so I cannot say how big

of a problem this actually is but if the land is being abused then we need to do
something. It made me think about the reasons behind the unethical treatment of
land. I feel that there are many things that I can do to make myself treat the land
more ethically. These may not be big things but I believe that by doing a few
small things something big can be accomplished.