Tag Archives: Philosophical Ecology

The Goodness of Salmon

Our festive season here in Sydney was mostly damp: sultry and tropical at times, at other times chilly, but persistently wet, wet, wet. Whenever the rain carries on like this I think of Seattle in all its watery glory, from salt water to fresh, and from drizzle and showers through to sudden squalls and wild horizontal lashings of the most torrential rain. Love them or not, these rains are essential to the bountiful, moody, temperate rainforests that make the Pacific North West so special. The greatest concentration of biomass on earth is found in these forests, more even than in the Amazon, and one of the great scientific questions has been: how do the trees do it?

Hoh Rainforest, Elizabeth Gomm (CC)
Hoh Rainforest, Elizabeth Gomm (CC)

David Suzuki offered a surprisingly elegant and complex answer. He pointed out that while rain is essential, it is also the case that it washes nutrients out of the soil. Those months-long downpours take away nutrients at a rate that would seem to make huge forests impossible. So: where on earth does the actual fertility come from?

The Answer: Salmon!  And therein lies a true story of life’s goodness.

Sockeye salmon run, Todd Radenbaugh (CC)
Sockeye salmon, Todd Radenbaugh (CC)

The scientific analysis of the relationship between forests and salmon is fairly recent. The evidence comes from nitrogen. It is possible to distinguish two types of nitrogen, one that is land based (14N) and one that is ocean based (15N). Analysis of the forest, from trees to soils, shows that the main nutrient is ocean-based nitrogen.

Salmon hatchlings make their way to the ocean and live there for several years, consuming foods such as plankton that are rich in ocean based nitrogen. When it is time for them to spawn, they return to the river in which they hatched, swimming upstream in order to reproduce and die. Along the way they are prey to a great diversity of animals, especially bears.

Doug Brown (CC)
Doug Brown (CC)

Salmon and bears – how iconic! Bears grab fish out of the water and take them back into the forest for a private feast. They gobble up the choice bits and then return to the river for more. They transfer from river to forest upwards of 60 million kilos of salmon every year in British Columbia alone! The forests become rich in salmon carcases, and all manner of birds and other scavengers eat the remains.

The bears go on their way in the forests, pooping nitrogen rich fertilizer. The last remains of the salmon become food for flies; the flies lay eggs (on both salmon remains and poop) that hatch out as maggots and transform into pupae. Then, in a moment of perfect synchrony, zillions of nutritious flies emerge just in time for the annual northern migration of many insect-eating birds. Among them are the beautiful little olive-sided flycatchers who fly from Central and South America to the northern forests and back every year.

Olive-sided Flycatcher, Mike's Birds (CC)
Olive-sided Flycatcher, Mike’s Birds (CC)

And so vast amounts of ocean based nitrogen are transferred to the forests, their inhabitants and their visitors. Indeed, the scientists have learned that they can correlate tree rings with salmon runs: the wider and healthier the tree ring (indicating greater annual growth), the bigger the salmon run that year.

Salmon not only benefit a great diversity of other creatures, including the mighty rainforest trees, they also benefit their own offspring. After spawning, the adults die. Their bodies are consumed by fungi which are themselves consumed by bacteria and other micro-organisms. Later the young salmon feed on these same micro-organisms, building strength for their journey back to the ocean. Indeed, salmon are food for almost everyone – in the course of their travels not only are they prey to bears and birds and humans, but also to whales, seals, dolphins and sea lions, and to larger fish including sharks; their decomposing bodies are consumed by micro-organisms; as youngsters they are scooped up by snakes and water birds ~ everybody eats them! And still they thrive, and still they carry the ocean’s bounty into the freshwater rivers, and into the forests, and into other land, sea and sky creatures.

'Seal snack', Larissa Saye (CC)
‘Seal snack’, Larissa Saye (CC)

The scientific analysis is fascinating, but it barely begins to capture the wild exuberance of this story. The transformation of fish into food sustains bears, humans, eagles, crows, otters, trees, microscopic river organisms and much more. In these transformations life itself is shifted across plant, animal, fungi and other kingdoms. The great nutritional loops conjoin land, sea and air, seasonal and migratory cycles, birth and death.

Eagle with fish, Jerry McFarland (CC)
Eagle with fish, Jerry McFarland (CC)

David Suzuki wanted to make a point about management. With all the connectivities and transformations that loop through species and individuals to form ecologies, it is clear that a forest is not just a collection of trees. And yet, from a management point of view, trees are to be managed by one bureaucracy, rivers by another, oceans by another, wildlife by another, fish by another; forestry, fishermen, hunters, and a myriad other human-centric interests argue passionately about their particular part of the great system. The real issue, however, is that the health of any part of this vibrant system is integral to and dependent on other parts of the same vibrant system. In Suzuki’s words, ‘… if we keep looking at our own self-interest without seeing the big picture … we are going to screw it up for sure.’

More than forests are at stake here – more than trees and salmon, more than bears and micro-organisms. The wildly entwined loops of transformation are the very practice of goodness in Earth life. The goodness of salmon, as with all goodness, lies both in their lives as lived for themselves and their offspring, and in the benefits others gain from them.

In a human-centric world of narrow ‘self-interest’ and stubborn resistance to recognition of entangled connectivities, it is good, I find, to think of the philosopher Lev Shestov. He argued for a kind of craziness that is exactly what is needed here. Craziness for Shestov meant that a person would immerse themselves in life that is specific in its time and place, situated in awareness of its entanglements with others, and fully committed to the complexities of birth and death. His craziness is a commitment to transience, flux and uncertainty, and perhaps part of the craziness is that none of these qualities offers a promise that leads to human complacency. Rather, uncertainty means that nothing can be taken for granted. And so craziness goes hand in hand with Earth’s exuberance. It offers joy in the form of commitment to transformation, metamorphosis, synchronicity, and shared, looping connectivities.

Mills (CC)
‘Tree of LIfe’, Mills (CC)

For us humans, to become crazy-in-love with the living world would mean becoming crazy for salmon and crazy for bears, crazy for forests, fungi, clear running rivers, healthy oceans, migrating birds, nitrogen and much more. We would become absolutely crazy for goodness.

At the end of the day, goodness is the way and the truth of living creatures, and craziness is a human being’s way of remaining part of it.

I find it hard to imagine becoming crazy for rain. Even while I treasure its gifts of life, the truth is that day after day of the stuff makes me fretful. It was a great delight, therefore, when the sun returned for a day or two. And so it is in this world of flux: nothing lasts forever, except perhaps the great earth herself, and change is yet another aspect of goodness.

© Deborah Bird Rose (2016)

Resources:

David Suzuki spoke on the Science Show (ABC Radio National – listen here).

Scientific research on salmon, bears and forests has been carried by Tom Reimchen, and James Helfield and Robert Naiman (among others).

Lazarus

It feels splendid to leap into the writing life after a year of absence. Thank you, dear readers, for your interest across this span of silence.

Photo: Chantal Jackson
Photo: Chantal Jackson

The diagnosis was cancer and the treatment that knocked it off was brutal. Together they left me stunned, wandering in the valley of the shadow of death, at times truly fearful.

Coming now into the light of life, feeling the beginnings of vibrance as I emerge from the shadows, I keep thinking of Lazarus. Not the guy who was raised from the dead, but the other one. Jesus told the parable of a sick and destitute beggar named Lazarus who lay before the rich man’s gate asking only for the crumbs from the table. The rich man turned his back, slamming the gate shut so that no food, care, comfort or goodness could cross over. Behind the closed gate the rich man and his brothers continued their self-satisfied, hard-hearted, opulent and comfortable lives. Lazarus, abandoned and alone, died at the gate. Abraham himself came and took Lazarus away to a better place.

Not long after, the rich man died. From his place of torment in Hades he called to Abraham, asking that Lazarus come to give him relief. Abraham said no: the barrier between the two places was impassable, he said. So the rich man asked if Lazarus could go back to earth to tell the brothers what had happened to him. He thought that if they heard about it from Lazarus they would change their behaviour and avoid the brother’s fate. Again, Abraham refused. He said that the living brothers already had Moses and the prophets. If they would not listen to all the wisdom that was already given, they would not listen to anyone.

This is the true wisdom of the face-to-face: goodness toward others gives life its value, and all anyone needs to know is right before them.

The first part of this powerful story concerns hard-heartedness in the face of desperate need. We are today deeply familiar with the social and spiritual demands of strangers at the gate. Indeed, there are hundreds of thousands of them. Michael Ignatieff recently wrote about the disasters pushing people to flee Syria: ‘Assad’s barrel bombs, Russian and American air strikes, ISIS beheadings, militia murders and persecution’. Ignatieff argues that generosity toward refugees is both ethically good and politically prudent. Far better that people be given the opportunity to make good lives for themselves than that they be pushed into utter, nihilistic desperation. And multicultural experience shows that in general nations are enriched as newcomers settle and flourish. None of this happens without effort, but this is the real work of life’s goodness: to reach out in care and responsibility.

The second part of the Lazarus story also speaks powerfully to life on earth today. Abraham said that all we need to know is actually before us.  For him, Moses and prophets held the keys to knowledge. Other times and places hold other keys.

These days I find myself thinking of the animist vivacity that permeates the goodness of earth life. Part of the horror of the shadow of death is that one feels that life’s goodness is being obliterated. In contrast, to see clearly is to see that goodness arises all around us – in the rain, air, ground, light, warmth, the light winds of morning and the golden glow of dusk. Alfonso Lingis explains:

‘We do not relate to the light, the earth, the air, and the warmth only with our individual sensibility and sensuality. We communicate to one another the light our eyes know, the ground that sustains our postures, and the air and the warmth with which we speak. We face one another as condensations of earth, light, air, and warmth ….’

Photo: Chantal Jackson
Photo: Chantal Jackson

All creatures are the beneficiaries of elemental goodness, and all creatures participate in the webs that nurture and support on-going life. We are face-to-face with goodness all the time, and that goodness gives rise to creatures’ capacity to flourish. It speaks in all the vast exuberant generosity of earth life that flows through birds and bees, predators and prey, flowers and nectar drinkers, creaturely generations, air, sun and water. All around us is this great flourishing. All one needs to know as a grounding for wisdom is the coming forth of diversity, beauty and integrity. The goodness of a human being is here: in becoming a conscious contributor to the generosity of life.

© Deborah Bird Rose (2016)

Readings:

Ignatieff, Michael 2015 ‘The Refugees & the New War’, New York Review of Books, LXII (20), pp. 8-12.

Lingis, Alfonso 1994. The Community of Those Who Have Nothing in Common. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.p.122

Violence Against the Defenceless

Flying-fox Courtesy of Nick Edards
Flying-fox
Courtesy of Nick Edards

The term ‘warfare’ is regularly used to describe human action against the natural world. I too have spoken of the war against nature and the war against flying-foxes. And yet, I haven’t felt fully comfortable with this language.

Nature (in general), and flying-foxes (in particular), have never mounted a war against humans. The violence in this ‘war’ is all one-sided. And, too, the violence is radically disproportionate. What humans have done to flying-foxes in Charters Towers, both now and in the past, bears no correlation to what flying-foxes have done or ever could do to humans. Reports indicate that the people who organised the Charters Towers violence have stopped. Apparently, they are ‘happy’ with the results. Can it really be that all this suffering and on-going injury, including starvation, all this totally unnecessary death, constitutes warfare and is something to be happy about?

A new book called Horrorism is helping me think again about the problem of using the language and imagery of warfare to describe human-animal or human-nature violence. Written by the Italian scholar Adriana Cavarero, and subtitled ‘Naming Contemporary Violence’, this wonderful book shows that there are huge problems in using the language of warfare to describe forms of violence that are directed primarily against the helpless. Her examples all concern violence perpetrated by humans against humans, but the general direction of her analysis works extremely well with human violence against animals.

Horrorism Adriana Cavarero
Horrorism
Adriana Cavarero

Here is the key point: ‘violence against the helpless is becoming global in ever more ferocious forms, [and] language … tends to mask it.’ The masking language draws on images of warfare. But there are huge differences. In war armed combatants face each other knowing they are aiming to kill each other, and knowing they may be killed. Speaking for myself, I respect the armed forces, and I respect the fact that some wars (not all) are necessary.

It is clear that a great deal of contemporary violence does not live up to the model of the warrior. Violence against the helpless, violence for the sake of making life utterly miserable and uncertain for those against whom it is directed – this is not warfare. This is something that should be named as a hideous phenomenon in its own right. Horror, Cavarero explains, describes actions that ‘dismember and disfigure the body, the social relations, the uniqueness of that way of life’. In Charters Towers the use of weapons of harm was thoroughly engaged in damaging bodies, minds, and social relations. The attack on the maternity camp targeted defenceless young and nursing mothers, and thus was an attack not only on this generation but on future generations as well. In the mode of violence against the future it clearly aimed to violate the standards that have been set for conservation of native species (i.e., ensuring their continuity).

Is horror new? Not at all, Cavarero says, and yet something is changing. In part it is the scale of violence, in part it is the organised and sanctioned targeting of those who are helpless, and in part it is the wanton revelling in ruining the person, their bodily dignity, their life and future. In Cavarero’s words ‘a certain model of horror is indispensable for understanding our present’ time.

Cavarero discusses the totalitarian principle that ‘everything is permitted’ in the use of force against the defenceless. Here in Australia we have had legislation that prohibits cruelty to animals and the purpose has been very clear. Not everything was permitted in the use of violence against animals. But when Queensland made the legislative decision that the anti-cruelty legislation would not apply to flying-foxes, it opened the way for an apparently bottomless pit of cruel and vicious action. Yes, there had to be a permit to ‘disperse’ flying-foxes, and yes, the actions were meant to comply with the permit, but in the absence of any outside regulation, and with the tacit approval Local Councils for whom ‘everything is permitted’, cruelty becomes a matter of local choice.

Many of us wondered where the RSPCA was in all of this. A recent statement offers a bit of clarity. In a nutshell, if cruelty is allowed, then the only legal questions are procedural: was the action carried out in the manner in which it had been stated it would be carried out? This legal pit of violence was anticipated by many thoughtful people, as I discuss in my post on Zombie Politics. And yet, many of us really had not fully grasped the depths to which humans will sink, given the opportunity. The RSPCA asks to be notified in cases of ‘blatant cruelty’. What was the Charters Towers action if not horrific, and certainly blatant, cruelty?

It is clear in Cavarero’s analysis that the language of warfare puts a layer of conventionality over actions that are essentially crimes. Let us not forget: actions that would legally have been crimes if the legislation had not been changed are still the same actions. Nothing has changed except that people are now carrying out violence that previously the courts, the legislature, and all humane people had understood to be criminal. In the language of horrorism, people are savaging the bodies of those who have no means of defending themselves against this wounding.

Is the Charters Towers event over? Not for flying-foxes. Not for the survivors who may yet die of starvation or shock, not for those who come back next year, and perhaps not for the survivors who have gone to other towns in Queensland. Further actions are planned. The story of persecution is just beginning. This means that the need for action is not over either. Websites and Facebook pages are helping people to stay in touch with what is happening. A few of my favourites include Don’t Shoot Bats, Bat Conservation and Rescue, and Bob Irwin’s site.

I will close with some words from Louise Saunders, of Bat Conservation and Rescue:

The use of water cannons to hose bats from the trees at Charters Towers’ cruel and sadistic dispersal. An observer said a mother and her baby were hit with the full force and thrown to the ground. This is barbaric treatment to a gentle innocent and important keystone mammal. With non flying and dependent young many mothers tried to carry away their babies but the young are too big to carry far if at all. Nursing mothers so stressed from the cruel onslaught will lose their milk in the next week or so, as seen when maternity colonies are disturbed. Their babies die slowly and in agony. PLEASE if you have not written to confirm your disgust please we need your voice. Email the EHP Director General – jon.black@ehp.qld.gov.au and the EHP environment minister Andrew Powell – Environment@ministerial.qld.gov.au THEY WILL BE LEGISLATING FOR MORE TORTURE TO BATS IN THE NEW YEAR -KILLING ENTIRE COLONIES BY UNIMAGINABLE MEANS. PLEASE HELP OUR BATS. WRITE ASAP Thanks

© Deborah Bird Rose (2013)

Man Is The Only Animal That ….

Flying-fox, courtesy of Nick Edards
Flying-fox, courtesy of Nick Edards

It seemed like good news when I heard evolutionary biologist Professor Maciej Henneberg of Adelaide University explain how he and his research team came to a radical conclusion about intelligent life on earth. When it comes to intelligence, he said, the human species is not the pinnacle of evolution, but actually is one animal amongst many. Humans, he is saying, are not smarter – they’re different. As Dr Henneberg puts it, human are smarter in some ways, but dumber in others. He discussed some of the uses of intelligence of other animals – the dog’s sense of smell, the koala’s ability to jump vertically from one branch to another, the wolves’ body language.

Dr Henneberg’s findings are particularly significant because they are developed through evolutionary biology. They confirm in a fascinating way the work now being done by ethologists on animal empathy, morality, and many other qualities that once were thought to belong strictly to humans. As is well known, the quest for that which makes ‘man’ different from and superior to all other animals is a central preoccupation in western thought. And yet, language, tools, imagination, and much more: all these great indicators of a vast gulf between ‘us’ and ‘them’  are becoming indefensible in the face of contemporary science and philosophy.

It seemed like good news last Friday night when I heard the radio interview, and it is good news, except when one’s mind turns toward what is happening in the rural city of Charters Towers in North Queensland. Here the war against flying-foxes is full-on. It is marked by an intensity of cruelty that does no credit either to those who are organising and conducting it, or to all of those who are standing by and letting it happen. In a recent post I wrote about the proposal to drive the flying-foxes out of town at this time when they are acutely vulnerable. In spite of petitions, and immense outreach around the world thanks also to a beautiful video, the terror is now happening. It is not happy to know that these animals are intelligent, and that they are suffering.

Helicoppter in Charters Towers, Photo: Adele Foster
Helicoppter in Charters Towers, Photo: Adele Foster

This is the time of year when the babies are too heavy to be carried by their mothers. They are left back in camp in a crèche tree while their mothers go out at night to find food. The babies are still dependent on their mother’s milk, and when the mothers come back before dawn they reunite, each with her own baby, for a day feeding, grooming, nuzzling, chirrking, and socialising.

These animals, like us, are intelligent. They have emotions, they feel pain and anguish, fear, terror, and panic. Mothers are dedicated to their babies; the young are dependent on their mothers. Generation upon generation of flying-foxes over the last fifty million years or so have worked to raise the young, and to keep the flying-fox way of life alive in the world.

By any human standard, flying-foxes in a maternity camp should not be tormented. By any human standard, cruelty to animals is not acceptable behaviour. Somehow, these basic standards of social life are not operative in Charters Towers. Somehow, those with official responsibility for protection of animals are not doing their job.

Flying-fox Mum and Bub. Courtesy of Nick Edards.
Flying-fox Mum and Bub. Courtesy of Nick Edards.

A number of committed activists have gone to Charters Towers to try to assist wounded flying-foxes, to bear witness to the event, and to hold in place a human stand that says: this is not acceptable, and this is not full measure of humanity. Here are a few quotes from various facebook pages.

Noel Castley-Wright reports from Charters Towers: We have just witnessed the most vile act of cruelty. They were shooting Mums and babies with paintball guns, hosing with fireman hoses, two helicopters flying below 100ft over urban area, mum and babies down (refused to stop), birdfrite, fireworks, smoke, horns and babies left panic stricken in trees. When mums come to get them tomorrow, it starts all over again. This continues for two weeks. Babies will die a slow horrible death.

Adele Foster wrote: I travelled 7hrs to get here. CHARTERS BLOODY TOWERS. It has been the most horrific day. You can’t even begin to imagine the noises, the screaming, the cheering of local rednecks. I will be back again tomorrow morning at 4am when it all starts again. Part of me doesn’t want to go back but I have to film & document the audacity again. I feel emotionally drained. It’s too dark now & have returned to the motel. Left screaming babies high in the trees, some mothers have returned & been reunited with their bubs. Other bubs not so lucky. This dispersal will continue for up to two weeks. I can’t stay here that long. The babies cannot fly, they will die in the starved hang position waiting for their mums who will not be able to return. Eventually they will fall dead to the ground. Shame on you Charters Towers. Our Queensland State Govt has allowed this to happen. Qld beautiful one day, Government sanctioned animal cruelty the next.

Adele, again: ‘Paint ball guns, smoke, water hoses, birdfrite, sirens & helicopters. RSPCA is this not enough to stop the dispersal, where were you today?? … The Department of Environment and Heritage Protection were present & did nothing except watch as this all took place.’

A day later she wrote: ‘This is so cruel & inhumane. The bats are going but then they are turning round & coming back. Their babies screaming in the trees. The locals are cheering. WTAF!!’

On Tueday morning she said she was leaving: ‘We heading out, some the bats have gone to Centenary Park. They are now smoking them out too. They are spraying them with water in people’s back yards. The bats are dispersed all over town. There is nothing more we can do’

Injured flying-fox, Tolga Bat Hospital.
Injured flying-fox, Tolga Bat Hospital.

It is often said that it is important to present both sides of an issue like this. I don’t agree. That many people in Charters Towers don’t want to live in proximity to flying-foxes is self-evident, but beyond the obvious there are two significant reasons why such a suggestion is wrong. The first is that the pro-cruelty camp represents itself extremely well already. Google Charters Towers and flying-foxes and you’ll find newspaper articles vilifying the animals. You’ll find politicians ranting against the animals. You’ll find all manner of claims, abuse, belligerence, and hatred. I believe it is wrong to further disseminate incitements to cruelty.

The second reason why the idea of ‘both sides’ is wrong is that it suggests that the issue can be boiled down to just two sides. This is way too narrow. There are many, many sides to this story. Let me offer a few in an effort to ensure that the complexity of life on earth not get reduced to any simple formula of ‘both sides’. Here are eleven more sides:

1)   The people in Charters Towers who oppose this action, but are not able to convince their fellow townspeople of the wrongness of what they are doing, and seem not to have much of a voice.

2) Carers all over Australia who are concerned about the well-being of flying-foxes, many of whom may end up caring for or fostering wounded animals. Along with them, all the people who care, who support them financially and emotionally, and who work publicly and privately against such cruelty.

3)   Aboriginal people for whom flying-foxes are their Dreaming, or totemic, kin. Attacks on flying-foxes are attacks on them too. I can’t help but think that the use of the term ‘dispersal’ tells quite a significant sub-surface story. In earlier times, the term meant ‘massacre’ and was used to describe settler Australian actions against Aboriginal people.

4)   The flying-foxes themselves. They want to live, to raise their young, to depart and return in their own way.

5)   Koalas – they live on eucalyptus leaves, and rely on forests and woodland for their lives. Flying-foxes pollinate the trees and disperse the seeds. A lovely poster advocating care and protection of koalas has the slogan: ‘No Tree, No Me’.

no tree no me

 

Another lovely poster advocating care and protection of flying-foxes turns this slogan around: ‘No Me, No Tree’.

6)   Along with koalas, all the other forest dwellers.

7)   The forests themselves, and the great savannah woodlands of North Australia. They are co—evolved with flying-foxes, and depend on their pollination.

8) The air we breathe. Air is 21% oxygen. Oxygen is produced copiously by forests and woodlands, which is why forests such as the Daintree are called ‘the lungs of the earth’.

9)   RSPCA (Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals), Animal Ethics advocates, the Humane Society, and other bodies whose commitment is to the prevention of cruelty to animals.

10)   The Department of Environment, and all those who are meant to enforce protection of native animals.

11)  Bystanders – when public cruelty is carried out, there is a responsibility on the part of the public to protest that cruelty. Are we doing enough?

In a situation like this, there really are no ‘innocent bystanders’. Except, perhaps, for the children. I am haunted by thoughts of the children in Charters Towers. Do they wake up with the sounds of helicopters and think about all the suffering babies over there in the park? Do their nightmares include flying-foxes being chased into the backyard and subjected to water torture? Do they wonder why the adults are doing all this? Or are they learning lessons now that will shape them for years to come? Lessons about how to ignore, or even enjoy, the suffering of others?

What of the older children? Do they go to school and learn about ‘the environment’? Do they read To Kill a Mockingbird and learn about the principles of standing up for what is right even when it is difficult and unpopular to do so?

What about their teachers, their pastors or priests, their guidance counsellors and mentors? What are they teaching the children?

What will anyone, human and flying-fox, become through this reign of terror?

environment

To go back evolutionary biology, it is clear that we humans are different from the others. If it is not tools, intelligence, consciousness or communication, perhaps it is this: Man is the only animal to systematically promote hatred and cruelty. Man is the only animal to organise the suffering of others (animals and also humans) on a massive scale. Man is the only animal that cheers in the face of the despair of others.

Perhaps worst of all: in spite of our capacity for intelligence, conscience, empathy and compassion, we keep doing these terrible things over and over and over. Man is the only animal that refuses to learn.

©Deborah Bird Rose (2013)

 

Can Animism Help Revitalise the Commons?

Wesleyan University,  Long Lane Farm Herb Spiral

Wesleyan University,
Long Lane Farm Herb Spiral

My travels in North America have included a fantastic visit to Wesleyan University in Connecticut where I was hosted by the College of the Environment. My colleague and main host was Gillian Goslinga who has carried out inspiring research in India and writes fascinating articles about communities that include humans, non-humans and spirits. Lori Gruen is another key figure in the Wesleyan community, and a thinker who is leading research and action in the field of human-animal studies and multispecies ethnography.  The College of Environment’s  visiting professor this year is Frederique Apffel-Marglin, whose work on local and indigenous knowledge in the face of development has helped me articulate a number of key ideas  over the course of nearly two decades. She has put her ethics and politics into practice as the founder-director of the inspirational Sachamama Institute in Peru. My curiosity and desire were totally captivated by her news of a week-long workshop she and colleagues are running in December on ‘Tantric Ecologies’. How I would love to be  part of that!!

If you have had the opportunity to hang out with inspiring people, you’ll have a good idea of what a buzz I gained from this experience. Perhaps one of the most wonderful aspects of my visit was the opportunity to learn about the student farm. A future blog will discuss Long Lane Farm in much greater detail – stay tuned!

The specific invitation that brought me to Wesleyan was the opportunity to give a keynote speech in the series organised by the College of Environment, under the heading ‘Where Are Earth Are We Going?’ With that stimulating question in mind, and in dialogue with their theme for this year – ‘Re-Envisioning  the Commons’ – I offered a speech on ‘Kinship with Nature in this Time of Loss: Can Animism Help Revitalise the Commons?’ They have very kindly posted it on the web, so here it is.

Frédérique’s brilliant speech ‘Re-imagining the Commons: Natural Resource Management or Biocultural Generation? is also online.