###
News Release
Anthropologist pleads for fewer humans, more saved species
Peer-Reviewed Publication
ANTHROPOLOGIST PLEADS FOR FEWER
HUMANS, MORE SAVED SPECIES
COLUMBUS, Ohio – Ask Jeffrey McKee whether the planet would
be a better place without humans and he'll qualify his answer:
"It certainly would be better with fewer humans."
That may seem a strange response for an anthropologist who has spent
his career studying both the bones of our million-year-old human
ancestors in Africa and the ecological drain modern humans place on
their world.
McKee, an associate professor of both
anthropology and of evolution, ecology and
organismal biology at Ohio State University,
argues his point in his latest book, Sparing
Nature: The Conflict Between Human
Population Growth and Earth's Biodiversity,
(Rutgers University Press, 2003).
"As an anthropologist, I'm obviously fascinated
by humans," he proclaims, "but at the same time,
humans have been around for a very long time
and we have to take some responsibility as a species for what we do to
the planet.
"This includes curbing our reproductive habits," he says.
This thin tightrope McKee walks between ecology and anthropology
gives him what he believes is a rare insight into the impact humans
have on all other life on the planet. And if something doesn't change,
he warns, we'll lose many more species and dramatically impact our
daily lives.
"Humans have been in competition
with all other species for space,
energy and resources for millennia.
We can look back and see that 1.8
million years ago, we began losing
biodiversity in Africa. Starting around
10,000 years ago, this loss
accelerated dramatically. Now we
can actually put a number to how
many extinctions are occurring
worldwide and tie it to the impact of
human populations."
Part of the problem, he believes, is
our short-term orientation. "Human
beings have evolved to notice things that are happening right now. They
don't normally think about the distant future. That needs to change."
McKee points to agriculture – one of humanity's greatest innovations –
as an example of our short-sightedness. "I'm sure that at the origins of
agriculture, no one worried about the possibility that by irrigating fields,
they would increase the salts in the soil, depleting them. But that is
what happens."
The problem is endemic to all humans, he says, even to indigenous
peoples who are often seen as "closer" to the land. These people
respected and cherished the land but they still had to support
themselves and their populations kept growing, he said.
"You can have all of this religious zeal in respect for the land but
whatever you do has impacts in one way or another. That's true for all
species – even humans. They are all in competition with others for
resources," McKee said.
He believes that anthropologists have a slight edge over ecologists in
seeing the extent of the threat on biodiversity. "Ecology is largely a
science that deals with the present," compared to anthropology, he
says, and the study of millions of years of evolution gives perspective to
the current urgency over endangered species and our relationships to
them.
Conservationists and ecologists have trouble convincing the public that
this problem has been facing us for an extremely long time. And many
critics are skeptical about whether the public will recognize the problem
and take it seriously.
"I think they will," he says. "Deep down, humans are basically
reasonable, and this message can get out: By sparing nature, we spare
outselves a lot of future grief. The message has to get to the people
who make decisions, however."
But recently, American decision-makers seem to have ignored such
issues. Refusing to agree to the Kyoto Protocol on global climate
change is an oft-cited example by critics. But McKee doesn't see that
failure as a pattern.
"We've won other battles over air and water quality and in both cases,
those campaigns were driven by a grassroots effort," he said.
Most animals on the planet are adapted to a particular environment or
food supply and when that fades, so do they. But humans, he says, can
adapt to almost any environment and be successful.
"I'm an optimist. People are adaptable and we can learn to live
differently. We are the only species that can recognize what we are
doing, if we look close enough," McKee said.
"Then we can do something about it."
#
Contact: Jeffrey McKee, (614) 292-4149; mckee.95@osu.edu
Written by Earle Holland, (614) 292-8384; Holland.8@osu.edu