shifting baselines
- Thread starter CBulla
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Baselines do shift.
If you were to set your baselines say, 65 million years ago, the coast would be at my doorstep; set it only 20,000 years ago - a mere blink in geologic time - the coast would be 300' lower than it is now. Ecosystems have changed dramatically too.
The challenge is to recognize those shifts we can and should try to arrest or reverse, and those we can't or shouldn't.
Separating the junk science from the facts is especially difficult these days.
Rick
If you were to set your baselines say, 65 million years ago, the coast would be at my doorstep; set it only 20,000 years ago - a mere blink in geologic time - the coast would be 300' lower than it is now. Ecosystems have changed dramatically too.
The challenge is to recognize those shifts we can and should try to arrest or reverse, and those we can't or shouldn't.
Separating the junk science from the facts is especially difficult these days.
Rick
Fortunately the context for Dan Pauly's theory is meant to only apply to time periods that encompass human civilization, and usually far shorter (industrial age).
However "Big Daddy's" comments have relevance. I had several discussions with my former non-profit's major donor (a former high school student of mine decades ago) in the area of ecological restoration about this. For example, what do we do knowing that the climate may shift (naturally or through anthropogenic causes) and wipe out all our attempts to restore a given set of ecological processes.
Of course to me the answer was we do what is "right," that is we remove the major anthropogenic impacts and remediate them if possible, and we recognize that certain natural events may lead to the extinction of some of our local endemics (due to decreasing moisture.. climate change following the Pleistocene). He was fine with that and gave millions to the effort
Of course to me the answer was we do what is "right," that is we remove the major anthropogenic impacts and remediate them if possible, and we recognize that certain natural events may lead to the extinction of some of our local endemics (due to decreasing moisture.. climate change following the Pleistocene). He was fine with that and gave millions to the effort
From what I understand of Shifting Baseline Syndrome (from its major authors), its context is only meant to apply to manmade changes in ecosystems, and such changes have to be slow and gradual enough to mask the public's perception that anything is changing. Anything leading to rapid change (to human perception) doesn't count, as the changes are glaring and apparent to the public... therefore the "syndrome" would not apply.
A "shifting baseline" can refer to a great many things, but "shifting baseline syndrome" is quite specific. I've seen the latter term shortened in various media and discussions (the "syndrome" is dropped), and that has led to much confusion.
A "shifting baseline" can refer to a great many things, but "shifting baseline syndrome" is quite specific. I've seen the latter term shortened in various media and discussions (the "syndrome" is dropped), and that has led to much confusion.
Rick Murchison:
and 15 000 years ago it would have been in your livingroom. We know that there is no constant in climatic and ecological systems. They are in a constant state of flux. The only true stable environment would be a sterile one.
What is difficult as Rick pointed out is determining what is a natural, and what is a man made shift.
A great example that is presently of concern is that global warming could shut down the North Atlantic conveyor. If this is to happen, it would cause DRAMATIC shifts in Northern Europe over a very short time. Temperature could shift 5-8 degrees over one season.
One reason to study chaos theory I guess.
Randy Olson
New
- Messages
- 2
- Reaction score
- 0
Greetings Divers -
I'm the director of www.shiftingbaselines.org and came across this excellent discussion you guys have been having. I think our intention with getting behind the term "shifting baselines" is first off, just to get the general public realizing its meaning in its most general sense -- that before you start celebrating a recent uptick in something, let's make sure we're seeing a significant improvement.
With all the bad news about the environment these days, there's a tendency for people to desperately search for good news that will make themselves feel better, which is okay, but not so great when a resource that has been depleted to the 1% level makes the tiny improvement to 3% and everyone breathes a sigh of relief as if the problem has been solved.
This happens a lot these days. And in all aspects of our society. It's the term John Kerry could have used last summer when he was trying to get the public too look at the economy, not by the baseline of 3 months earlier that Bush was touting, but by the baseline of 3 years earlier.
Its a relatively simple term for an increasingly common syndrome that is probably more common today because of the information explosion that causes people to not have the time and energy to thoroughly research a topic and find out that they are dealing with a shifted baseline.
And most importantly, its just a basic aspect of "critical thinking" which is always in short supply.
Great that divers have begun putting the term to use because there are certainly plenty of examples. My personal connection with it was from taking graduate students diving on the largely dead reefs of Jamaica in 1992 for their first coral reef dive, listening to them rave about how beautiful the reefs were, and then thinking back to the reefs I saw in the summer of '78, before Hurricane Allen wiped them all out. You hate to ruin people's excitement, but still, its all about maintaining standards.
- Randy Olson
www.shiftingbaselines.org
I'm the director of www.shiftingbaselines.org and came across this excellent discussion you guys have been having. I think our intention with getting behind the term "shifting baselines" is first off, just to get the general public realizing its meaning in its most general sense -- that before you start celebrating a recent uptick in something, let's make sure we're seeing a significant improvement.
With all the bad news about the environment these days, there's a tendency for people to desperately search for good news that will make themselves feel better, which is okay, but not so great when a resource that has been depleted to the 1% level makes the tiny improvement to 3% and everyone breathes a sigh of relief as if the problem has been solved.
This happens a lot these days. And in all aspects of our society. It's the term John Kerry could have used last summer when he was trying to get the public too look at the economy, not by the baseline of 3 months earlier that Bush was touting, but by the baseline of 3 years earlier.
Its a relatively simple term for an increasingly common syndrome that is probably more common today because of the information explosion that causes people to not have the time and energy to thoroughly research a topic and find out that they are dealing with a shifted baseline.
And most importantly, its just a basic aspect of "critical thinking" which is always in short supply.
Great that divers have begun putting the term to use because there are certainly plenty of examples. My personal connection with it was from taking graduate students diving on the largely dead reefs of Jamaica in 1992 for their first coral reef dive, listening to them rave about how beautiful the reefs were, and then thinking back to the reefs I saw in the summer of '78, before Hurricane Allen wiped them all out. You hate to ruin people's excitement, but still, its all about maintaining standards.
- Randy Olson
www.shiftingbaselines.org
Thank you all for the articulate commentary.
It is very easy to be tricked into believing that the current state of an environment is how it is supposed to be. I have been aware of the "Shifting Baselines" problem since my college days but I haven't had a name for it till now. Back then we used to go backpacking in the Southern Appalachians of the US five or six times per year and we alway tried to go to the areas designated as official Wilderness in order to see the best forests.
One year my buddy suggested we go to a place called Joyce Kilmer Memorial Forest in North Carolina. He said it had never been logged and was therefore was better. The difference could not have been more obvious. Joyce Kilmer is a small pocket of Eastern old growth forest and the trees are gigantic. Oaks have trunks up to 10 feet in diamter that punch right up through the canopy so that we could not even see their branches. At that point we knew we had been duped. Hiking all those years in "Wilderness" that was nothing more than sterile third growth tree farms.
Last year we went to Belize to dive the reefs and hike the rain forest preserves. We dove for several days before my wife pointed out that virtually all the coral were dead. I was so excited to be diving that I did not even notice that the large spherical rocks used to be brain coral and the weird vertical rocks used to be columnar coral. Of course the dive operators are not going to say anything about dead coral and the divers don't want to be rude by mentioning it.
After a week of diving we went into the mainland to visit Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary. It is an extremely well run preserve sheltering jaguars and howler monkeys but it was all clearcut by the British before creation of the sanctuary. We were left wondering what a real climax tropical rainforest would be. My understanding is that this is true of the entire country of Belize. The British cut and exported all the tropical hardwoods and then said "you can have your contry back now - here's your independence".
Anyway, keep up the good work. We are learning, even if a little too late.
Pete
It is very easy to be tricked into believing that the current state of an environment is how it is supposed to be. I have been aware of the "Shifting Baselines" problem since my college days but I haven't had a name for it till now. Back then we used to go backpacking in the Southern Appalachians of the US five or six times per year and we alway tried to go to the areas designated as official Wilderness in order to see the best forests.
One year my buddy suggested we go to a place called Joyce Kilmer Memorial Forest in North Carolina. He said it had never been logged and was therefore was better. The difference could not have been more obvious. Joyce Kilmer is a small pocket of Eastern old growth forest and the trees are gigantic. Oaks have trunks up to 10 feet in diamter that punch right up through the canopy so that we could not even see their branches. At that point we knew we had been duped. Hiking all those years in "Wilderness" that was nothing more than sterile third growth tree farms.
Last year we went to Belize to dive the reefs and hike the rain forest preserves. We dove for several days before my wife pointed out that virtually all the coral were dead. I was so excited to be diving that I did not even notice that the large spherical rocks used to be brain coral and the weird vertical rocks used to be columnar coral. Of course the dive operators are not going to say anything about dead coral and the divers don't want to be rude by mentioning it.
After a week of diving we went into the mainland to visit Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary. It is an extremely well run preserve sheltering jaguars and howler monkeys but it was all clearcut by the British before creation of the sanctuary. We were left wondering what a real climax tropical rainforest would be. My understanding is that this is true of the entire country of Belize. The British cut and exported all the tropical hardwoods and then said "you can have your contry back now - here's your independence".
Anyway, keep up the good work. We are learning, even if a little too late.
Pete
The distinction between "shifting baselines" and "shifting baselines syndrome" is an important one to acknowledge. I speak primarily of the former.
Padudle- last year I led tours through the Cockscomb Basin for the passengers on our small cruise ship. You are absolutely right. Fortunately the Belize tour operators we worked with acknowledged the fact early on.
I used to frequently take visitors, including scientists, out into Catalina's interior. They would often comment on how "undisturbed" and "pristine" it is. These comments would ofen be made as we overlooked a hillside populated largely with European annual grasses, non-native broom and even Eucalyptus!
Dr. Bill
Padudle- last year I led tours through the Cockscomb Basin for the passengers on our small cruise ship. You are absolutely right. Fortunately the Belize tour operators we worked with acknowledged the fact early on.
I used to frequently take visitors, including scientists, out into Catalina's interior. They would often comment on how "undisturbed" and "pristine" it is. These comments would ofen be made as we overlooked a hillside populated largely with European annual grasses, non-native broom and even Eucalyptus!
Dr. Bill
You used to have buffalo too as I recall. What'd the visitors think of them?drbill:
Eucalyptus ticks me off. It's appalling how many californians think the plant is native to "the area". We have the same problem with chinese tallow.
Similar threads
