TORONTO, Ontario, Canada, May 2, 2005 (ENS) - Environmental journalist and
Greenpeace founder Bob Hunter died this morning in Toronto after a long
fight against prostate cancer. He was 63.

A television journalist with the CHUM Group's CITY-TV, Hunter was also a
newspaper columnist and author of more than a dozen books.

"This was a man with a great loving heart, a brilliant mind and a massive
spirit. Bob Hunter changed our world. It a sadder world today, but a better
world because of him," said Stephen Hurlbut, vice-president of news
programming for CITY-TV and vice-president and general manager of CP24.

Hurlbut said, "Beyond being a dear, dear friend, Bob was a champion and a
hero. He was in so many, many different ways, the brightest person I ever
met, with a brilliant sense of humor and staggeringly good karma. In the 15
years that I knew him there was never a moment that his spirit wasn't life
affirming, wasn't about making things better. Everybody loved Bob."

"on Monday, May 2nd, charles said

David,

In another post you lament the Las Vegas display of wealth and ponder if those resources would be better spent on raising the standard of living of the poorest amoung us. I agree. However, I would go a step further and say that spending billions of animals why humans die is also a poor allocation of resources."

"on Monday, May 2nd, Jeff Harvey said

Charles,

How much longer can you go on writing such tripe? When are you gonna realize that the fate of human beings and that of nature are not mutally exclusive?

I have already deconstructed this fable a dozen times on this blog, and then you come up with it again. And again. And again. And again. And again.

For the umpteenth time, we have to start realizing that our effect on natural systems will rebound on us. Along with our elected representatives, we need to recognize that all political decisions have a biological component, and that the fate of humanity is inextricably interwoven with the fate of the natural world. As population ecologist Tom Lovejoy said a few years ago, the planet already has a reduced capacity to support man, and a slash-and-burn approach to the biosphere is no longer viable. He went on to state that, as biological systems become simpler, the human material economy becomes more expensive economically: fish are smaller and cost more per unit of weight; lumber is narrower, shorter and of reduced quality; dwindling natural resources fuel inflation. Most importantly, the planet also becomes more vulnerable to a range of disasters, and the quality of human life inevitably declines.

What is most wrong from the dichotomous arguments of those like Charles is that they perceive conservation as stopping everything in its tracks, or holding Ivory Billed Woodpeckers in higher esteem than people. What science and scientists must do is to disseminate the understanding that the choice is not between wild places, animals, and people. The choice is between long term security for everyone, or an impoverished existence for mankind."

"The choice is between long term security for everyone, or an impoverished existence for mankind.""

Beyond mankind, an impoverished existence for all.