Nature’s nations: the shared conservation history of Canada and the USA

Historians often study the history of conservation within the confines of national borders, concentrating on the bureaucratic and political manifestations of policy within individual governments. Even studies of the popular expression of conservationist ideas are generally limited to the national or sub-national (province, state, etc.) scale. This paper suggests that conservationist discourse, policy and practice in Canada and the USA were the products of a significant cross-border movement of ideas and initiatives derived from common European sources. In addition, the historical development of common approaches to conservation in North America suggests, contrary to common assumptions, that Canada did not always lag behind the USA in terms of policy innovation. The basic tenets of conservation (i.e. state control over resource, class-based disdain for subsistence hunters and utilitarian approaches to resource management) have instead developed at similar time periods and along parallel ideological paths in Canada and the USA

Discovery of the Closest Hot Subdwarf Binary with White Dwarf Companion

Contains fulltext : 117396.pdf (preprint version ) (Open Access

PARACHUTING CATS AND CRUSHED EGGS The Controversy Over the Use of DDT to Control Malaria

The use of DDT to control malaria has been a contentious practice for decades. This controversy centers on concerns over the ecological harm caused by DDT relative to the gains in public health from its use to prevent malaria. Given the World Health Organization's recent policy decisions concerning the use of DDT to control malaria, it is worth reviewing the historical context of DDT use

Why the difference in the recreational hunting ethic between Australians and North Americans? An opinion with emphasis on ‘furbearers’

Australia and North America have many similar cultural features. Yet, although North America has a strong recreational hunting culture, the sport is limited in Australia. This paper investigates why this difference may have developed. It appears that a major difference is the reason for settlement: Europeans were attracted to North America because of its abundant wildlife and the socio-economic value of furbearers already established, whereas Australia was settled as a penal colony. The colonists found Australia’s wildlife was scarce and unfamiliar, offering no prospect of socio-economic gain from hunting furbearers. With over-exploitation, both continents moved to conservation of their wildlife. North America developed a conservation ethic based on a social, utilitarian approach to sustainable management of furbearers. Australia embraced a holistic approach to conservation to protect biodiversity. The differences, therefore, result from zoological differences and not innate cultural difference