Land Ethics: Is it right or wrong?

Agree Quote: "In Short, a land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it."

I agree with this statement because it lets us know that as humans we have evolved in many different ways and it shows the inevitable changes that were made. As years have gone by our perception of being conquerors of the land-community has deteriorated. More and more people became accustomed to the lifestyle in the city and less and less people became disinterested in taking care of their community values. Later down in the article Leopold says that trying to be a conqueror of the land can lead to self defeat. It leads to self defeat because one who wants to be  in that "conqueror role" must know the ins and out of the community and the end result is they don't know, just as Leopold states. This alone states that we are just a plain member to and a citizen of the community because we don't know what the lands use is.  Often times we don't know about what it takes to keep the land in good conditions, we often times don't know the great values and goods and the bad about the land. I definitely agree as one who is just a citizen of land-community. I can't tell what is valuable about the land, and what its going to take to keep the land in good health. Someone cannot be a conqueror over the land if they don't have the ability to or a responsibility to the health of the land, and that is most times why the quest is cut short!

Homo sapiens evolving
www.importancia.org 

Agree Quote: "We can be ethical only in relation to something we can see, feel, understand, love or otherwise have faith in."

I would have to definitely agree with this statement made by Leopold. Why, because we only tend to care for the values of places, people, and things when there is a sense of attachment to them. When an individual has that attachment to the environment or land, there will be an ethical viewpoint for them. That individual will get a sense of wanting to take care the environment, fight for it to be kept in healthy conditions, for the atmosphere as well as the animals that are present within that environment. If I am unable to see or feel something or I don't have a sense of attachment towards something, why would I place any ethical value to it? The reason I believe I have no ethical value to the environment, is because I don't have a sense of attachment to it. It will be difficult for me to find good in keeping the environment healthy. 

www.deepgreenpermaculture.com

"

"When one asks why no rules  have been written, one is told that the community is not yet ready to to support them ; education must precede rules."

I strongly agree with this statement by Leopold. I agree that if any rules and regulations are going to be set in place for the environment, there must be an educational standing that will support the rules that are being set in stone so individuals who actually want to study the understanding of the ruling, but I'm not necessarily grasping the knowledge as to why that is.