“The extension of ethics to this third element in human environment is, if I read the evidence correctly, an evolutionary possibility and an ecological necessity. It is the third step in a sequence. The first two have already been taken. Individual thinkers since the days of Ezekiel and Isaiah have asserted that the despoliation of land is not only inexpedient but wrong. Society, however, has not yet affirmed their belief. I regard the present conservation movement as the embryo of such an affirmation” (239).

This quote stood out to me be I found that it contains a sense of optimism, that Leopold feels we are in the starting stages of our conservation movement at that time of extending our ethics to the land.

“A land ethic of course cannot prevent the alteration, management, and use of these ‘resources,’ but it does affirm their right to continued existence, and, at least in spots, their continued existence in a natural state” (240).

This line in particular stood out to me because we recently discussed the concept of Deep Ecology in my conservation biology class. While discussing this concept we spoke of the intrinsic value all things had, their equal right to existence, and their equal value to us humans. I think this line shows Leopold wants to be realistic about this goal he is putting forth, but he is also expressing the deep ecology rooted in his idea for the Land Ethic.

“(A) regards the land as soil, and its function as commodity-production; another group (B) regards the land as biota, and its function as something broader” (258-259).

Another line from the Land Ethic that caught my eye. I really love this synergy I am finding between Conservation Biology and this class. We looked at anthropocentrism vs. deep ecology, and I think group A expresses the anthropocentric side, while group B expresses this deep ecology side. It is interesting to see a concept we took notes on in that class, demonstrated in a reading we done for this class; it is nice to see these things in a variety of ways.