"Ecology was everywhere": Ecological leaders from West Virginia

Background/Question/Methods

Conventional histories of American ecology focus on several formative universities and research institutions. However, most ecologists spent at least part of their careers at less well-known institutions. To what extent did their experiences at these other locations influence the evolution of the field and of ESA?

In this case study, we present West Virginia University (WVU) as an example of an institution not in the historical spotlight.  A public, flagship, and land-grant institution, WVU was founded in 1867 and has a current enrollment of 30,000 students.  Around the time of ESA’s founding in 1915, WVU was much smaller but had a robust program in applied science and a new building to house departments of forestry and agriculture. The nation’s first program in mine engineering dates to this time and place as well, which was a harbinger of well-known environmental impacts to come.  

We analyzed contributions made by four scientists who spent time at WVU: Victor Shelford, undergraduate from 1899-1901; Albert Reese, nominated by Shelford in 1936 to spearhead an ESA-sponsored campaign against “vermin control”; Earl Core, a well known naturalist; and Robert Leo Smith, author of the widely-adopted textbooks Ecology and Field Biology and Elements of Ecology.

Results/Conclusions

Shelford, Core and Reese were naturalists. This reflects early phases in the discipline of ecology prior to World War II. Smith’s textbook, produced 20 years after WWII, resulted from a need to standardize methodology.  All four individuals witnessed a steep increase in the extraction of West Virginia’s natural resources, which appears to have influenced both their scholarship and predilections to become environmental activists.

The themes of disturbance and activism are important to understanding West Virginia’s contributions to the development of ecology. The low population of the state as well as its rich natural resources and resource extraction may have affected the careers of these historical figures.  This case study reinforces previous work showing that the place a scientist lives and works influences the way s/he thinks about and practices ecology. This is not a counter-narrative to the history of ecology as it stands. Rather, it is meant to enrich it, and to serve as a reminder that ecology today is a result of a complex, collective process in which input from institutions throughout the nation was incorporated.