Savanna or parkland?

[Marc Verha]

Ecology professor Derek Ellis:

I am getting increasingly concerned about the loose use of the
term "savannah" by human evolutionists. Savannah to an
ecologist means tropical, extensive, virtually flat, grassland
with very restricted open water. I suspect that many people
using the term "savannah" actually mean what ecologists term
"parkland",
i.e. grassland with trees, usually clumped around some sort of
water source. When I read the term "savannah" anywhere, I
try to find out if the writer knows that the type of
grassland habitat adjacent to forests, is most likely to
be "parkland" not savannah. Savannah could only be freely
entered when humans had horses, cars or some other form
of rapid transit. A few human cultures obviously have
managed to evolve social groups of males hunting over the
savannah, running far out from drinking water and shelter
from group-hunting large predators. But I just can't
believe that any ape-human could live out on the
savannah, rather than on parkland. Let's get our habitat
terminology right.

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 1, 1:07=A0pm, Marc Verhaegen
<m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:

> Let's get our habitat terminology right.

Someone thought different????

http://portals.wi.wur.nl/files/docs/Image/landscapes/Pictures-
/Savanna.jpg

http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2001/december/hominids.htm Dr
Julia Lee-Thorp "It makes sense when one considers that global
climates changed between about 4 - 1.8 millions years ago,
causing African forests to be replaced by woodlands and
grasslands."

Dennell 2003 "The earliest Eurasians preferentially occupied
grasslands and open scrub- and wood-lands, as in East Africa.
Homo ergaster/erectus in East Africa after 1.7 Ma is
associated with hot and dry conditions, and open grasslands;
its post-cranial anatomy, with its long limbs was geared to
long-distance walking across open ground, and to heat
dispersal through upright posture."

[claudiusde]

On Apr 1, 1:07=A0pm, Marc Verhaegen
<m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
> Ecology professor Derek Ellis:
>
> I am getting increasingly concerned about the loose use of
> the term "savannah" by human evolutionists. Savannah to an
> ecologist means tropical, extensive, virtually flat,
> grassland with very restricted open water. I suspect that
> many people using the term "savannah" actually mean what
> ecologists term "parkland",
> i.e. grassland with trees, usually clumped around some sort
> of water sourc=
e.
> When I read the term "savannah" anywhere, I try to find out
> if the writer knows that the type of grassland habitat
> adjacent to forests, is most likely to be "parkland" not
> savannah. Savannah could only be freely entered when humans
> had horses, cars or some=

> other form of rapid transit. A few human cultures obviously
> have managed t=
o
> evolve social groups of males hunting over the savannah,
> running far out from drinking water and shelter from
> group-hunting large predators. But I just can't believe that
> any ape-human could live out on the savannah, rather than on
> parkland. Let's get our habitat terminology right.

I am getting increasingly concerned about the loose use of the
term "aquatic" by human evolutionists. Aquatic to an ecologist
means in water. I suspect that many people using the term
"Aquatic" actually mean what ecologists term "Littoral",
e.a. beach with trees, usually clumped around some sort of
water source. When I read the term "aquatic" anywhere, I
try to find out if the writer knows that the type of
beach habitat adjacent to forests, is most likely to be
"littoral" not aquatic. Aquatic habitat could only be
freely entered when humans had boats. A few human
cultures obviously have managed to evolve social groups
of males fishing over the sea. But I just can't believe
that any ape-human could live in the waters of an ocean
or sea rather than on or near a beach or in the littoral
forest nearby. Let's get our habitat terminology right.