Abstract
In a zoosemiotic inquiry, alloanimal agency is accepted as a natural property of all animals. The aim of zoosemiotics is to analyse the behaviour of alloanimals and ecological relations through the emic perspective. This chapter shows certain changes that take place in an animal’s perceptual world and are mirrored in their operational world. The zoosemiotic analysis will be based on the Umwelt theory and work chiefly with a case study of reintroduction of the European mink (Mustela lutreola) and interviews conducted with local people in 2019 on the island of Hiiumaa in Estonia. The agency of animals becomes especially important when substantial changes take place in their environment, their food resources, or social relations; these are changes to which animals must adapt according to their Umwelt. In the context of reintroduction of the European mink, animal agency is central because ex situ environment was replaced with an in situ environment. What will be proposed and formulated is a special case of Umwelt transition, an ‘Umwelt reversion’, where the reintroduced minks return to their ‘natural’ social relations and food resources. This indicates that meaning carriers in the environment can change due to the agency of the mink.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In this article, we refer to ‘agent’ and ‘agency’ in a synonymous fashion (see Tønnessen, 2015 for further discussion), where agents – i.e., subjects possessing agency – are the alloanimals.
- 2.
Perceptual world (see, e.g., Uexküll 1992: 320).
- 3.
Effector world (see, e.g., Uexküll 1992: 320).
- 4.
An overview of the concept of a functional circle should also make it clear that since plants do not have receptor and effector organs, they ‘are not able to construct and be in command of an Umwelt’ (von Uexküll, 1982: 33).
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
Previous head of conservation centre and currently the director of the Tallinn Zoological Gardens.
- 8.
Specialist on reintroduction of the European mink to the island of Saaremaa.
- 9.
For a detailed timeline, see Mäekivi et al., 2021: 7.
- 10.
Although the concept of ‘reversion’ carries some connotations to genetics, where this concept is used to describe cases where alterations or mutations are reversed. We do not see it as a problem for our Umwelt analysis, where the reversion can take place solely through the activity of the subject, i.e., animal.
- 11.
Some females were equipped with radio-tracking devices, which made them easily recognisable, and all minks caught during monitoring were equipped with a data chip (F, 55, veterinarian; personal communication with Tiit Maran).
- 12.
One might argue that ‘natural’ food sources are more easily attainable for the reintroduced mink and that is the reason for choosing them, but our emphasis is rather on the agential aspect then reasons for executing their agency.
- 13.
- 14.
According to 2019 monitoring results app. 190–210 animals in the autumn (personal communication with Tiit Maran).
- 15.
Finding their way to human settlements ended fatally for the mink at least on two occasions according to our interviews. In both cases, the minks’ boldness was misinterpreted as having rabies (F, 45, environmental officer; F, 33, livestock farmer; F, 55, veterinarian).
References
Anadón, J., Giménez, A., Ballestar, R., & Pérez, I. (2008). Evaluation of local ecological knowledge as a method for collecting extensive data on animal abundance. Conservation Biology, 23(3), 617–625.
Brook, R., & McLachlan, S. (2008). Trends and prospects for local knowledge in ecological and conservation research and monitoring. Biodiversity and Conservation, 17(14), 3501–3512.
de Waal, F. (2019). Fish, mirrors, and a gradualist perspective on self-awareness. PLoS Biology, 17(2), e3000112.
Garin, I., Aihartza, J., Zuberogoitia, I., & Zabala, J. (2002a). Activity pattern of European mink (Mustela lutreola) in southwestern Europe. Zeitschrift für Jagdwissenschaft, 48, 102–106.
Garin, I., Zuberogoitia, I., Zabala, J., Aihartza, J., Clevenger, A., & Rallo, A. (2002b). Home ranges of European mink Mustela lutreola in southwestern Europe. Acta Theriologica, 47(1), 55–62.
Gilchrist, G., Mallory, M., & Merkel, F. (2005). Can local ecological knowledge contribute to wildlife management? Case studies of migratory birds. Ecology and Society, 10(1), 20. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss1/art20/. Accessed 20 Apr 2021.
Haage, M., Maran, T., Bergvall, U., Elmhagen, B., & Angerbjörn, A. (2017). The influence of spatiotemporal conditions and personality on survival in reintroductions – Evolutionary implications. Oecologia, 183, 45–56.
Hediger, H. (1950). Wild animals in captivity: An outline of the biology of zoological gardens. Dover Publisher.
Krampen, M. (1997). Models of semiosis. In R. Posner, K. Robering, & T. Sebeok (Eds.), Semiotics: A handbook on the sign-theoretic foundations of nature and culture (pp. 247–287). Walter de Gruyter.
Kull, K., & Favareau, D. (2022). Neurosemiotics and the mechanisms of animal semiosis. In A. García & A. Ibáñez (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of Neurosemiotics (pp. 15–32). Routledge.
Lestel, D. (2014). Hybrid communities. Angelaki – Journal of the Theoretical Humanities, 19(3), 61–73.
MacFarland, S., & Hediger, R. (Eds.). (2009). Animals and agency: An interdisciplinary exploration. Brill.
Mäekivi, N. (2018). The zoological garden as a hybrid environment – A (zoo)semiotic analysis. University of Tartu Press.
Mäekivi, N., Kiisel, M., & Magnus, R. (2021). Euroopa naaritsa taasasustamise õppetunnid [Lessons from Reintroducing the European mink]. https://www.flfi.ut.ee/sites/default/files/raport_-_euroopa_naaritsa_taasasusamise_oppetunnid_loplik.pdf. Accessed 24 Apr 2021.
Maran, T., & Põdra, M. (2009). Euroopa naaritsa Mustela lutreola tegevuskava (2010–2014) [Action Plan for the European mink Mustela lutreola (2010–2014)] https://www.envir.ee/sites/default/files/elfinder/article_files/euroopanaarits_kava_uus.pdf. Accessed 24 Apr 2021.
Maran, T., Kruuk, H., Macdonald, D., & Põlma, M. (1998). Diet of two species of mink in Estonia: Displacement of Mustela lutreola by M. vison. Communications from the Mammal Society, 76, 218–222.
Maran, T., Põdra, M., Põlma, M., & Macdonald, D. (2009). The survival of captive-born animals in restoration programmes – Case study of the endangered European mink Mustela lutreola. Biological Conservation, 142, 1685–1692.
Maran, T., Tønnessen, M., Magnus, R., Mäekivi, N., Rattasepp, S., & Tüür, K. (2016). Introducing zoosemiotics: Philosophy and historical background. In T. Maran, M. Tønnessen, & S. Rattasepp (Eds.), Animal Umwelten in a changing world. Zoosemiotic perspectives (pp. 10–28). Tartu University Press.
Maran, T., Põdra, M., Harrington, L., & Macdonald, D. (2017). European mink: Restoration attempts for a species on the brink of extinction. In D. Macdonald, C. Newman, & L. Harrington (Eds.), Biology and conservation of Musteloids. Oxford Scholarship.
Martinelli, D. (2010). A critical companion to Zoosemiotics: People, paths, ideas. (biosemiotics 5). Springer.
Ortiz-Jiménez, L., Iglesias-Merchan, C., & Barja, I. (2021). Behavioral responses of the European mink in the face of different threats: Conspecific competitors, predators, and anthropic disturbances. Scientific Reports, 11(8266), 1–13.
Payne, C., Tillberg, C., & Suarez, A. (2004). Recognition systems and biological invasions. Annales Zooogici Fennici, 41, 843–858. Finnish Zoological and Botanical Publishing Board.
Põdra, M., Maran, T., Sidorovich, V., Johnson, P., & Macdonald, D. (2013). Restoration programmes and the development of a natural diet: A case study of captive-bred European mink. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 59(1), 93–104.
Rees, A. (2017). Animal agents? Historiography, theory and the history of science in the Anthropocene. British Journal for the History of Science, 2, 1–10.
Sebeok, T. (1968). Zoosemiotics. American Speech, 43(2), 142–144.
Sebeok, T. (1972). Perspectives in Zoosemiotics. Mouton.
Sebeok, T. (1986). I think I am a verb: More contributions to the doctrine of signs. Springer.
Sebeok, T. (1990). Communication in animals and men. In T. Sebeok (Ed.), Essays in Zoosemiotics (pp. 15–36). Toronto Semiotic Circle.
Sebeok, T. (2001). Signs: An introduction to semiotics (2nd ed.). Toronto University Press.
Sidorovich, V., Polozov, A., & Zalewski, A. (2010). Food niche variation of European and American mink during the American mink invasion in North-Eastern Belarus. Biological Invasions, 12(7), 2207–2217.
Steward, H. (2009). Animal agency. Inquiry, 52(3), 217–231.
Tønnessen, M. (2009). Umwelt transitions: Uexküll and environmental change. Biosemiotics, 2, 47–64.
Tønnessen, M. (2015). The biosemiotic glossary project: Agent, agency. Biosemiotics, 8, 125–143.
Ulicsni, V., Babal, D., Juhasz, E., Molnar, Z., & Biró, M. (2020). Local knowledge about a newly reintroduced, rapidly spreading species (Eurasian beaver) and perception of its impact on ecosystem services. PLoS One, 15(5), e0233506. doi:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233506. Accessed 20 Apr 2021.
von Uexküll, J. (1982). The theory of meaning. Semiotica, 42(1), 25–82.
von Uexküll, J. (1992[1934]). A stroll through the worlds of animals and men: A picture book of invisible worlds. Semiotica, 89(4), 319–391.
Acknowledgements
This research is supported by grants PRG314 ‘Semiotic fitting as a mechanism of biocultural diversity: instability and sustainability in novel environments (1.01.2019−31.12.2023)’ and Australian Research Council Discovery Projects scheme (DP200103404). Special thanks to Riin Magnus and Maie Kiisel with whom we conducted the interviews, and to the interviewees for providing us with valuable knowledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mäekivi, N. (2024). Organisms as Agents in Zoosemiotic Perspective: The Case of Umwelt Reversion. In: Švorcová, J. (eds) Organismal Agency. Biosemiotics, vol 28. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53626-7_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53626-7_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-53625-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-53626-7
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)