A post-Industrial Revolution starting date may suggest, to the uninitiated at least, that everything that came before was ‘natural.’ Restoration ecology and conservation biology, then, may not need to consider the deeper history of human impacts that predate the start of the Anthropocene. This would be a giant step backward at a critical time, one that ignores decades of work and progress by ecologists, geologists, paleobiologists, environmental historians, archaeologists, and many other scientists who have demonstrated the vast array of pre-industrial human impacts on local, regional, and global environments. Anti-cancer Compound Library order Now that the ‘shifting baselines’

concept has been widely accepted (Pauly, 1995 and Jackson et al., 2011) and is being translated into public policy, we should not risk going ERK inhibitor backwards. Historical data are crucial

to future management, conservation, and restoration efforts. Ultimately, as the papers in this volume demonstrate, the definition of an Anthropocene epoch marked by the human domination of Earth’s ecosystems should explicitly recognize the deep historical processes that contributed to such domination. There is little question that a variety of geological and archaeological evidence will clearly illustrate that domination to future scientists. If the value of historical records now seems obvious, defining a starting date for the Anthropocene is a trickier business, depending on the specific criteria (e.g., atmospheric composition,

faunal and floral changes, geochemical records, or specific ‘marker’ fossils such as AMH and domesticated dogs, cattle, horses, sheep, pigs) utilized. Although we favour a starting date of ∼10,000 cal BP and the merging of the Anthropocene and Holocene, any inception date is bound to be at least somewhat arbitrary. Consequently, a beginning Tacrolimus (FK506) date of AD 1950 or AD 2000 could be acceptable if the long process that led to human domination of the Earth is explicitly recognized. As a lightning rod for galvanizing future environmental management and a call-to-arms for public involvement in helping solve our world’s environmental crises, the Anthropocene should help focus attention on better understanding the deep, complex, and ongoing history of human impacts on local, regional, and global scales. Here we offer several options for consideration by the ICS and the growing and global community of scientists interested in the definition of an Anthropocene epoch. 1. Follow the suggestion of Smith and Zeder (2014) by merging the Holocene and Anthropocene into one geologic epoch. The Holocene is defined relatively arbitrarily, tenuously in our opinion, as it was not clearly differentiated from previous interglacial periods within the Pleistocene prior to anthropogenic global warming.