<P> The fur trade was as detrimental to the survival of native people as it was imperative to the success of settlers due the high European demand . Trappers employed natives because of their knowledge of the terrain and wildlife, putting natives with no immunity to European diseases into close contact with Europeans . </P> <P> The fur trade also upset the ecological balance of North America . "Restraint wasn't a hallmark of the fur trade . In 1822, in the north western regions of the country alone, the Hudson's Bay Company stockpiled 1500 fox skins, a paltry number compared with the 106,000 beaver skins, but too many none the less . The fur traders had miscalculated . As predators, they had failed to adapt to their prey, and their prey, in turn, retaliated with denial . Of course, the red fox didn't render himself extinct . His numbers merely shrank .". </P> <P> Historian and professor Alfred Crosby wrote Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900 - 1900 in 1986 . He uses the term "Neo-Europes" to describe the places colonized and conquered by Europeans . </P>

What is ecological imperialism and what did it mean for north america