Biodiversity and Human Well-being

Positive relationships between diversity and ecosystem functions were found by experiments where diverstiy was lost and then restored. Ecologists believe that the loss of biodiversity threatens the stability of ecosystems. With an unstable ecosystems animals are unable to adapt to things such as climate and diet. The loss of biodiversity not only threatens animals, but to society as well. Farmers are experiencing a decrease in bees and other species that pollinate from parasities and disease - this is causing a descrease in product. Another example of loss of biodiversity is over fishing - humans fishing is causing such a drastic decrease in species that a ``global collapse`` is predicted to happen in the 21st century. (91, Easton)

Alex Steffen - Sustainable Future

Alex Steffen cofunder of WorldChanging spoke to his audience about our sustainable future. Although our society is the most prosperous, it has major flaws. Our society has such a large, unsustainable ecological footprint. Our society lives in such a way that we will need 5 planets to survive. The one planet we do have, is not treated properly. It is so dynamic that in North America we have people living luxioursly, and people in Africa who can't even survive.
Steffen believes the way we are raising our children is teaching them not to live sustainably or in any way promote stability.
Steffen believes we need to change our cities so they become "bright green cities," where they become more densely populated and more liveable. Potentially, people should not drive cars, they should use efficent tranist systems, reside in buildings that generate there own electricty and recycle their own water. These "bright green cities" will cost less over time.
Cofounder Steffen also discusses "leap frogging" where if one is stuck in a situation where they don't have what they need, they should not invest in old technology but in the cheapest newest technology.

Another world is possible and here.

http://www.ted.com/talks/alex_steffen_sees_a_sustainable_future.html

The Salt Marsh

John and Mildred Teal studied wetlands in the Maritimes, and we specifically researching the flora and fauna that are supported by the salt marshes, their importance and how human activity effects them. Wetlands that have been polluted are filled with trash, and have become posioned and eroded from the waste from surrounding cities. The Teal's say the posioned marshs smell like rotten eggs from hydrogen sulfide.

Cancer and the Envrionment

Since Sanda Steingraber battled bladder cancer and ost a close friend and many family members to cancer, she decided to research  envrionmental pollution she was exposed to in Illinois, believing that maybe this pollution caused her, her friend and her family members to battle cancer. Around her home, fields were sprayed with pesticides, and there were industrial plants that released toxins into the air and water. I agree with Steingrabers statement that all activities with potential public health consquences should be guided by the principle of the least toxic alternative, which presumse that toxic substances will not be used as long as there is another way of accomplishing the task. 161. This principle will ensure that we will move away from the possible cancer risks from carcinogens.

Envrionmental Policies

Mark Sagoff is a director of philosophy and public policy at the Univerity of Maryland. Sagoff discusses the economic decisions we make about the environment. He believes people dont place any value on things like "open space, a stand of trees or an unspoiled landscape," he puts this into perspective by asking his audience, "how much did you spend last year to preserve open space? How much for pizza and gas?" (167, Easton)
Sagoff believes it is impossible to place economic value on things the provide aesthetic satisfaction and value can be determined only by what people are willing to pay. Envrionmental problems are difficult to assess and require much more then an economic analysis.

Restoring Rivers

Our lives depends on clean water for so many things like drinking, irrigation, and power generation. But, from all of these processes, we have caused many bodies of water to be polluted and filled with chemicals, in some cases rivers no longer flow to the sea, or are blocked with dams. According to Professors Margaret Palmer and J. Allan, we must restore rivers so they provide clean water for humans, fisheries and wildlife. They believe or current methods of restoring rivers are not suffiecent; "The United States needs regulatory and legislative federal policy reforms in order to improve the effectiveness of river restoration and thus the health of the nation's waterways." (114, Easton) Standards have been established for river restoration they are;
"The design of a river restoration project should be based on a specific gudining image of a more dynamic, leathy river.
The rivers ecological condition must show measurable improvement.
The river system must be more self-sustaining and resilient to external perturbations, so that only minimal follow up maintenance is needed.
During the construction phase, no lasting harm should be inflicted on the ecosystem.
Both pre and post-assessments must be completed and data made publically available."
(115 Easton)

Will the appropriate use of money and by following the above standars, Allan and Palmer believe "rivers and streams can oce again flow clear and clean." (117, Easton)

Controvery at Love Canal

Beverly Paigen a dedicated advisor disscusses the consequences experienced at Love Canal, from improper disposal of Hazardous wastes. This first became an issue in the 1970's, where chemicals such as PCBS and dioxins were leaking into the basement of peoples homes and into schools. Specifically in 1942, love canal was filled with 21000  tons of around 200 different chemicals. Schools and homes were built on the site, and caused people to become ill. Paigen did a study to understand the exposure of chemicals in many ways;

if illness's were clusted in families is this because this specific family has a low tolerance to chemicals? If the illness's were geographically clustered, is this possibly because the chemicals have migrated to specific areas? And if illness's were random is there no relation? Paigen found that birth defects and miscarriages became much more common in 'wet homes.'

Affluenza - A Painful Condition

The pursuit of the American Dream, causes one to follow down a treacherous road, similar to the one Hunter S Thompson went down in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.

Affluenza defined by John Gaff is "a painful, contagious, socially transmitted condition of overload, debt, anxiety and waste resulting from the" determination to pursue more. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluenza#cite_note-de_Graaf-0)
Personally, I  would consider it more of a disease, that most people in western civilization are diagnosed with, sadly I see signs of the disease in myself.
I find myself never satisfied with what I buy, and I always want more.
The last few months have been pretty stressful for me; I did a lot of travelling, and with travelling comes shopping. Sadly, my air fare, and most of my purchases were made with my Visa. After all this temporary happiness wore off, I was stuck with a 2000 dollar visa bill and a part-time job. This made me very anxious and I decided I must pay it off right away. I'm only 19, and it seems illogical for me to already been in such debt!
 Now, I am working full-time while I attend school full-time, and I am overloaded with work and school. I have been putting entire pay checks towards my visa bill, but I still shop and spend my money on things that provide only temporary satisfaction.
The worst part about it all is I can see myself doing this, and being a subject of affluenza, yet I do nothing about it. I think the media has a really big influence on the decisions I make. I bought a pair of 'combat' boots yesterday for 100 dollars, I could have spent much less on a pair of boots that will last me through the winter, but I thought, "these look good, and they are in style, I should spend the extra money for this reason."
I see affluenza every where, especially within my family because I am a part of it and rather then looking at them from the outside I have an internal perspective. My parents are currently in a 6 year process of renovating their home. The last 6 years have involved a lot of procrastination and mishaps. At the moment, their house is in an uncomfortable living environment, and rather then spending their money on the necessary materials and labor to finish the house, they have decided to put money towards a vacation to Florida. I spoke to my dad, explaining how I think it would be much wiser to place his money towards the house as he would experience more long term satisfaction then a 3 week vacation to Florida. In response, he told me he chooses how he spends his money, and his decision is final. Every one wants to achieve happiness, but it seems every one has forgotten how to be truly happy.
I wonder if there is any way to move away from this disease.
It seems that it has become such a big part of our society that we can't help but transmit this idea to our children. In order for affluenza to stop, sustainable development would have to take over (affluenza is obviously not a sustainable way of life).
It seems with the evidence of carbon emissions, food scarcity, poverty, lack of fertile land and space we will slowly follow the path to sustainable development, and that should take most of society away from affluenza.

Carl Safina

Carl Safina, the author of many books about the ocean, speaks to an audience about the oil spill in the gulf. Safina is traumatized by the oil spill; "Because whenever I look at the ocean, no matter where I am, even where i know none of the oil has gone, i sort of see slicks." (00:45, Carl Safina)
He compares our world to a very fragile soap bubble, which is very easy to effect.
With the burning of gas, oil and other fossil fuels we are changing our atmosphere greatly,  and the catastrophe that happened in the gulf is really only a small contribution to our problems.
Our oceans are becoming more acidified, which is greatly affecting animals. The normal PH level of sea water is 8.1, when a clam is placed in a pH level of 7.5, it dissolves within 3 days. A sea urchin placed in a pH of 7.7 will become deformed and die.
As Safina progresses in his discussion, he mentions the lack of effort of the people in the gulf; "there's nobody out there trying to collect it, where it is densest." (3:59, Carl Safina) People are ignoring the small signs that say do not go in the water, and are swimming in an ocean full of tar. He believes that the dispersant was added just to cover up the mess as the "murderer is in charge of the crime scene." (7:23, Carl Safina)
The government was totally unprepared for the oil spill, and even know they still have not figured out what they need to do. Safina strongly believes that the oil spill is a result of negligence and is certainly not an accident.
Safina closes his discussion by ensuring his audience that clean energy is not too expensive and will not destroy our economy, although fossil fuel suppliers try to convince otherwise.
Personally, I strongly agree with Safinas attitude about the BP oil spill, and how sloppy the government has tried to handle it. As for the expense of clean energy, I believe at this point and after so much destruction, we have no choice to go towards clean energy and away from the recklessness of fossil fuels.

The Zoo

The zoo, was  once on of my favourite places to go as a kid, but as I have grown older and become more educated, it does not seem like such a happy and educational place, like it once did. Yes, the zoo can be an exciting place to be, but how can one call it educational? Staring at an animal, certainly not dwelling in any envrionment comparable to their natural one, can not be defined as educational. The animals do not hunt, they do not find mates and they do not  have the same agression and attitude they would within theit natural habitat.
Treating animals so poorly just for the satisfaction of humans is wrong entirely! It is impossible for the animals to be treated properly; the first problem is keeping them in a jail with no freedom.
Some animals in the zoo might be considered an endagered species, so the zoo is trying to `conserve` the said species by keeping them in holding, by taking care of them and breeding them. How can a 10 by 10 cage possibly create a pleasant atmosphere for any species. I think although the zoo is trying to save their species, they are providing a lower quality of life to the animals.
I must admit, I still enjoy going to the zoo, I mean who wouldn`t want to see a lion or a bear! But when it comes to ethics I don`t believe the zoo should play any role in conservation or education, as it is not right.

My Food System

My food system is quite vague, simple and nutritious; I eat the same thing almost every day! For breakfast I will either have oatmeal or eggs; the oatmeal is purchased at superstore and the eggs are too unless on certain occasions my grandpa goes to a free range farm and will bring us chicken and eggs. For lunch I usually have a salad, where none of the vegetables I use are organic. Dinner consists of chicken breasts and vegetables, normally the chicken is from superstore as well as the vegetables (non-organic).
 Although my regular food system is quite simple and easy to prepare, I dislike how I don't know where my food came from. It would be fair to assume the chickens and eggs came from a large holding farm, which does not provide the animals with a good life or death. I have never really tasted organic fruit or vegetables, so I can't really compare the two, but I do enjoy the taste of the vegetables and fruit I consume from superstore. I think for an environmentalist perspective I need to put more time, and potentially money, into what I purchase. I should start buying locally, and try and arrange all of my eggs, chicken and vegetables to be purchased locally. Ethically speaking, I think one is obligated to spend the extra few bucks and buy locally and from a respected farm then to support the mistreatment of animals and environmental issues caused by agriculture.

On weekends if I am out with friends, we will always end up going out to eat. I work at Prairie Ink, the McNally Robinson restaurant, and although they are known for the healthy and affordable dining, they walk over to Safeway to buy their products. None of their food is bought locally or is organic, and the amount of waste they produce is astronomical. Whether the chef made a mistake in the order, or a customer couldn't finish her meal, it`s thrown in the garbage. The garbage is emptied periodically and the washing machine (for napkins) is always running. So, when my friends and I go out to eat, I know what's going on within the restaurant and I think that this lifestyle where people go out to eat is taking us in the opposite direction of sustainable development. Not only are restaurants supporting conventional farming by purchasing at Safeway, but they are creating so much waste and not even disposing of it properly. For example, Prairie Ink has a compost box that ends up getting filled with garbage, and recyclable items are thrown in the trash as well. On a positive note the take out cutlery and boxes they use are all biodegradable.

The Path to Harmony between Humans and Nature

Gilfford Pinchot was one of the founders and leaders of the U.S conservation movement. He defines conservation as, "the wise use of natural resources to meet human needs and desires," and describes the principles of conservation as "exceedingly simple." (8, Easton) Conservation recognizes the right for the current generations use of resources, so it demands the welfare of the current generation first, and then takes into consideration the next generation. The first principle of conservation is development, which is the use of natural resources for current generations. The second principle is the prevention of waste and to control the earth we live on. Resources must be developed and preserved for the benefit of many people and not for the profit of a few. (9, Easton) Pinchot believes by following the principles of conservation, it should provide the greatest good, to the greatest number for the longest time. Pinchot makes me question, how can we really know a respectable amount of resources to use? At what level do we cut our welfare off? When burning fossil fuels for our current generation, we must take into account the next, but what if there isn`t enough and we can`t find a replacement resource? Should we sacrifice ourselves for the next generation?

Aldo Leopold  was an American preservationist who was concerned with the relationship between people and earth. He believes that humans do not respect the land they live on, and he believes the source of this problem is our educational and economic system. Our educational and economic system does not consider or take into account land ethics, but rather it is more considerate towards technology and "physical gadgets." (12, Easton) Leopold says "a thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. And it is wrong when it tends otherwise." (12, Easton) Leopold is certainly right that are society is consumed with technology, and with the evolution of technology it certainly has taken us further and further away from nature. Although technology has also provided us with longers and happier lives, in order for us to even have a life we need a place to live. Our earth, for billions of years have given us land to build on, food to eat and the materials to create shelter and clothes. Our earth deserves respect and to be treated properly, and by doing so we are respecting ourselves and ensuring a future.

Lester Brown, who founded the World Watch Institute, is concerned with environmental degradation and population growth. Environmental damage will effect the global economy as well; with the collapse of fisheries from over fishing, the loss of timber from deforestation and wasted cropland from erosion are economy is bound to suffer in the form of food scarcity. From evidence, it was determined agriculture has often been connected to environmental deterioration and economic decline. Brown believes rising grain prices will be the first sign that we are living unsustainably, and that humans are in need of a wake up call. We must stabilize population and climate which is dependent on reproduction and reconstruction of the economy. "The futures food security depends on creating an environmentally sustainable economy." (145, Easton) With a growing population, which is supposed to be around 9 billion by 2050, how can we control our poopulation? There are far too many people to control! Does that mean we should create a law on reproducing? Will it become that the government decides who can have a child? Or, will it be a limit as one per household? Our quality and freedom of life is taking a very serious turn for disaster. Soon, not only will we have restrictions on reproduction, but our cities might be redesigned so we don`t have to drive to the super market or to get our hair cut. Will we have to walk everywhere, even in -50 weather?

David Pimentel discusses the time when farming was organic and compares it to today`s farming techniques, which are much more harmful to the environment and to public health. Farming techniques today consist of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, which cause, just in the USA per year, 12 billion dollars worth of environmental and health care costs. Organic farming allows the conservation of soil, water, energy and biological resources. (150, Easton) Although, organic farming has to major problems; nitrogen deficiency and weed competition. Personally, I do not want to eat a bunch of hormone injected, pesiticide filled fruits and vegetables. I also want the animals I eat to have a life filled with quality and time. We should reflect back on how hunters and gatherers lived and learn from their respect for animals and the moderation they exercised.

Wendell Berry discusses how humans no longer live with the land and instead are too focused on technology and how advanced it can become. He spent his childhood in Henry County, where his family owned a small farm. On this farm, they would eat the eggs and drink the milk they produced and grow their own gardens.. Now, Henry County has become `increasingly  mechanized,`` where the lands have become larger and instead are owned by professionals from the city rather than local farmers. (137, Easton)  By farms becoming larger and larger a dependence on machine forms and instead of having a nurturing farmer who tends to his crops, you have a technician focused on size and profit.
Berry thinks we should live by the philosophy, ``act locally, think globally.`` (137, Easton)
At our population and demand it is very difficult for a farmer not to depend on technology to maintain his or her farm. But with a decrease in demand, the farmer is given more time and can be more patient with his crops. Humans must begin to live sustainably and respect the convenience of going to Superstore and buying a dozen eggs, or a loaf of bread. If we keeps on the path of improving technology and disregarding the environment we will undoubtedly be the cause of our own extinction.
Vandana Shiva, a feminist, contrasts women and nature within our patriarchal society. As women are considered the `second sex,` nature is also placed as second. Nature is not seen as valuable, but rather the profit gained out of it is what is concerned important. As diversity is the foundation of women's politics, it is also the foundation for ecology. Since women have such experience in dealing with diversity, Shiva believes women are greatly beneficial to the preservation of biodiversity. In Shivas opinion, women are much more knowledge in the preservation of biodiversity as they are producers, reproducers and consumers. Women are certainly, in most cases, more sensitive than men, and since they reproduce, they naturally are caregivers. Although I agree with Shiva in a lot of her argument, many men are just as capable, if not more capable then women to care for our environment. Since it is an issue that affects both genders, it becomes important to both, and regardless of gender if a person is concerned with the envrionment they will care for it similarily.

Sustainable development, is ``the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs.`` (198, Easton) Sustainability strives towards the satisfaction of all human needs and it requires a society to increasing `` productive potential`` and making sure every one has equal opportunity. Sustainable development must not endanger the atmosphere, water, soil or living beings. That being said, we must use renewable resources in ways it will not be depleted and it the resource is still able to regenerate itself. Non-renewable resources can be used as long as it does no degrade the land in a way it wont recover. In order for sustainable development to become a common interest it must be integrated with the education system as well as law enforcement. It must become of every ones benefit to take into account the environment. We must create harmony between humans and nature in the pursuit of sustainable development.  

Alberta Tar Sands Project

The Alberta Tar Sands Project is said to be the largest oil reserve in the world. In this reserve the oil is not liquid but is extracted from sand, which takes a lot of water to do. Also, to gain access to the sand the land has be destroyed, already 5000 hectares have been destroyed. (http://www.celsias.com/article/the-most-destructive-project-on-earth-albertas-tar/)  By the end of the extraction the water used is very polluted and it cannot be used. They estimate in ten years, "they will have cleared an area the size of Florida." (http://www.celsias.com/article/the-most-destructive-project-on-earth-albertas-tar/)

Birds that come in contact with the polluted water die, which to me is a sign that development like this must stop. This development is damaging the land and the animals that live on it, and at the same time is causing potentially irreversible climate change. I believe it should be stopped and instead put the funding that goes towards the oil extract towards emerging renewable resource technology. Alberta is experiencing acid rain and some say they can even smell oil in the air, I see no reason that this development should be continued.

Jason Clay

Jason Clay is a vice president for the World Wildlife Foundation working with large corporations in hope they can produce more with less. He grew up on a farm that survived off less then a dollar a day and he decided he`d achieve an education to help small farmers and people in poverty. Clay says that the most important thing is to change the way we think. Right now, with our 6 billion population we are living as if we have 1.3 planets. Clay mentions that the average American consumes 43% more then the average African, and the average cat has a larger environmental foot print then the average African. Scientist expect that by 2050 we will have a population of 9 billion who consumes twice as much as we do today, and with our limited resources change must occur. Not only is population growth important, but our lifestyle is as well; how much we consume and waste. `Sustainability must become a precompetitive issues, we need groups to work together that never have,` for example coke and Pepsi.(http://www.ted.com/talks/jason_clay_how_big_brands_can_save_biodiversity.html )

Clay says there are 15 products in great demand; palm oil, cotton, biofuels, sugarcane, pulp and paper, saw wood, dairy, beef
soy, fish oil and meat, farmed salmon, farmed shrimp, tuna, tropical shrimp and white fish. And of these 15 products, he took the top 100 producers, and is trying to work with all the companies to produce sustainable products. Since the top 100 producers are supplying sustainable products it is important for consumers to purchase these products to not only support sustainability but to not support those who choose to produce unsustainable products.

I found clay to be a very productive and powerful speaker -  although he lacked emotion and a sense of humor he spoke seriously and productively. He was to the point with a very motivational plan in progress.

Who is to blame for Environmental Degradation? What are the Consequences? How can we Stop it?

According to Lynn White Jr, Christianity is to blame for environmental degradation. He says this because in the bible man is not made a part of nature, but he is made in God's image. (21, Easton) The view in the bible is very anthropocentric, a human centered view on life, where God insists "man exploit nature for his proper ends." (21, Easton) An anthropocentric view on the world, is not only selfish but is the path to irreversible environmental degradation and a future of discomfort. A biocentric point of view is one I believe to be most beneficial to humans and the environment, where all life is important. In a biocentric point of view it recognizes the relationship between man and nature, and how what affects nature affects man. In biocentrism, because man and nature are directly correlated, man would be so careful to protect and respect nature because he knows in turn, it will affect him in the same way.

Garrett Hardin speaks of  the tragedy of the commons as a dilemma which every person sees our world as limitless which it indeed has a limit. Hardin continues to say that there is no technical solution to this tragedy, where a technical solution is defined as, "one that requires a change only in the techniques of the natural sciences, demanding little or nothing in the way of change in humans values or ideas of morality." Hardin continues to say that pollution is "fouling our own nest," and in order to live sustainable we must change our values and morals and the `freedom to breed is intolerable.` (25, Easton)

Robert Young and Orrin Pilkey discuss how the federal government should stop directing funds to beach preservation and restoration and instead the US should move away from developing the ocean front. Many engineering efforts to protect coastal beaches and infrastructure are counter productive. Young and Pilkey believe that it is unsafe for people to live on the ocean front, therefore the government should not support this. They believe that if it is so important to the community, the community should be responsible to come up with the money.

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment found that over the past 50 years, humans have managed to change ecosystems more than any other time. This is justified by the growing demands for resources like food and water. (49, Easton) With such high demands we are leading towards permanent damage that will be irreversible. Here are some facts that the assessment provided that are quite shocking...

• 20% of the worlds coral reef were lost, 20% were degraded
• H20 withdraws from rivers and lakes doubled since 1960
• Reactive nitrogen has increased by 2 and phosphorus by 3
• C02 increased by 32% from the combustion of fossil fuels (50, Easton)

Amory Lovins discusses the advantages of the use of renewable resources and more efficient methods of energy use. Lovins recommends fluorescent lamps, which use 75-80% less electricity then incandescent bulbs and last 10 to 13 times longer.  He also recommends window coatings that reflect heat, instead of running your furnace at a higher temperature, and also any other product like a fridge or TV that is labeled energy efficient. (66, Easton) Lovins believes that if one chooses this lifestyle where they make more energy efficient decisions will `hold out the promise of a fairer richer and safer world.` (69, Easton)

Christopher Flavin and Seth Dunn discuss how a new energy system is necessary for the 21st century. Energy is something that needs to be valued and used sparingly. Before Homo sapiens relied on only renewable energy, but in the 17th century a transition took place where humans became dependent upon coal and burning fossil fuels. To continue like this means we will continue to damage our environment and we will eventually run out of nonrenewable resources. Saying this, it becomes obvious a change is necessary. Flavin and Dunn believe that with the help of science break through, and improvement in wind and light as an energy source, we can strive towards a more environmentally friendly life. But, not only do we need to change our energy sources, we need to change our lifestyles and the high standards that come with it.
Greenhouse gases are mostly from carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and nitrous oxide emissions from agriculture. Greenhouse gases have caused the years 1995-2006 to be the 12 warmest years to be recorded. Water vapor has increased since the 1980's because warmer air can hold more vapor. The oceans have increased temperatures which causes the sea level to rise. Mountain glaciers and snow cover have declined which also causes the sea level to rise.  (129, Easton) Greenhouse gases have also cause a rise in arctic temperatures, changes in precipitation, ocean salinity, wind patterns and extreme weather occurrences. (130, Easton) If we continue to emit greenhouse gases at this rate or higher the changes we will see will be much more drastic then previously experienced. Our earth will continue to warm and sea levels will rise even if greenhouse gases are kept at a constant rate because they will remain in the atmosphere.

Riding Mountain Challenge

   My dad and I cycling through Riding Mountain

Just this past month my dad and I participated in the Riding Mountain National Park bike tour challenge. This is a charitable bike ride for MS, that goes through the park located just outside of Dauphin. I was quite excited as I heard the ride is scenic and I would be seeing lots of wildlife along the way. Well, we departed Dauphin that morning, and set sail for Clear lake.

85 km later...

We arrived in Clear lake, without seeing one moose, bear or even a deer! Now, don't get me wrong, the ride was gorgeous. The entire road was surrounded by trees and little bodies of crystal clear water, but where were the animals? According to Riding Mountain National Parks Management Plan, they hope to maintain intact habitats and natural processes while raising awareness and understanding amongst young Canadians. (11, Riding Mountain Management Plan)  How can this all be done while a long, wide road goes all the way through the park enabling cars and semis to ride right through it? My hypothesis is that all this traffic must scare the animals away and disrupting them from there natural habitat which the park strives to preserve. How can we preserve the land and their habitat if it is on public display? In order to maintain these "intact habitats" they must remain undisturbed. But how will Canadians learn and understand about intact habitats and natural processes if they are never subjected to them? This poses the question; is it possible for parks to meet its dual mandate of access and protection? I would say yes, but with limitations. I don't believe national parks can remain a tourist attraction but they should be viewed as an opportunity for research and observation.  I believe the amount of visitors should be limited and they should travel in groups, opposed to having a small number of people coming in many different ways of transportation. As you can see in the picture of my dad and I, there is a wide road that goes through the entire park, and because the park is so hilly, asphalt must be relayed every year. With all this construction and maintenance to the road it seems very unbelievable that this land is being preserved and a comfortable environment for wildlife. If less vehicles travelled through the park, road maintenance would not be as necessary and frequent.


 Wapsuk, another national park in Canada, is one of the largest polar bear protecting areas in the world. Will visitors to Wapsuk cause a similar situation that I observed in Riding Mountain? I do believe if we follow the same idea as to limited visitors and smart transportation to the park, the polar bears and other wildlife will remain safe and comfortable. Since Wapsuk is located in the North of Manitoba, right along Hudson Bay, I believe the amount of tourists compared to Riding Mountain would be significantly less, therefore it is much easier for Wapsuk to protect and enable access to the park. Regardless of location, both parks remain a very important piece to Canadians past and future, and they must be treated with respect and care.


Wapusk                                                                Riding Mountain

Works Cited
Canada, Government . "Parks Canada - Riding Mountain National Park - Riding Mountain National Park of Canada." Parcs Canada | Parks Canada. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. http://www.pc.gc.ca/pn-np/mb/riding/index.aspx.

Canada, Government . "Parks Canada - Wapusk National Park." Parcs Canada | Parks Canada. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. http://www.pc.gc.ca/pn-np/mb/wapusk/index.aspx.

Clesias. "The Most Destructive Project on Earth: Alberta's Tar Sands | Use Celsias.com - reduce global °Celsius." Use Celsias.com - reduce global °Celsius. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. http://www.celsias.com/article/the-most-destructive-project-on-earth-albertas-tar/.

Easton, Thomas A. Classic Edition Sources: Environmental Studies (Classic Edition Sources). 3 ed. Dubuque, Iowa: Mcgraw-hill/dushkin, 2008. Print.

An Inspiring Story

John Francis, an American Environmentalist, has refrained from using motorized vehicles and has walked and sailed the world for the past 22 years. After seeing two oil tankers collide and spill gallons of oil beneath the golden gates, Francis decided he must give up driving and riding in motorized vehicles, he also decided to give up speaking and he listened for 17 years. During these 17 years Francis went to school and earned a Ph.d. Through his 22 years of travelling and 17 years of not speaking Francis learned that communication is vital to saving our environment. He also realized he must come out of his long silence to share his message; "we have to leave behind the security of what we have become and go to the place of who we are becoming. " (John Francis) Francis makes the parallel that we are the environment and how we treat each other is how we should treat the environment. Change must be made in order to achieve a sustainable environment. He stresses that we must come out of our comfort zones of who we have become and respect our environment, and respect ourselves.

While thinking about Francis's idea, I began to think about whether the media does really do a good job at covering current issues. Well, considering I had never heard of Francis before this video, I would say no. But, I also don't watch the news or read as often as I should. But, as for media coverage I do see, I believe although it is relevant, they focus too much on small details and don't look at the issue as a whole. The media lacks logic in there way of presenting current issues. Instead of introducing the issues and ways to fix it, they scare audiences and make them feel helpless. When the oil spill occurred in the gulf, fingers were pointed as to who was to blame and not much action was taken.

There is a pro-environment group where people believe that the all environmental issues are vital and changes must begin now. And, opposing pro-environment are the people who believe the current environmental issues are exaggerated and it is not that important to our future as the media makes it out to be. Well, I believe that the media exaggerates everything, for example, in my criminology class we were learning about crime statistics and in one particular case murder rates dropped 5%, meanwhile the murder media coverage increased by 20%. Although, I believe that humans should be pro-environment regardless of the media as Francis says we are the environment. Whether global warming is actually happening, and whether our ozone layer is seriously and quickly deteriorating, we should still practice environmentally friendly ways and try to come away from the destructive and wasteful people we have become. We should aim towards a goal which will allow us and the future generations a lifestyle which is not only sustainable but provides quality to all.

This sustainable life is difficult to achieve because we have become so comfortable in our ways, but that does not make it impossible. Humans have evolved  from nomads to highly sophisticated and technologically advanced individuals who generation after generation achieve and accomplish what once was thought impossible. To me this is inspiration and belief that a sustainable future is more then possible. With the growing disconnect from the environment, our goal only seems to be further away. People have lost touch with the environment, and over beautiful natural habitats we have built offices and homes and buildings among buildings. With this growing disconnect we move further away from our goal, and this to me creates a danger. Where has our love for our earth gone? We have become too focused on materialistic things to stop and think that we must protect our environment to protect ourselves. If our way of life continues this way, we will certainly not only look past our Earth's beauty but damage our environment in ways such as deforestation and habitat destruction, and we will lose soil fertility. As our population increase we will over hunt, emit more greenhouse gases, and be short energy. (215, Easton)  So I say get outside and help our earth, and in turn it will help us!

Dear 2010 - From 2500

Today I had a very rude awakening to how inconsiderate and foolish our species was only some centuries ago. To vent a little I am directing a letter to the people of 2010. Here I go...

Dear 2010,

Not too long ago, I was allowed to drive into a McDonalds drive through in a gas fueled car and order a hamburger with extra cheese, extra pickles and you know, the works. Just today, I stood inside a McDonalds for the first time, of course I could not get the delicious burger I have read about. Since the Sustainable Act in the year 2482 took place, all restaurants were shut down, supermarkets as they were once known were drastically changed and our economy took a big leap forward, although some might say in reverse. I certainly do.

As we now have farms breeding animals in controlled environments, my family and I are limited to the meat and poultry we eat throughout the month. We are rationed with not only meat, but fruits and vegetables too. We live in a small home, and we can only use so much heat in the winter and next to no air conditioning in the summer. As for transportation, you don't see any cars around. We do have electric powered cars, but only police, paramedics and government employed are allowed to operate one. There is public transportation, but most people use there bikes or walk.

 My older sister, who is now 25 and married would like to have a child, but since 2484, one must be granted permission from the government to have a child. She's on an insanely long wait list. How is this fair? Our government, following the sustainable act, is attempting to level off the population at a number that is sustainable economically, socially and environmentally.

Now, let's rewind a few years, well a little more, and look at how you lucky guys got to live, and how, even though you had great warning you chose my inconvenient  fate. Philosopher, George Santayana once said, "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." (213, Easton)  From this idea, Jared Diamond, a world renown professor wrote a novel on how a society can choose to fail or succeed. Diamond discussed that similar to Mayan civilizations and others societies such as the Anasazis and Cahokia which failed due to lack of resourse, over population and other forms of ecocide, the people after the millennium will experience a similar collapse unless, the decisions made 'today' are designed to benefit 'tomorrow'. (213-214, Easton)

Now, 2010, you might say that the Aztecs and other civilizations failed due to lack of technology, but infact technology is a big factor which contributed to the sustainable act. The Ehrlich Professors of your time, said that due to the population explosion, or in other words, the increase of consumption, the damage on the environment increased. This is because different technologies trying to support this increase were on high demand, causing more pollution and other waste. (184, Easton) In a way the Ehrlichs presumed the control of reproduction in the future, when the two discussed a 'optimum population size..." (185, Easton) It also brings me to shame how, even though encouraged to do so, the public health officials of your time, ignored the request to look into possible health problems of environmental contaminants, such as DES. (162, Easton)

Humans and animals share the world, so it seems to me, only obvious that what affects animals and their environment must affect humans and our environment. (162, Easton). Theo Colborn, a professor in Florida, discussed the affect of a chemical DES, "a synthetic hormone drug," or estrogen, which was used to increase growth in cattle. DES caused abnormalities such as cancer and tumors mainly in women and children. (163, Easton) This situation proved obvious that humans were in "jeopardy" and were "affected" by chemicals released into the environment. (163, Easton) As Colborn says, "the tragedy is that we ignored the warning." (164, Easton.)

 As these numerous warnings against environmental damage and over population were made and continuously ignored, my generation was destined to a life with little freedom and little quality.
Cheers 2010.

Arielle Lofchick -7645343

Work's Cited
Easton, Thomas A. Classic Edition Sources: Environmental Studies (Classic Edition Sources). 3 ed. Dubuque, Iowa: Mcgraw-hill/dushkin, 2008. Print.


TED. "John Francis walks the Earth | Video on TED.com." TED: Ideas worth spreading. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Sept. 2010. <http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/john_francis_walks_the_earth.html>.