Government agencies have a huge stake in the NYC Water Supply.  There are many government agencies impacted by the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYC DEP) and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC).  The EPA is unique because it does not have one set procedure for protection of New York’s water supply.  In 1993, the EPA accepted a waiver from NYC from filtration of the water coming down from the Catskills.  The reason behind NYC’s request was because of cost.  The EPA also added over 150 conditions, in a compromise.  The conditions were mostly watershed protection and reservoir monitoring matters.

The NYC DEP issued a harder approach for farmers, homeowners, and businesses in response to this action by the EPA.  Residents of the towns where the reservoirs were located felt alienated by the act and felt that urban NYC was going to stunt their slowly growing economy by placing additional restrictions on local upstate residents.  In 1994, a coalition representing 34 towns provided so much support that NYC was unable to put their agreement with the EPA in effect.

In 1997, the Watershed Memorandum of Agreement came into play.  This Memo attempted to please all parties and has placed restrictions on NYC with use of eminent domain.  It also says the city will spend greater than 1.2 billion on infrastructure improvements.

Since the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, the EPA has regulated water so that it is safe to consume.  After the Surface Water Treatment Rule, the NYC DEP has made sure that water is filtered, and if it is not there must be several safety measures taken to make sure it is also safe for consumption.

Taking these rules into consideration the government has an obligation to protect the people from hazardous chemicals that may be found in the waters.  With New York City, one of the world’s most important cities, at risk, this matter is serious.  The question of who is to blame and who must pay for all this regulation is what the hoopla is about.  Should the city fit the bill or is it the Federal Government’s responsibility?  Both governments have large roles; the city has the more important one, however.  In many studies done, most people would say the water is safe to drink in NYC.  Because of the Watershed Memo Agreement, many stakeholders had to compromise.  Ultimately, the health of New York City residents must have to come before any profits or development is to be made on these lands.

SOURCE:

Blaine, James G., Bernard W. Sweeney, and David B. Arscott. “Enhanced Source-water Monitoring for New York City: Historical Framework, Political Context, and Project Design.” Http://www.stroudcenter.org/. The North American Benthological Society, 2006. Web. 1 Dec. 2012.

1. What impacts have you book had on the conservation community?
2. Has your opinion on invasive species changed since publishing your book?
3. What role do you think government has on the environment?
4. How has the conservation population taken your book? Are there any solutions that you feel Rambunctious Garden played a key role in?
5. Why did you write Rambunctious Garden?

How can we address the problems with our environment?  What strategies are best for all parties involved?  Emma Marris tries to provide the reader of Rambunctious Garden with answers.  The simple answer is that in order to have well serving ecosystems all parties (owners, managers, and government) need to come up with common goals.  Marris goes on to list seven goals we must keep in mind as we go forward.

Goal one is to protect the rights of other species by realizing what Nauss calls “deep ecology” and connecting that to the intrinsic value of nature.  The main view is that humans must reduce their intensive impact on the Earth.  This view can be seen in two ways: 1. Letting a species live and survive on its own, 2. Buying ammunition so that a certain species will not eliminate other loved species.

The second goal Marris points out is protecting charismatic megafauna.  These are the beautiful wild animals that we have come to love by viewing the Discovery Channel and going to zoos.  The World Wildlife Federation has held responsibility in this field.  Animals we are aiming to protect include whales, dolphins, gorillas, tigers, and pandas.  One large population that is under the threat of poaching is the African Elephant.  In fact, the only place where the elephant is not threatened is in South Africa.  Ironically the population is getting so large that the organization has resumed culling the largest land mammals.

Goals 3, 4, and 5, deal with slowing the rate of extinction, protecting genetic identity, and creating biodiversity.  One of the greatest pieces of environmental legislation is the Endangered Species Act of 1996.  This piece of law has protected numerous species by placing them on that list and this leads to certain problems.  Specific species are incorrectly classified under genus, therefore are never even considered an endangered species, even though they might be.  Scientists can share the blame because they have failed to identify certain species.

Maximizing ecologic services and protecting the spiritual and aesthetic experiences is what sums up the goals for Marris.  She brings up the Sandhill crane on the Platte River in Nebraska.  Every March these cranes land in the river and spend some time before heading up north to Canada.  Due to industry, however, the river has been altered in many ways and humans have had to use heavy machinery to clear space for these marvelous birds.  Through human intervention the cranes have made a positive impact on the ecosystem.

All these goals may seem unrealistic to any person who does not care about the environment.  Many Americans go through their day without thinking about these things.  Marris realizes that and says that the only way for change to come about is if parties involved make complex compromises.  One key aspect is keeping green, open land undeveloped.  A great example to follow is the Hawaiian Ahupua’a.  We need certain wedges in our environment to be restored to the peak of human use and even restored to the era of early European contact.  We need a rambuncious garden.

Emma Marris uses the concepts of ‘Designer Ecosystems’ and ‘Conservation Everywhere’ to illustrate her perspective of what humans should do about nature.  Her book, Rambunctious Garden, says it very clearly.  Human beings should not reserve nature for a closed off section in the wild, but rather incorporate the wild into their everyday lives.  Marris uses perspective from well-respected scientists such as Hobbs to strengthen her argument for Designer Ecosystems.  Marris then goes on to praise the work of Ilkka Hanski, a researcher from Finland who has quite a unique garden.

Designer Ecosystems, what are they?  In many ways they sound like what they are.  They are habitats, wildlife, flora that are designed through effort.  Hobbs says that many ecologists will like a certain species if it is native to the land.  “Depending on whether you say it was native or not native they like it or don’t like it,”

(Location 2452).  To him it was a game.  Too many ecologists rely on baselines for “pristine wilderness.”  The idea behind designer ecosystems can be described in these lines when Hobbs says, “You are not going to get the previous ecosystem back, but you can still aim for something that is valuable,”

(Location 2480).  Hobbs is talking about an area where the soil was so salted that the eucalyptus tree was no longer able to survive.  The possibilities of what to do with this soil now seem endless.  Hobbs flirted with the idea of turning the land into a prairie that could feed the native birds and also serve as biofuel.  Such transformations, though not 100% pristine could serve a great compromise to natural and human needs.  These efforts of designer ecosystems are one way conservation is happening everywhere.

Chapter 9 in Rambunctious Garden talks about what conservationists and ecologists are working on globally.  In Seattle, the Duwamish River has become part of the ‘industrial waterway.’  Surprisingly enough, there are signs of life in these toxic waters, although there appear warning signs to not eat any fish caught in the river. Activists are trying to improve rules and regulations to get more conservation value.  One way is with private landowners.  If a landowner chooses to not develop his land, he will be the beneficiary of a large tax break.

Other strategies for conservation are prevalent throughout Europe.  One such is agri-environment.  This strategy involves reworking farms so they are suited for greater species.  Europeans are protecting farmland birds by rolling back on monoculture and herbicides.  They are using the land more efficiently.  Marris goes on to say that this rural ecology shift is great but as of 2009, more than half of the Earth’s population lives in cities.  That is why we are now moving into a period of Urban Ecology.  Now, wastelands will be used for plants and it all starts at the top.  Big companies will have to be innovators, starting with green roofs and utilizing unused space for planting more diverse, thriving species.  We need to see nature as the background of our own lives.

What are ecologists supposed to do about invasive species?  In Chapter 6 of Rambunctious Garden, Emma Marris discusses the possibilities.  In Chapter 7, the concept of a Novel Ecosystem is discussed and there have been some arguments as to what that is.  We will see the problems and potential solutions of both invasive species and novel ecosystems.

Invasive species are just what they sound like, an unwanted plant or animal that is accidentally introduced to an ecosystem, and thrives.  The species overtakes the native population and many times destroys a beloved species.  An example of this would be feral cats in New Zealand.  Marris points out that the cats wiped out the native wren.  Another example would be the brown tree snake in Guam.  The snakes also killed birds.  These birds were pollinators that distributed fruit tree seeds.  What solutions do scientists have in mind?

One solution is physically removing invasive species by using strike teams.  Unfortunately, strike teams are very ineffective.  Within a few years the “exterminated” species becomes invasive again.  Top ecologists like Shahid Naeem of Columbia University,  “would love to get rid of every invasive species on the planet and put all native species back in their place.”  This agrees with the idea of a novel ecosystem.  An ecologist like Naeem would think that a novel ecosystem is one dominated by native species.

Ecologist Mascaro holds an alternative view of novel ecosystems.  He believes that an ecosystem shared in dominance by native and exotic species is what makes it thrive.  He looks at the services being provided by the exotics such as filtering water, controlling erosion, and building soil.  A native ecosystem does not necessarily have these things.  Mascaro describes his favorite ecosystem, the mango forest.  The forest is filled with life in every crevice.  There is strawberry guava (considered invasive), rose apples, the Queensland maple, and candlenut.  All of these invasive species are living together in harmony.  Many traditional ecologists will disregard this area because it is filled with invasive species.  They are living in a quite healthy ecosystem, though.

It is things like this that make me question an ecologist’s agenda.  In politics, there are liberals and conservatives.  I did not know that was the case in ecology.  There are a new class of liberals, like Mascaro, who are trying to stick up for these invasive species by saying that ultimately they are good for the ecosystem.  Other ecologists like Naeem are saying that the old baseline method that ecologists have relied on for decades is the way to go.  It is just a political debate within science in my opinion.

What is an invasive species? Is it merely something that was not there when the Europeans arrived?  But what if that species is actually good for the environment, like the strawberry guava for the Hawaiians.  Marris states that invasive species are only really overpopulated for the initial few years, the environment controls them eventually, like the zebra mussel, which became food for the ducks on Lake Erie.  Maybe a novel ecosystem could have invasive species, but it remains to be seen if ecologists can live with that.

-Chandrapaul