Home to over 18.9 million people, the New York City Metropolitan Area, consisting of “New York City, Long Island, Northern New Jersey, and Northeastern Pennsylvania” (Vintinner) requires tremendous efforts in waste disposal and clean drinking water. New York City prides itself in the quality of its drinking water that boasts to be the “champagne of drinking waters” (Vintinner). To further protect our valuable resource, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) spread the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR), giving Governor Pataki the options to filter the source water or meet a level of water quality.

The tremendous costs of building and maintaining the filtration plant in the Catskill Delaware water supply would paid by the New Yorkers themselves but it would hit the lower income families the most, doubling their water rates, and effectively closing the housing projects where landlords cannot raise additional water costs. While the argument of maintaining water quality remains one of the utmost important priorities for the metropolitan area, if there is not enough funding to carry it through, it will need the minimal amount of resources possible to keep it functioning.

Mayor Bloomberg announced on November 30^th that Hurricane Sandy victims will have relief from their water bills. They have not had access to their supplies because of their damaged property. Any “residential and commercial buildings that have been red- or yellow-tagged by the city will not have to make a monthly water bill payment until June 1, 2013” (Wrobleski). Bloomberg said, “by deferring water bill payments and other charges, New Yorkers can focus their attention and money on more immediate and pressing needs.” New Yorkers currently need time to recooperate and having to pay more to filter the water is not our immediate priority. Perhaps by next year when people have resituated into new neighborhoods and new living conditions, it would be logical to develop a filtration system that protects the purity of the water in Catskill/Delaware water supply.

The reality is that New York is not ready for another major financial burden while in its recovery state. Thus, the responsibility of paying for these burdens should fall on the company that are pollution or poorly managing their wastes. One of the major causes of microbial contamination is poor waste disposal by large municipal waste treatment systems. Economists say that companies involve in these activities and who are largely responsible should pay for their damage to society or a Pigovian Tax.

Source:

Wrobleski, Tom. “NYC to give Hurricane Sandy victims more time to pay water bills.” Staten Island Advance[Staten Island] 30 Nov 2012, n. pag. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. <http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/11/city_to_give_hurricane_sandy_v.html>.

What many people believe to be natural in the wilderness actually contains anthropogenic influences.  The ideal kind of river that most are accommodated to are the meandering rivers  “thought of as ‘natural’ today” (Marris). By following the methods for creating these streams, conservationists consequently raise mercury levels in the river. There was no efficient way to optimize the environment through restoration. In fact, it was near impossible to restore the ecosystem back to the baseline. One solution to this problem is designer ecosystems.

Rather than restoring what was previously existing, these ecologists study how these environment operate and design. These restoration jobs can be counted as a redesign because these designers never achieve the level of biodiversity of what previously thrived in the area. Restoration ecologists “use lots of ‘hacks’”(Marris) to manipulate the natural environment to function harmoniously. Some great examples are having “wire baskets filled with rocks or the root balls of dead trees chained in place to slow stream flows
and create nooks and crannies for animals” and also having “old ships sunk to provide places for coral reefs to live” (Marris). These hacks are merely natural mimicry that recreates items utilized by creatures in the wild to shelter themselves. On the other side of the spectrum, we see scientists thowing the idea of restoring out the window and instead suggest the idea of “designing, engineering, cooking up”(Marris) strategies that heal the natural world.

Coming from humbler origins, some scientists simply call it “whatever works” (Marris). Dee Boersma, a Seattle ecologist seeks to preserve the Galapagos penguin through introducing a new habitat. Boersma simply “makes the habitat better than ‘normal’ for the birds” (Marris). The point to revisit is that these habitats work because these ecoystems are ever changing ones. When they try to restore environments, they are simply bringing about the habitat’s new current state. Baselines have been rendered moot since the Pre-European human alteration.

The third case to examine is a hybrid ecosystem that discusses abiotic alterations to the environment. Despite the minor climate shift, the organism can still survive. For instance, the “eucalyptus woodlands in Southwest Australia” (Marris) survived some mild climate shifts. What would benefit the woodlands would be the fertilizing methods, These scientists let us know how species react to the climate shifts and how to react when it does happen.

Faced with environmental dilemmas, these ecologists will be able to scope effective restoration campaigns. Science is constantly breaking ground and we begin asking ourselves, can we get the best from both worlds? Nature continually teaches us the relationships and behaviors of various species and how the interactions can be different through various methods of restoration.

Stories of invasive species taking over an ecosystem, wiping out another species spread as rampantly as these invasive species themselves. However, this term “invasive species” seems to be rather new.  Humans have been introducing new species to environments constantly, from the “root balls of nursery trees, in packing material, in ballast water, in the wheel wells of aircraft, and in the mud on our boots” (Marris). These newly introduced species “naturalize” quite comfortably at times and adapt into its new home very well, to the point it disrupts the balance of the existing ecosystem.

Movements began during the 1990’s to repair the destructive effects of invasive species. In 1995, South African non-profit, Working for Water “created jobs for poor people removing invasive plants that “divert enormous amounts of water from more productive uses” (Marris). In 1999, Clinton launched a campaign for “all agencies to avoid spreading them and to stamp them out, wherever possible” (Marris). People began to realize the harm that these newly introduced species exceeded what the environment could sustain. National Park Service organized strike teams to eliminate harmful species. An ecosystem evolves and although all these scientists and movements hold evidence that these organism affect their surroundings for the worst, they should know that no species is really native or invasive rather the quantity of the change. Any drastic environmental shift will hurt the environment at first until it plateaus into a more static ecosystem.

Movement among nature is natural. This movement refers to the gradual migration of a species into a new territory. Mark Davis, an ecologist at Macalester University challenges the 1990’s ideology of invasive species stating it might not be necessarily a negative thing to have new species as species have always been migrating, just at different rates. People often overlook the case studies where species improve on existing ecosystems. Rather than compete with the native species, “Pyura praeputialis, a squidgy brown sea-squirt-like creature from Australia, has increased biodiversity on Chilean rocky tidal shores by cementing itself down and creating a gelatinous landscape in which large invertebrates and algae can thrive” (Marris). Sometimes invasive species serve as a replacements or shelter for existing species. Jeff Foster at the University of Illinois and Scott Robinson at the University of Florida discovered exotic birds that “are dispersing the seeds of native plants since many native birds have gone extinct” (Marris). In Britain, blue tit chicks found gall wasps as a replacement for the endangered caterpillars. Nature demonstrates that invasive species or unfamiliar species can actually serve to improve an ecosystem.

Scientists, politicians, and businessmen should strive to maintain the delicate balance of our environment before further damages is done. Some viable next moves would be to research into the species in each ecosystem and their roles. Then, find replacements and back-up plans that would be feasible in terms of execution and cost-efficiency. Politicians would drive the regulations and enforce the rules amongst society so that corporations and people alike will all cooperate and abide by the rules to further protect the environment. Businessmen would be the ones to raise the funds and develop strategies to spread the word out. Social entrepreneurs would engage their audience to encourage people to donate and raise funds that directly contribute to the reconstruction and development of damaged environments. Together they would be able to build a better future to repair ecosystems and the tarnished names of some “invasive species.”