Author Archives: SeoHee Yoon

Posts by SeoHee Yoon

Pro-Development Upstate Stakeholder

Posted on December 2, 2012 by SeoHee Yoon

Upstate New York residence has right to use the land for whatever they want. The landowners bought the land legally in exchange for using the land freely without external regulation. The hydrofracking does not only benefit the nation with the abundant natural gas but also benefits the landowners financially with continuing recession.

For few years hydrofracking received bad reputation as it was reported that it might harm the environment and human health. However, the expected damage outweighs definite benefits. In the current case of excessive recession, any action that may help the economy must be supported. Therefore, the hydrofracking, which brings tremendous amount of revenue and benefits, must be supported and carried out.

In exchange of the usage of the land, the landowners lease their backyards to the hydrofracking company to install drills that can extract natural gas. With the agreed-lease-payments, the landowners also get extract incentives from the gas produced in their land. It is hard to deny that the deal is very sweet to anyone who has a land.

In Chemung County, NY an economic boost was observed. The observers say that the boost was from the hydrofracking that was done in the Chemung County. The additional consumption of hydrofracking users boosts the community’s sale up to 60 percent. The workers are buying foods, clothes, and gifts from Chemung sellers. Since the county is getting external injection of money, it is inevitable for the county’s economy to boost. In addition of the sale revenue, the landowners of the county are also having a good real estate market too. The demand of the rents from the workers increase and it results higher price and then higher profit for the landowners. “Nonetheless, the report said that Chemung and other counties in the state’s Southern Tier where shale gas is assumed to be plentiful can expect a surge in retail sales and tax revenue from those workers once drilling begins.”

With the local economy, the airplane industry are also benefitting from traveling hydrofracking workers. “Ann Crook, the manager of Elmira Corning Regional Airport in Big Flats, estimates one of five passengers flying in or out has some tie to the gas industry.” It is evident that the hydrofracking industry causes chain reaction that benefits surrounding area’s economy.

If the Upstate residents sign the lease papers and let the hydrofraking to start, it is evident that the financial boost that happened in Chemung and other counties in New York will occur once more. Once again, in the recession, economic recovery has priority over other aspects. The hydrofracking bring economic benefit to the nation with natural gas and to the local individuals with great sales and revenues.

Mirreya Navarro. (2011, Dec 28). With Gas Drilling Next Door, County In New York Gets An Economic Lift. New York Times, pp. A.18.

Questions for Emma Marris

Posted on October 29, 2012 by SeoHee Yoon

1. What is your idea about tradition conservation projects and current conservation projects?

2. What is your most recommended conservation for the urbanized area such New York City?

3. Do you think humans have more impact on the nature or the natural disasters?

4. In your thoughts, what is the best conservation project in the past that benefited the environment the most?

5. What was your favorite idea that you mentioned in your novel Rumbustious Garden?

Poster Questions

Posted on October 9, 2012 by SeoHee Yoon

1. How are the biodiversity in New York City? Is there a specific species that only dwell in one particular region of a borough? Why?

2. Is there any change of pollinators in New York City? Was there any extinct species? How does current species carry out pollinating in New York City?

3. How does pollution in New York City affect species and people?

Goals for the future

Posted on October 3, 2012 by SeoHee Yoon

At the last chapter of Rambunctious Garden, Marris displays new set of goals for conservation.  She lays out several goals that must be work out together in order to fulfill the conservation that can save the nature, species, and humans. The fist goals that Marris displays are protecting the rights of other species. Humans and other species must exist on earth together and all species including humans have intrinsic values. Since some humans downgrades value of other species, it is hard to find a point that many agrees to a certain value of species. She argues that every species are important and valuable. However, in contradiction, Marris says that in order to protect biodiversity and for natural balance, there must be intentional killing of other species. It is inevitable to be thinking less of the species that are intentionally killed.

The second goal is to protect charisma megafauna. The first goal talked about how humans think less of certain species. At the same time, humans become more sensitive and protective with “big mammals with big eyes” (156). The megafauna of current ecosystems features more likeable characteristics and humans prioritize the value of the megafauna over other important small species.

The third goal is to slow down the rate of extinction of species. There was times that species extinct in a rapid rate and sometimes the fast extinction was cause by humans. This goal is important, however, hard to achieve at the same time. Currently, it difficult to measure the magnitude of effects that decreasing the rate of extinction of species will bring. More population of species can be a benefit or damage to the ecosystem.

The fourth goal is to protect the genetic diversity. Conserving the genetic diversity will result in more biodiversity that is beneficial to the ecosystem. Having more diversity in the nature is more favorable than have homogeny nature system.

The fifth goal is to define and defend the biodiversity. It is general theories that scope the species and the ecosystem. Marris continued as she say through the evolution with introduction of new species and extinction of species, the nature created a beautiful web that many species, genes, and environments interrelate.

The sixth goal is to maximize ecosystem services. This idea sounds unethical since species that are not noticed by humans receive a lower value. Also, species that provides resources to humans have less value since they must be killed frequently for the resources.

The seventh and the last goal are protecting the spiritual and aesthetic experience of nature. This goal suggests that people lean more towards the welfare of nature that people have memories in. Therefore, nature tour sites are more concerned by the humans when it comes to conservation.

These goals that suggest by Marris shows the future of ecosystems and also show how modern ecosystem became a problem. It seems like Marris tells the readers that humans are hypocritical when it comes to protecting and conserving species and ecosystems. People do play favorites regarding this important issue. I think it is inevitable for humans to favor, but I thin it is important for humans to acknowledge the every species in the ecosystems have high intrinsic value and play key roles in the natural balance.

Marris chap 8&9

Posted on October 1, 2012 by SeoHee Yoon

The main idea of Emma Marris’s Rambunctious Garden was that the pristine wilderness that modern ecologist and environmentalists are looking for is nearly impossible. Marris introduced her idea of Rambunctious Garden to the readers, which is more possible solution to modern environmental issues. Marris argued that the “baseline theory” couldn’t be applied in reality; instead Marris suggests “designer ecosystems”, where the nature is conserved according to specific goal than the baseline. The goals are “nitrogen reduction, sediment capture, or the maintenance of one or a small number of named species” (125). These goals may be costly and timely however it is more possible solution to the problems.

In the chapters, Marris says that regarding the “design ecosystem”, following factors such as “size of project, budget, and how much the place has already changed” (127) must be defined. Having a clear goal for recreating the nature seems much more feasible than looking for the pristine nature that no one actually knows. Goals such as nitrogen reduction are possible and are currently going on in certain areas. The idea of “design ecosystem” was my favorite idea that Marris introduced, since is most feasible and matches up with current reality. I believe that many project that are currently held are based off from the design ecosystem since many projects has specific goals to achieve.

Later on in Chapter 9, Marris revisited her idea of “rambunctious garden”. Marris informs readers that conservation can happen anywhere even in their backyard. Anyplace can be turned in to the rambunctious garden that allows survival of nature and human lifestyle. Therefore, the author urges the readers to conserve their closest nature and bring more diversity into it. She recalls all of other ideas that she mentioned through out the book. After getting informed by all of the sub-ideas, Marris’ rambunctious garden seems more clear and understandable. I believe that the primary goal of Marris is to find the ecosystem that balance out the natural ecosystem and urban life. This is why Marris used the city as example of all of her sub-ideas. “Plants and animals are all around us, in our backyards, along roadsides, in city parks” (150), this quote basically sums the rambunctious garden that Marris wants to inform the readers. There is nature everywhere and the best way to conserve them is just to look carefully unto it and let it be.

What I felt through out the book is that Marris thinks that pristine nature is unnecessary. I think that the most important thing is to conserve what we have now before the nature becomes extinct, endangered, and damaged. Overall, what the urban cities need is a slight effort to conserve the little nature on the roadside and in the people’s backyard. It may seem easy and have no-effect but I believe conserving the smallest nature brings a great impact in the future.

Rambuctious Garden 6-7

Posted on September 27, 2012 by SeoHee Yoon

In the chapter 6 and 7 of Rambunctious Garden, Marris talks about the invasive species. The invasive species became a major problem in modern ecosystems. Marris discusses how the invasive species have bad reputation since they are exotic species that are foreign to specific ecosystem.  Unlike the general opinion that disfavors the invasive species, Marris decides to argue the benefits of having exotic species. Mark Davis, an ecologist, argues that there are positive effects to introduce exotic species and letting them flourish in the new environment. Davis demonstrates how “sometimes newcomers might help natives flourish” by giving example of Pyura praeputialis in Australia. (pg  105). In this case, the exotic species helped the algae in the water to flourish, benefiting many other organisms in the water including the natural species. She continually argues that the introduction of exotic species does not necessarily mean the extinction of the natural species in the ecosystem. Furthermore, statistically, many of the introductions failed.  I somehow agree with Marris’s point that the introduction or the assisted migration benefits the ecosystem including the survival of the exotic species and the natural species. However, it is obvious that Marris is exaggerating since she does not fully demonstrate the extreme case of damages that the exotic species had done. She only speaks about the benefits and tends to minimize the damages that the modern ecosystems are suffering from.

Later on, Marris continues her argument by introducing the concept of “novel ecosystems.” In those situations, the exotic species are left on their own in new ecosystem with no regulation by humans or other species. Marris begins to talk about the benefits of the novel ecosystems since the exotic species bring better food chain, faster growth, and more efficient nutrient cycling. At the same time, Marris admits that there are some down-sides of the novel ecosystems since it also can being “homogenization and extinction.” In this case, Marris demonstrates the situation of mango species on how it was introduced and flourished with many benefits. However, it must be noted that the successful introduction happens “sometimes” not “all the time” as the tone of Marris suggests. It is possible to say the novel ecosystem can be the best alternative for exotic species that are close to extinction is their native ecosystems. However, such situation must be examined carefully since many fear the disadvantages of the exotic species.

My point of view is against on the exotic species. The records show that the exotic species causes more trouble than benefiting the introduced ecosystems. May exotic species extinct or endangered native species and harmed the natural cycle of the ecosystem. Moreover, many humans suffered from the disadvantages that the exotic species had brought such as pathogens. What make the invasive species so hated my humans is that once they settle, it is hard to remove the species and repair the damages. In the chapter 6 and 7, I was disappointed at Marris as she denies to look at the reality on how bad the exotic species are to the modern ecosystems

High Line

Posted on September 26, 2012 by SeoHee Yoon

After many years and billions of dollars, the old railroad site turned into a rambunctious garden. When I first encountered the Emma Mariss’s idea of rambunctious garden, I automatically recalled my visits to the High Line Park. According to Staler, the park “consisted of 161 species in 122 genera in 48 families”. Located on the busy west strip of Manhattan, the park brings one of the most natural environments. Manhattan already has the Central Park to promote natural species and expansion of foreign species. What makes the High Line different from the Central Park is that from the High Line, you can see cars and stores from every corner.

strolling with a cup of iced-coffee

strolling with a cup of iced-coffee

The Park does not consist the pristine nature that many environmentalist and ecologists seek for. The park is basically the rambunctious garden that Marris introduced. It merges the busy city ecosystem with most natural ecosystem. The park is not exactly polished like central park. Grasses, short trees, flowers, and weeds make exceptional natural feeling in the middle of the city. Also, the park made what-seems-impossible assisted migration possible. May foreign species became adapted to unique setting of the park’s nature and the city.

yellow flowers! (look close there is a butterfly)

I’ve been to the park several times before but I have not noticed the flowers, grasses, and animals so closely. The park was more diverse than I thought. There was many different species of flowers but mostly there was yellow flowers called asteraceae (Staler said that the asteraceae is one of “largest families of flora”) I looked closely and there was at least a single bee per flower bush. It was the pollinators that prospered the special ecosystem of the High Line. If the pollinators did not adapt to the setting, the garden wouldn’t be as prosperous as it s now. It was overwhelming to see well-working natural ecosystem in the middle of the concrete jungle.

do you see it?

a bee!

 

**sorry for the quality, the picture was taken with my smart phone

 

Assisted Migration

Posted on September 12, 2012 by SeoHee Yoon

 

In Chapter 5 of “Rambunctious Garden”, Emma Marris introduces the assisted migration to the readers. This assisted migration refers to a process when the humans boost up the migration of the animals (80). The natural migrations of the animals happen slowly, and for immediate effects, humans assist the migration of the animals.  Climate change lays key role to the animal’s migration and since the changes are slow, it make the natural migration of the species slow as well. However, the species had to migrate due to urbanization in their natural habitat. Basically, what the ecologists and conservationists are trying to do is placing species in new natural habitat hoping it will adapt to the new environment and prosper.

So, the question is will the assisted migration work? I will say both yes and no but more to the no-side. The idea is feasible if the scientists do enough research and know the consequence of the assisted migration. If the assisted migration is carried out successfully, it will create ultimate way to preserve and conserve natural species. However, the consequence of the assisted migration is currently unknown.

It seems like there are more foreseeable negative consequence of assisted migration. I believe that the animals are capable to find new habitat by themselves. The birds change their migration sites when they know there usual site is unbearable for them. In Puth&Burns article, the authors agreed that the urbanization had so many consequences upon us. I think that current ecosystem cannot bear any failed conservationist project. We must be careful because the assisted migration will change the natural ecosystem of introduced site. “Organisms could die, because you don’t know exactly what they need to live-some specific microbes or microclimatic condition’”(77) Additionally, if the species failed to adapt to the introduction site due to food, climate, or other traits, it will create more problems in the ecosystem such as emergence of invasive species.

Humans cannot change the Earth. There are more regulation and consequences to change current ecosystem. As I always say, the most important thing is to avoid anymore further damage to the ecosystem such as extinction of species. The Earth and species will recover someday if humans do not damage it furthermore.

Rewilding? or Rewinding? chap 3&4

Posted on September 10, 2012 by SeoHee Yoon

Emma Marris introduces the concept of “rewilding” in chapter 3 and 4 of her novel “Rambunctious Garden.” This idea of “rewilding” aims for the restoration of the nature to its wild days, when there were no human regulations upon the natural ecosystem. It is another idea derived from many conservationist and ecologists that dreams of pristine nature. Under the idea of “rewilding” extinct animals and organisms will be reintroduced to their old habitat, creating the “natural” food chains and cycles.

Theoretically, “rewilding” seems a good solution to current problems in the ecosystem. However, it is practically impossible and unethical. In the chapters, Marris shows the cheetahs of Arizona and elephants of Missouri as examples (61). Those two animals are clearly dangerous species to humans and it is preposterous to let those species to dwell near the human habitat. There is chance that those animals will escape their protected area and it is certain that wild cheetahs and elephants will harm the people. The ones who agrees with the danger of the species said, “we killed ‘em once; we can kill ‘em again.” (69) They are saying since humans wiped out cheetahs and elephants once before, if they create trouble once again, the animals will be wiped out once again. I think this idea is very unethical. Previously, the humans wiped out the cheetahs and elephants for the human greed. Then, the animals are placed in the natural habitat that is not accustomed for the animal’s survival for human’s greed. Later on, when they cause any trouble, once again, the animals are wiped out for human greed. The ecologists are trying to create “wilderness” due to human’s greed as they treat the animals unethicallyMy question is whether or not “rewilding” is intended for the sake of nature and animals or for the humans that feel bad for destroying the nature?

Moreover, the idea of “rewilding” is clearly impossible. First of all, the nature has evolved after much extinction of animals and organisms. How can the scientists measure and figure out the current nature with the extinct animals? Life and death is natural cycle and the ecosystem learns how to accustom to the absence of certain animals and organisms. Against the idea of “rewilding,” Marris argues, “the whole place is cultivated, man-made, created.” (70) The human existed in natural ecosystem for thousands of years. There is no way to predict the “wilderness” 10,000 years ago. Also, there may be natural disasters or climate changes that humans do not know about they could’ve altered the natural ecosystem in pre-human, or even in pro-human era.

Yes, having the most pristine nature sounds tempting. However, why waste time and money that is clearly unknown, unethical, and impossible? It is better to focus on what the nature has right now and learn how to preserve it. It is important to fix the mistakes the humans had done to the nature but it is after when we learn to preserve current nature so it won’t become any worse.

 

Rambunctious Gardens- Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World chap 1&2

Posted on September 3, 2012 by SeoHee Yoon

Emma Marris’s novel Rambunctious Gardens- Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World suggests the readers to see the nature through a different view. In the first chapter, Marris introduces here thesis and the current state of the ecologists and their conservation projects. One of the major goals of the ecologists is to return nature to its “baseline”.  People strive for the most natural state of the ecosystems. The term “baseline” refers to a most basic state of nature. However, Marris argues that there is no way for the nature to be pristine. It means by that nature changes even without any human interference. So here is my question? What is the base or the standard for nature? Is there a real pristine nature? My answer is no. The nature has been changing from the beginning when there were no humans. The other aspect of nature such as animals and climates has evolved and changed each other. Yes, it is the humans that destroyed the nature and made problems. However, my point is that it is pointless for the humans trying to restore the damages.  One of the past two articles states that the speed of nature’s restoration is unbelievably fast. Therefore, what human needs to do is not to disturb the nature while it restores. (Which seems like impossible at this state.)

Current conservation projects isolate the nature from the human society. The ecologist hopes for the protected area to return to its pristine state since there is no human contact with the land. However, the conservation project drives people away from the homes. Eliminating people from there traditional habitual area to protect lands seems hypocritical. Ecologists strive for the pristine nature, however, the protected area are basically man-made. Humans control everything inside the area. So, is protected natural area such as Grand Canyon and Yellow Stone Park pristine?

Later on in the chapters, Marris introduces the readers the idea of “rambunctious garden.” In rambunctious garden, humans and nature live together as one. Marris states are nature and ecosystem is everything between our very own backyards to the protected area. This statement criticizes current operation of conservation projects as it only focuses on the protected areas. What ecologists must realize is that it is important to protect nature that resides with human in the urban ecosystem. Therefore, the rambunctious garden is solution to the current problems of the ecosystem. Since there is no pristine or the baseline of nature, what we can to is to make sure the nature survives with the existence of humans.

Dominance

Posted on August 29, 2012 by SeoHee Yoon

The term anthropocene refers to the geological age of the earth. The current age, or the stage of the earth that started approximately 200 years ago when the industrial revolutions began. One of the writers of the articles, Kareiva talked about the conservation projects that are held around the world. Due to greed, human destroyed vast amounts of land for money and power. It wasn’t until recently that people found out the ultimate consequences of past actions and started conservation projects in hopes that the damages will be undone. However, Kareiva displayed what the world is doing for conservation, especially America in this case, is wrong. In the name of the conservation project, living spaces were taken away and the species that must be preserved is not preserved. It is basically wasting money and doing noting. Kareiva mentioned the Yellows Stone State Park. The park was set up to preserved the beautiful natural scenery of Yellow Stone and to save the small animals that dwell in such unique habitat. The untold story about the park is that people, especially Native Americans, were driven away from their home. It is evident that some conservation projects are fairly controversial as they are benefitting others than the just the nature and its inhabitants.

Before the industrial revolution, it was the Earth itself that controlled itself. The humans did not alter the Earth’s ecosystem. It was the nature that controlled people’s life. When technology developed and human population increased, the controller of the Earth shifted to the humans. The factories, deforestation, and vast amount of toxins and liter started to alter the ecosystem of the Earth. During last 200 years, humans changed the nature dramatically that it is had to find the right solution to the problem. Humans do know the polluted air causes many problems, however, it is also a fact that society cannot run without the factories producing carbon dioxide. Kareiva said, “ Nature is so resilient that it can recover rapidly from even the most powerful human disturbances.” It means that whatever damages that human causes to the Earth can be recovered. However, the ongoing changes shows that the humans are damaging the Earth without giving it time to recover. The statistics, science, and what we see and feel right now shows that Earth has changed and there are more ongoing changes.

Both articles mentioned that human population now dominates this planet. In the stage of Anthropocene, it is important to find a way to cope the Earth’s nature with the urban societies. In my opinion, many of the conservation projects and attempts to save the nature seem to be ineffective. Instead of solving problems of the damages that has been already done, I think it is important to change in order to avoid furthermore damages of the Earth. The ocean and the forest will recover rapidly by other conservation projects. However, same thing might happen in the future and our children can be the one to destroy the nature that we brought back. My conclusion is that we need to make sure that people know the consequence of the damages. As the articles say, people dominates the earth and power to change it.

Comments by SeoHee Yoon