All posts by Leora Margelovich

Monitor the Marshes

Marsh Restoration

Over the course of time, we have discovered that many things that we innocently do have detrimental effects. Smoking is bad for one’s health, so we must stop; overhunting is bad since it leads to extinction, so we must stop. However, the case with swamp marshes is not nearly as black and white. While ideally salt marshes should return to their original condition with their native plants, it is also complete wishful thinking. I think that allowing non-native plants to recolonize, while carefully monitoring them, is a much more feasible option, that can better ensure the survival of natural salt marshes.

Restoring a salt marsh to its complete former glory entails a tremendous amount of effort. Salt marshes have experienced changes in their salinity, thereby giving rise to Phragmites, a plant that, by nature, is invasive. No longer are there as many Spartina plants, for the Phragmites are dominating this particular ecosystem. A restoration would require that the Phragmites be completely removed (by bulldozing). Then, Spartina plants could be grown by either planting its seeds or by uprooting and replanting Spartina from other salt marshes. Suddenly, what was innocuously considered a “restoration” might be more appropriately labeled an “upheaval”.

Changing the current status of salt marshes is much easier in theory than it is in its actual implementation. For one, getting people to actually carry through with such painstaking work would be difficult. In fact, Weis and Butler note that the people currently dedicated to such labor are students and volunteers. So few individuals cannot accomplish this sheer volume of work, at least with some noticeable impact. Besides for people, actual legislation is lax when it comes to carrying through with restoration. In 2007, for example, Louisiana did not follow through with a law passed due to rising costs. In short, time and money are key factors in limiting any potential restoration progress.

If nature could provide immediate results to the restoration of salt marshes, people might be more willing to help out. However, restoring salt marsh with Spartina plants does not guarantee successful results. To thrive, Spartina need proper tidal flow and proper salinity; if they are planted in the wrong conditions, they will not grow. While we can attempt to manipulate where plants grow, we are still susceptible to nature’s fickleness in all our efforts.

Humans might have good intentions by restoring, but they must also take the organisms’ well being into account. Indeed, the salt marsh has changed, but organisms, by nature, learn to adapt. Therefore, many have adapted to the presence of the Phragmites, and have learned to use it as shelter. It would be counterintuitive to change the salt marsh environment, to that of which it used to be; organisms would, once again, have to readapt.

Ultimately, Sheehan’s statement of Phragmites, it’s green most of the time, and it ain’t condos” bears much validity. While phragmites are not an ideal part of a salt marsh, they are still an organic element in this ecosystem. It is far better to have a plant than a building in one of the most crucial settings in nature. We deal with many other plants that are a nuisance, such as weeds and vines, but never by completely uprooting and redesigning an area. Humans are fallible and still do not know everything about how nature runs; perhaps restructuring might be detrimental in the long run. Rather, we should monitor the current situation of salt marshes. That way we can still exert human control in a positive way, all while using our resources efficiently.

Who to Blame?

Destruction of the Salt Marshes

If you were to ask anyone to list ten things that had a major impact on US history and its development, I can guarantee you that not a soul would mention salt marshes. And yet, this environmental resource played a crucial role in how Americans adapted to their new land. They quickly discovered a plethora of ways in which it, along with the surrounding areas, could be usurped. However, the increasing reliance on salt marshes soon bordered on exploitation, as little heed seemed to be given to signs of apparent deterioration. Unfortunately, the way in which salt marshes have been treated is an inevitable consequence of the ultimate reality of societal, agricultural, and urban development, in which there is a tradeoff between improving the human condition and maintaining the condition of our natural resources.

The way in which people interacted with and consequently impacted salt marshes depended on the time period. For example, colonists had an agricultural lifestyle and took advantage of the easily arable land. With few rocks and much fertile soil, it was the prime location for developing farmland. In addition to planting crops, they also used the area as pasturelands for their livestock. The products of animals in this area appeared to be superior, but at a cost to the current animal population: the grazing caused a decrease in some types that lived there. Furthermore, the presence of carbon dioxide and other chemicals increased, thereby causing a disturbance to the chemical balance of the atmosphere. The improvement of one natural resource, farming land, thus came at an expense to another natural resource, the salt marsh.

The focus of American development over the years has shifted from an agrarian lifestyle to an urban one. The clear turning point occurred during the Industrial Revolution. At that time, salt marshes were abused in many new ways: they were tidally restricted by dams, polluted by runoff and sewage, and ditched for mosquito control. The intent was to increase productivity, but at times it was counterproductive. Drying up marshes, for example, actually increased the amount of mosquitos present because killifish, which keep the population of the pesky insects in check, consequently died off. The more US society urbanized, the more salt marshes were impacted, until Congress began making concerted efforts to preserve and protect them. Some of the consequences, such as changes in temperature, eutrophication, and salt production, were easily noticeable. However, salt marshes, renowned for their resilience, only began to display various other signs of being impacted after many years of mistreatment.

While humans clearly contributed to the negative changes in salt marshes, they did not intend to do so out of malice. In their attempts to adapt to the land and make life better, they had to make decisions as to what was a priority: preserving a salt marsh or utilizing it so that they could survive. Indeed, there is a finite amount of resources in the word. Anything that humans do entails usurping some of what is available, and doing so at a cost. Every choice we have has some sort of impact, even if it is unbeknownst to us at the current moment. For example, society depends on using cell phones, but we do not know what the long-term effects of the usage will be on our bodies or our environment. Cellphones are now considered a convenience that contributes to the development of the modern world. Similarly, taking advantage of the salt marshes was the way in which past societies attempted to develop, too.

Of course, with hindsight being 20-20, we can see the many flaws in how previous generations behaved. It is rather tempting to play the blame game and to theorize what their motives were as well as how they should have behaved. Yet only now can we truly see the harmful effects in their totality, with the mistreatment having accumulated over the years.  Our way of life significantly improved, it is our ethical responsibility to use and explore alternative methods that are more environmentally friendly. The fact that people today do not know the crucial role  salt marshes play in our ecosystem is extremely depressing.  We must act now by preserving and protecting them, before they are literally both out of sight and out of mind.

Land of the Lenapes: Hunting and Gathering

Land of the Lenapes

America nowadays is known, sometimes notoriously, for its excess. From the flashy homes to the overabundance of goods in the market, it is a wonder that many years ago, people were forced to lead modest lifestyles simply because they did not have the means to survive otherwise. A clear case in American history of a people creatively stretching the little they had was the hunting and gathering of the Lenape Indians. Through this lifestyle, the Lenape tribe was entirely dependent on nature, exploiting, yet without an ounce of prodigality, all of the resources available in the great outdoors.

Despite what the title connotes, “hunting” is a term that is broad in scope; for the Lenapes, this process described catching various animals that provide protein and sustenance.  A major component of hunting involved game, but it is important to note that the Lenape also fished and hunted fowl; thus, they did not exclusively use one resource, which could have quickly led to extinction of many large, meaty species. In order to hunt game, the Lenape did not run after them with spears, as cartoons often inaccurately depict. Rather, they would first set fire to a portion of the forest, which would cause the animals to flee into traps. This method was efficient in capturing the game because it did not require too much energy to catch them. ‘Fire surround’ could have easily had a detrimental effect to the natural environment. However, the Lenape spread the ashes of the trees on the ground to ensure that the soil was rejuvenated and would remain fertile. In doing so, they consequently found a way to utilize the ashes that resulted from the fire and protected one of the most precious resources they had which would be vital for growing agriculture in the future: earth.

The ground is where the gatherers found the food that supplemented the protein. Done by women, gathering involved collecting various agricultural items that were found in the wilderness, ranging from fruits, vegetables, berries, and nuts. Proper gathering, however, took a great deal of getting in touch with nature. To ensure that you lived another day after eating a day’s gatherings entailed a keen knowledge as to what was nutritious and what was poisonous.  Over time, women became adept at knowing the difference. In fact, when picking, they would pluck out bothersome weeds so as to clear the way for other things that were growing. In that way, the Lenapes promoted the growth of plants that were beneficial to humans.

While hunting and gathering required a close interaction with nature because of food, this lifestyle also extended to other aspects of life. For example, the Lenape moved seasonally. They changed their setting depending on the season, which, in turn, caused them to eat different food. By switching locations, local game population had a chance to replenish itself; otherwise, there would have been overhunted. Additionally, the temperature inevitably affected the Lenapes’ comfort level, for they chose to live in wigwams during the summer. Wigwams, furnished by portable, impermanent things, were therefore a tangible reminder of Lenapes’ semi-nomadic way of life. Even many tools, often made from shells, were considered “disposable”. The origin of other instruments, on the other hand, traced back to roots in hunting or gathering: needles were created from bones of game, while paint and decorations on various items was from the dye of berries.

The hunter-gatherer lifestyle had a profound impact on the Lenape tribe as a whole. They were not dependent on other nations for food, but rather on nature itself. Finding out just how much nature had to offer, the Lenape took advantage of all the resources they had, in a way that did not harm nature. Hunting and gathering proved itself to be a means of enabling the Lenapes to become a more progressive tribe because it fostered creativity which consequently lead to major advances, such as growing agriculture.

Science AND Technology vs Science OR Technology

Bio Blitz

Coming into the BioBlitz, I had certain expectations as to what I thought would happen and what I would gain from it. This was a unique experience, one that I considered to be a once in a lifetime opportunity. After all, when would be the next time I could spend three and a half hours dedicated to a nature related event led by a knowledgeable professor in Central Park? This, I anticipated, would be a way for me to connect with nature, to truly become one with the outside elements. I would witness a part of the world that I often fail to properly appreciate, a type of neglect that I attribute to my preoccupation with technology. Separating myself from the bustling city streets would enable me to instead focus on the innate beauty and wonder of the great outdoors. And yet, I came to discover that various aspects of technology at this event stood out far more prominently than did our analysis of nature.

When our tour first began, I was excited as to what was in store for us. Our guide pointed to a paw print in the mud, an aspect of nature that I would have otherwise ignored. I started wondering about its origin: What kind of mammal had created this? What was this mammal doing here, in this particular location? My creative juices flowing, I eagerly approached the spot to gain a better view. Unfortunately, a man in our group, carrying a professional camera, prevented me from doing so because he insisted on first taking many photographs of it. I was dumbstruck; this man hindered my attempt at learning more because he deemed his pictures of the footprint to be more important.

From that moment on, I felt that the nature of our trek had changed. We were there more to document Central Park than to really appreciate it. For example, while I stared in awe at the intricate pattern of the spider web, the photographer would continuously adjust his lens to accommodate the shining sun.  His frantic insistence on documenting everything we saw impacted our group’s mood, for it caused us to be  hesitant to get involved.

There were other strong technological presences besides for the professional camera. I was surprised to discover that my peers and I had perfect cellphone reception. As a result, I heard cellphones ringing frequently, much more often than birds chirping, as our guide had promised we could detect if we hushed. The chirping from the cicadas was prominently audible, but I have already heard that particular noise in nature before. Additionally, I noticed others using Instagram and Twitter to upload pictures of animals they had just seen. While it was their way of sharing their excitement, I nonetheless felt that the technology took away from the grandeur of the moment. What bothered me even more was the fact that Macaulay did not just condone this behavior, but in fact encouraged it: they designated a hashtag for people uploading pictures and statuses to social media. Thus, when we were fortunate enough to witness a bat from a close distance, there were more people uploading a picture of it than physically looking at this rarely seen nocturnal mammal.

In hindsight, I was extremely fortunate to participate in such a unique experience. I had never before viewed Central Park as a haven for diverse wildlife; our educated guide really opened my eyes to various natural elements that I had previously taken for granted. Nonetheless, the Bio Blitz left me somewhat disheartened because it reinforced the reality of the fact that technology is taking over-so much so that it is preventing us from paying attention to the great outdoors. While the title of this class is “Science and Technology in NYC,” I expected the technology to serve more as a means of reinforcing the biology we were exposed to; instead, I felt that it often overpowered the science. I came out thinking that sometimes, it is important to appreciate nature for nature’s sake.