Chapters 8 & 9

In chapter 8, Marris introduces the idea of designer ecosystems, which are ecosystems built to be functional. The purpose of designer ecosystems is not to restore the ecosystem to a historic baseline. Rather, it is to improve the ecosystem and increase its value by helping it serve a purpose. Designer ecosystems are crafted for “for specific measurable goals [such as] nitrogen reduction, sediment capture, or the maintenance of one or a small number of named species,” (Marris 125) to name a few. Not only are designer ecosystems more practical, they are also easier to achieve. When Marris discussed some ecologists’ efforts to revert ecosystems to baselines, one of the major arguments against the idea was that there are too many variables that scientists cannot account for in the ecological makeup of an ecosystem to accurately recreate and ensure the survival of every species. According to Margaret Palmer of the University of Maryland, College Park, our methods of conservation and restoration “will just replace one arbitrary baseline with another – neither of which takes into account the changing nature of the landscape” (Marris 124). Designer ecosystems guide ecologists towards building a better future rather than living in the past.

Marris predicts that ecologists will eventually settle on fusing ecosystem designing with untamed nature. To her, these two viewpoints on environmentalism can produce a world that is “’ecologically sound, aesthetically satisfying, economically rewarding and favorable to the continued growth of civilization’” (Marris 131) but still offers “unweeded and untidy” (Marris 131) patches of nature. However, I disagree that having more unmanaged wilderness will effectively balance the designed ecosystems. Ecosystems need to be contained and maintained so that they do not interfere with other ecosystems and disrupt environmental balances. The idea of pure nature seems contradictory to Marris’s definition of a rambunctious garden in the beginning of the book, as it is less of a hybrid of modern conservation techniques and more of a laissez-faire approach highly dependent on natural regulation.

In chapter 9, Marris introduces the idea of integrating conservation and natural species within our society. The concept of creating conservational efforts within our cities, suburbs, and farms seem to be the most feasible and least radical of all the options Marris presents in the book. It builds on the efforts to increase practicality and functionality from nature. Hydroseeding, [for example, where] seed [of native species are] mixed in with water and sprayed directly on roadsides” (Marris 144), creates new habitats for said species, and utilizes land to its fullest extent. Not only does this promote efficient use of land, but also it also connects patches of nature together. By promoting connectivity and “[patching] together different kinds of land to create connected-up nature: parks, public lands of other types, private lands with special legal arrangements in place, state lands, tribal lands, and so on” (Marris 138), humans can also feel more connected to nature by living so close to it. Conserving and restoring native species and ecosystems, promoting human interaction and appreciation of nature, and higher efficient use of land – all of this can be achieved with a network of nature patches. Compared to Marris’s idea of large unmanaged fields of wilderness, blending conservation efforts with human existence seems more likely to succeed. Although it will not be as successful as perhaps devoting an entire garden to a native ecosystem, some native species will be able to survive in their new environments. Humans will also how to better understand interact with nature, and thus preserve it in the long run.

 

| Leave a comment

Designer Ecosystems

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.

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden, Chapters 8&9

In the eighth chapter of Emma Marris’s Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World, entitled “Designer Ecosystems,” comes an addition to the recurring concept of manmade nature. Yet again, this proposal rivals the standard conservation tactic of restoration to a historical baseline. Instead, designer ecosystems refer to those that are mended to suit their needs. This is more of a functional restoration, for it involves the construction of different aspects in order to perform certain jobs such as the reduction of nitrogen. Although this hasn’t become a particularly accepted or common practice, it seems pretty useful and beneficial. The idea of the historical baseline is slowly fading as conservationists begin to see more and more that the true origins of ecosystems cannot be discovered and that they’d end up changing anyway. If we can do something to repair damage while simultaneously conserving nature, there is no reason why we shouldn’t do so.

Another type of designer ecosystems that Marris mentions is that of entirely human-generated ecosystems. This is really not conservation at all, since nothing is being saved or preserved, but it’s more of an extreme version of the rambunctious garden. It isn’t humans tending to the nature around them but humans actually creating the nature. This might be the future of conservation, but it’s a bit too controlled for me. Nature has always been out of human control, and our efforts to save it are pushing that boundary, but us building it from scratch is just going too far. It’d be like little virtual ecological communities, and the point of nature, as I see it, is that it’s out of our hands and can’t and shouldn’t be manipulated to that extent.

The ninth chapter of Marris’s book, entitled “Conservation Everywhere,” rehashes the aspect of the rambunctious garden that says that nature can exist everywhere. All of her aforementioned conservation methods operate in accordance with her idea to “[make] the most out of every scrap of land and water,” (193) “from industrial rivers like the Duwamish to the roofs of buildings and farmers’ fields” (194). Theoretically, this sounds perfect. Instilling small pieces of nature everywhere possible can’t hurt; it would add some aesthetic value to urban areas while conserving nature at the same time. Yet, even with her example of the successful coexistence of nature and industry on the Duwamish, nature in “the loud, soot-belching landscape of factories, processing plants, energy infrastructure, and transportation” (204) seems remarkably difficult. In any city, these installments of nature would really just be out of place and probably ineffective. Nevertheless, it could be a great initiative if there was a foolproof way of going about it.

Throughout the ninth chapter, Marris appears to believe that everyone wants to coexist with nature in order to conserve it. Based on the history of humankind, I would beg to differ. All we’ve ever done is destroy nature to make more room for us, so it wouldn’t make sense that people are suddenly willing to surround themselves with it just because it’s dying out. In fact, many people are probably more than willing to let it continue on its current path of deterioration, or if not they definitely don’t want it at their doorstep. I personally think that conservation should be a priority and that we should do it however possible, but the hope for ‘conservation everywhere’ won’t even get close to becoming a reality until this becomes a more widespread view.

| Leave a comment

Marris Chapters 8&9

In chapters 8 and 9, Marris continues to criticize returning ecosystems to the way they existed before human intervention. She reiterates the idea, this time using designer ecosystems and once again, human misperceptions of nature and the goals of conservation, to illustrate the problems with trying to restore environments in this manner. Marris then clearly offers how people should think of conservation. Marris argues that the goal of conservation should be to create environments that are “ecologically sound, aesthetically satisfying, economically rewarding and favorable to the continued growth of civilization” (131). This idea of conservation is reasonable and practical given the amount of irreversible changes humans have already made to nature and its ability to appeal to the many people.

Marris has already attacked a variety of conservation ideas such as rewilding and assisted migration. The latest method of conservation she attacks is designer ecosystems. She begins by destroying the common idea held by ecologists and average people alike of what a stream should look like. The thought of a stream being a “single languidly curving channel with high banks” is actually something that has been created as a result of manmade dams during the Industrial Revolution (123). The archetype for an untouched stream is anything but natural. She goes back to the idea of baselines and where people decide untouched by humans really is. One point that she really nails is the idea that designer ecosystems can be expensive, difficult and unsuccessful. The idea of designing an area to look a certain way may require using humans to maintain it. One example she uses is sinking old ships so coral reefs can live on them. Old ships certainly are not a part of the way the ecosystem naturally was, but they are effective solutions. Some designed ecosystems just fail completely due to amount of changes and alterations in an ecosystem. One example she gives is in Australia where the soil and rainfall patterns have changed, that making it incredibly difficult to repopulate the area with eucalyptus trees that have become locally extinct. In such cases, it is fruitless to try to design an area to its original ecosystem; however, in other instances, designer ecosystems should not completely be thrown aside. Using the example of the sunken ships to promote growth in the coral reef, it does offer a solution that works, despite it not being completely natural. Designer ecosystems can save species that are going extinct.

Marris argues that the best type of conservation blends together the needs of humans and nature for a happy medium. An example that she provides that is working towards benefits for both humans and nature is the Duwamish River. The river is an important place that not only functions as a habitat but also a “active industrial waterway” (133). Though the water is polluted, cleanup efforts are being made to improve the ecosystem. A key point that Marris points out is how people are not asking for the entire river to be cleaned up completely and returned to a more ecologically friendly state since the river also provides a vital source of jobs. Perhaps because this idea does not require a drastic change in how humans already altering their behavior that it is often overlooked as a solution. Yet this might also be a selling point, because it is so simple, people might be more willing to adhere to it.

 

| Leave a comment

Designing a New Conservationism

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.

 

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden – Chapters 8 & 9

In chapters eight and nine of the Rambunctious Garden, Marris talks about designer ecosystems and conservation on less than ideal lands. Throughout what we have read, Marris discourages the way environmentalists and conservationists think about how nature should be. Many think that nature should be returned to their baselines, before mankind has altered it in any way. However, Marris introduces the designer ecosystems in chapter eight, which is an ecosystem to be altered for the better by humans, and how advantageous they can be. Marris quotes that, “… a designer ecosystem may be better than a recreation of a historical ecosystem.”

Marris gives an example of the Galápagos penguins as a successful result of the designer ecosystems. Because of the rats preying on the baby penguins, the penguins were at risk of extinction. Exterminating the rats to lessen the risk of the penguins is a long and difficult process. Instead, scientists drilled more nesting holes into the rocks for these birds. According to Marris, “This manipulation doesn’t return penguin habitat to any particular baseline; it makes the habitat better than “normal” for the birds.” There were instances when it has had negative effects, which led to a new domination of the area by a kind of grass. Despite its successes and failures, Marris points out that designer ecosystems are better than conserving areas the traditional way because designer ecosystems work with the growth of the environment, rather than against it. They are also cheaper and more efficient compared to the conventional method. This ties in with chapter nine. Marris writes how unexpected places can provide to be great habitats. She gives an example of a sunken ship housing coral reefs. And so, just like the Galápagos penguins, it would be like making an environment “normal.” “Nature”, such as trees and grass, would be added to urban areas, like the rambuctious garden.

As I read furthermore in the Rambunctious Garden, I see Marris’ idea of this whole rambunctious garden as more and more plausible. I feel like designer ecosystems will be of greater efficiency and cost. Although the idea of the “pristine wilderness” is still in the back of my head, reaching the baseline of an area is nearly impossible. While the possibility of that idea is almost zero, the idea of the rambunctious garden is completely possible and right in front of our noses. Many people do not like change, so it is rather better making small adjustments than to completely alter everything. I think this will be a great way to bring a small piece of nature to everyone’s front steps to admire.

| Leave a comment

Marris 8&9

In “Designer Ecosystems” Marris discusses how humans can change environments in order to fit the needs of the environment. The typical approach is to return to the historical baseline, but Marris argues that manmade approaches can possibly lead to ecosystems that are healthier and more efficient. To back up the idea that the manmade has already become mixed into our idea of what natural is, Marris starts with the example of our mental image of a stream, which is not as close to what Nature creates on her own as we might believe. It seems like such projects can be quick fixes for small areas, but as Marris points out, many complex ecological processes may be too far damaged for us to restore with this method. I agree with Marris’ idea that we may have to rethink our approach to lands that are infested with invasives or changed beyond hope of restoration. Wasting money on hopeless causes is silly, and as in the examples of the pesky rats and nonnative grasses in Australia, I think it makes sense to consider alternative methods of bringing the ecosystem into a more desirable state rather than always pushing for the historical baseline. However, I would not want to argue for these ideas in combination with her beliefs about rewilding and accepting invasive species. The possibility of having a chance to build a successful designer ecosystems then could become a way out, excusing mistakes with those projects. I mean a “it’s okay if we mess up the ecosystem here doing this, because we can simply fix it into something better afterwards.” kind of thought pattern. I rather think that the “design”ing should be a perspective used for those lands which have already been changed by past errors. I’m not really sure how Marris feels about these things because she continues talking about possibilities, sprinkling lots of “maybe”s and “likely”s, at the end of the chapter when discussing how far we may take designer ecosystems. She even says that the relations from organisms which have developed over millions of years from natural selection will probably outperform anything humans attempt to create. I’m not sure where her confidence about introducing proxy species and moving around life strategically like chess pieces comes from if she thinks Nature is more likely to be better than us, even “up to hundreds of years in the future”.

Chapter 9, especially the latter half, involves more everyday situations of how we can make more nature everywhere. There is a lot of content in this chapter, but I think most of the discussion about what regular citizens in this chapter is pretty self-evident and nothing really new. People are already being resourceful and trying to bring spots of nature all around them, whether in parks or in gardens or streets. To my experience, people usually do seed a mixture of aesthetically pleasing plants and native plants when they want more green. As for the rest of the chapter, I’m not that sure how well the idea of corriders could work in our world where land is valued so much as private property, but I do think allowing nature more space, and encouraging plant growth in our cities’ nooks and crannies (as well as in set apart places, like parks and gardens) where we have previously built over whole ecosystems is a good, agreeable thing.

| Leave a comment

Marris, Chapters 8 + 9

In chapters 8 and 9 of Marris’ Rambunctious Garden, Marris once again points out how ecologists shouldn’t just be concerned with restoring and taking care of a “pristine” nature, but they should embrace change and develop he nature in urban areas as well. Marris begins chapter 8 with a discussion on how ecologists have tried to restore streams. Margaret Palmer, a stream restoration expert, says “new picture of pre-European streams will just replace one arbitrary baseline with another-neither of which takes into account the changing nature of the landscape” (124). This supports Marris’ point of the arbitrary goal of many ecologists, to continue to conserve nature by restoring it to a certain baseline.

The streams are actually designed rather than restored since “no restoration reproduces exactly the ecosystem of hundreds of years ago” (125). It is the goal of restoring an ecosystem to it’s “proper” baseline that many ecologists chase. They want to restore an ecosystem to a historic baseline that is “morally better” as well as “maximally efficient” at certain ecological functions (126). In doing so they are creating new, designer ecosystems, “even if they are inspired by the past” (126). But just because an ecosystem looks as it used to, Marris points out, doesn’t mean it will behave in the same manner. She also points out that often the historic ecosystem isn’t always performing better at certain functions that novel ecosystems and often a well constructed designer ecosystem will be better than a “recreation of a historical ecosystem” (127).

Because the ecology and nature of an area is constantly changing and adapting, there is no point in establishing a baseline and striving to obtain it since the baseline is not an ideal scenario since nature is always dynamic. Often it is even impossible to restore the original ecosystem, such as in the eucalyptus woodlands in Australia, where the soil became to salty for the historical plants to live. Instead, other species that thrive with salt could grow there. Richard Hobbs states, “You are not going to get the previous ecosystem back, but you can still aim for something that is valuable” (129).

I agree with Marris’ statement that ecologists should try to stop using the word “restore” and instead just design high functioning and useful ecosystems, as well as leave some land unmanaged, “just to see what it does” (131). Marris sums up her main points in the end of chapter 9, discussing the importance to preserve and enhance nature that is all around us. She brings up an interesting point of how nature shows portray nature as pristine and untouched, yet this is very rarely the case, and they convince viewers that the “pristine” idea of nature is the only true nature that there is. Marris points out many examples of how nature is all around us and I agree with her view of nature, which includes all of the animals and ecosystems that are directly around humans. Just because nature isn’t untouched, doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be regarded as nature.

| Leave a comment

Designer Ecosystems

Throughout “Rambunctious Garden,” Emma Marris has suggested methods to solving the issues with conservation. Some ecologists try to return to pristine natures, which Marris doesn’t agree with since she believes in the rambunctious garden. She also discussed methods such as assisted migration, rewilding, restoration, and isolating landscapes form human interaction. She states “Restoration ecologists have been trapped by the seductive vision of healing wounded nature and returning it to a stable ‘natural’ state. But there is a new current of energy at their meetings. They are beginning to see the possibilities of designing, engineering, cooking up something new”(126). This introduces the emergence of designer ecosystems.

Designer ecosystems are created to fulfill a certain purpose, whether it is saving a species, “increased biodiversity, as well as the removal of nitrogen and excess sediment” (126). In this era of Anthropocene, returning to a state that preexisted human involvement won’t help nature because we have left our mark and the majority of the human population doesn’t seem content on reversing their progress. In this way “a designer ecosystem may be better than a recreation of a historical ecosystem” (127).

We have contributed some negative consequences to the environment, with the extinction of certain species, the depletion of wildlife, pollution, and the degrading ozone layer. To remedy these issues we could instead try to create an environment that helps resolve these issues, or at least mitigate their affects and growing rate. If we were to return the earth to a pristine environment it would be difficult since we can’t completely identify what the pristine environment exactly was. Then there’s the question of why have a pristine nature when humans are the dominant force on the planet. The eventual result would be in an unpristine environment. In addition, we cannot reverse the mistakes we have made, making it impossible to return to a pristine nature.

Radical conservationists are not a viable goal at this point in time, therefore designer ecosystems cold help us achieve the conservationist goals we set out to achieve. In this way, rather than isolating the environment from humans, we can have humans and the environment working in collaboration for the betterment of the earth. In this way, we are achieving Marris’ idea of a rambunctious garden because we will be living with the environment with the idea that it is capable of helping itself. Marri’s doesn’t believe nature is as fragile as we make it and if we can make certain modifications then rely on nature to take care of itself and maintain itself then we can live with nature rather than trying to baby it.

| Leave a comment

8 and 9 Chapters

Designer ecosystems are ecosystems that have a goal for its existence. This usually involves helping the environment in some way or preventing species from dying out. These designer ecosystems usually include a lot of planning which help identify a problem that needs to be fixed. Designer ecosystems are also more possible than “pristine ecosystems” that have been discussed throughout the book. Such projects would help during the present and continue to benefit the environment in the future. Therefore, designer ecosystems seem like a worthy investment of one’s time and effort.

Conservation is extremely important because it helps keep nature preserved. Marris points out that conservation should take place every where. This would be her model of a rambunctious garden and would greatly help the preservation of nature. People are encouraged to plant plants around their home. She greatly believes that people should not think that nature is a designated area, rather a place that exists everywhere. If everyone changes their mindset, it would greatly help the preservation of nature. If people are well informed, they will help contribute to the ecosystem.

The ideas that Marris presents are much more plausible than the ones mentioned before. A designer ecosystem is going to provide benefits almost immediately after completion. Designer ecosystems are much easier to finish as a project since it has a clear stated goal rather than restoring it to “baseline.” Marris also says that if everyone contributes to conservation, it would be much more successful. This begins when the people realize that every person can contribute to this effort. Even though these ideas may seem extremely well thought out, there are some drawbacks. Not everyone can be motivated to do something especially where it takes effort. Also, even though designer ecosystems do provide benefits, it may be some time before people see visual changes. This can discourage people in using more money and effort to creating more of these ecosystems.

I honestly believe that the ideas discussed in these two chapters are much more reasonable. The chances of these projects happening are higher than any of the others so far. Even though these are good ideas, I still think it may be a long time before any major changes will occur. Nature isn’t something that changes overnight and commitment to these projects are crucial to its success.

| Leave a comment

Chapter 8 and 9

In chapters 8 and 9, Emma Marris focuses on designer ecosystems and advocates the act of conservation everywhere, not only in the pristine wilderness. Like in other chapters, Marris brings up alternatives to the conventional idea of restoring wilderness to a pristine state or to a historic baseline. The reason that these alternatives developed is that baseline conservation is unrealistic and unfeasible to achieve in our current world. Funding, drastic alterations to the environment such as soil content, animal extinction, and global climate change are just a few reasons that baseline conditions are very hard to achieve. These alternatives are meant to be a more feasible way to integrate conservation and our human interests.

Designer ecosystems are basically ecosystems that are designed with a specific purpose to achieve. Previously, the only purpose of conservation was to reach the baseline of the ecosystem, but designer ecosystems are ecosystems that have their functions restored or new functions and interactions in the environment. Like in chapter 9, streams that were trying to emulate the baseline were not able to remove nitrogen like the past baseline ecosystems, while newly designed ecosystems did a much better job. This concept sounds like a more efficient way to use resources, or to gain more resources if the government takes notice. There are countless benefits including economic returns and environmental improvement, and could be a way to deal with climate change that is already changing ecosystems. Why not lend a hand to the inefficient ecosystems? The only problem would be deciding which ecosystems to help design, there should still be some attempts of pristine wilderness or baseline ecosystems, but not at the scale of focus that we have now.

The main idea in chapter 9 focuses on expanding conservation to everywhere, including our own backyards, industrial areas, and agricultural properties. One main point she makes is connectedness between our conservation areas, letting animals have a wider range through connected channels, which increases species diversity and does not allow for fragments to contain some populations. She also points out that we can make our own areas or gardens more accessible to nature, and by doing this a thriving ecosystem could emerge, or our urban environment could potentially become corridors for species to travel through. By converting our rooftops and lawns with eco-friendly plants, we are participating in the conservation of ecosystems. This idea seems very optimistic, but I do have objections pertaining all of these insects and pests that could accompany conservation anywhere. It could be a huge problem in New York to bring in more insects and other pests, and the general public could object to it; this idea is not exactly feasible everywhere.

The solution that these alternatives bring basically bring is combing both the needs of ecosystems/conservationists and other human needs for the environment. By connecting human interests with ecological goals, the actual involvement with conservation could potentially increase.

| Leave a comment

Chapters 8&9

In chapter 8 of Rambunctious Garden, Marris illustrates a foreign concept of “designer ecosystems.” She describes it as a created ecosystem that “is not emulating any baseline at all but building de novo to achieve a particular goal (126).” Instead of recreating the speculated baseline of an ecosystem years back before human interference, the focus is rather on designing a system with a specific benefit in mind to be earned. Some of the benefits might include supporting humans, increased biodiversity or removal of the unwanted in the ecosystem. In chapter 9 titled Conservation Everywhere, Marris presents many of the ideas she discussed in the previous chapters such as rewilding, assisted migration and embracing exotic/invasive species. All these ideas within the scope of the previous conservationists’ approach to nature and novel ecosystems are new and different, even a little bit difficult to embrace. However she argues that “they are all at some level about making the most out of every scrap of land and water, no matter its condition (135).” And she goes on to say, “To make the most of our protected areas, we must think beyond their boundaries…” As she had done throughout her book so far, Marris once again challenges her readers to approach nature and conserving it in a new way.

I completely agree with Marris that the first step to conserving and saving the already too damaged nature is to view it in its context right now. That it should no longer be about the restoration of a pristine wilderness but about making more of nature from what remains. Marris briefly mentions that often nature documentaries depict nature as an isolated thing. She claims that they intentionally “edit out any trace of the modern world, tricking viewers into thinking there is a place out there, somewhere, where cheetahs and polar bears and penguins romp free (150).” A place completely untouched is also the exact picture I draw in my head when I hear the word “nature”. I picture a far far away place with no traces of human beings. Completely isolated and protected from the modern world. But no such place exists anymore.

Many plants, birds and animals can be found near us right in the city. Marris mentions that 227 different bee species inhabit New York. There are 474 plants, close to 2,000 insects and over fifty birds in the back garden of a gardener in Leicester. Even street trees commonly spotted are homes to a variety of birds, wasps and cicadas. Simply put, “Street trees are nature (151).” The key point Marris makes is that “if conservation is to take place everywhere, we must all learn to see nature as the background to our own lives and not just as islands far away (151).” Though it might be a long process, I think it’s worth trying.

| Leave a comment

Chapter 8 and 9 Rambunctious Gardens

Chapter 8 of the Rambunctious Gardens by Emma Marris talks about the concept of the designer ecosystem. Designer ecosystems are created to make the habitat better than it already is. Their main goal is to make the area thrive most efficiently and effectively. Restoring areas to their original baseline is a lot of work, especially because at the end of the day, the area will not be 100% identical to its baseline. “The organisms and the relations between them that have emerged from millions of years of natural selection are likely going to outperform anything we cobble together in our computers, whether the goal is spaces for recreation, management of energy and nutrients, protection of biodiversity, or provision of services” (130). An example of this designer ecosystem is using large boulders to maximize the output of plant and animal communities in streambeds. Another example was sinking old ships to provide places for coral reefs to live. The thought behind designer ecosystems is that human involvement doesn’t always have to be thought of as a bad thing. In these situations, human involvement is actually helping the ecosystems exponentially.

Chapter 9 is titled “Conservation Everywhere” and spoke about how conservation should be taking place everywhere, not just in secluded national parks such as Yellowstone. With the Yellowstone, the goal was to create corridors in order to allow for more space for the larger animals.  Marris says,  “Rewilding, assisted migration, and embracing some exotic species and novel ecosystems may seem like disparate strategies, but they are all at some level about making the most of every scrap of land and water, no matter its condition” (page 135).” Through connectivity with nature, will scientists be able to bring about some of the best ecosystems. “Ideally, reserves should be scientifically designed to achieve conservation goals agreed upon by interested parties while being sensitive to the needs of the people who now live or once lived on the sites in question (page 138).” Marris tries to expand on her idea that conservation can everywhere by stating that “project of conservation is not just defending what we have, but adding lands to our portfolio and deepening value of the lands in play (page 135).” Regular people can help connect with nature by allowing nature to take over their garden. This process may not look pleasing to the eye, but this type of gardening creates a much more diverse as well as rambunctious feeling. To sum up, Marris says that since it is impossible to return nature back to a pristine wilderness, people should live in harmony with nature. After all as she states, “plants and animals are all around us, in our backyards, along roadsides, in city parks (page 150).”

 

| Leave a comment

Chapter 8&9

In chapter 8 and 9 of the book Rambunctious Garden Marris introduces the concept of designer ecosystem and the idea that conservation should occur everywhere around the globe. I agree with Marris that conservationists should think about achieving specific goals instead of heavily focused on returning the area to their baselines. Also, I like the idea that conservation should occur everywhere not just in those big parks.

In the chapter “designer ecosystem” Marris argues that while conserving ecosystem is important, there are many ways to do it. Many conservationists were too focused on setting a baseline, and trying to bring those places to meet a certain baseline conditions. While Marris thinks that by doing so it will miss the point. She suggests that, “no restoration reproduces exactly the ecosystem of hundreds of years ago. And restoration ecologists use lots of “hacks” –less-than-authentic shortcuts to get a landscape looking and working the way they want (Marris 181).” I agree with Marris that conservationists should focused more on achieving specific goals; for example, reducing the amount of nitrogen or carbons in the atmosphere, or changing the soil composition. Returning a place into what it looked like before human interferences sounds ideal, but it was not realistic. There are proofs of human interferences everywhere in this world; therefore, there are no such things as “pristine” nature. According to Hobbs, “You are not going to get the previous ecosystem back, but you can still aim for something that is valuable (Marris 187)”. It is not about making it looks the same as before, but creating a similar ecosystem that will provides same ecological services. In chapter 9 of the book, Marris talks about the idea that conservation should take place everywhere around the world. As she puts it, “To make the most of our protected areas, we must think beyond their boundaries and complement our wildernesses with conservation everywhere else too, from industrial rivers like the Duwamish to the roofs of buildings and farmer’s fields (Marris 193).” We should start paying attention to the nature that surrounds us, whether it’s a small park, a street with many trees or anywhere with plants and little creatures; because all of them represent the signs of nature. It is easy for people to talk about conservation but difficult to get everyone involved in this big project of saving nature. Marris gives an example of conservation in agricultural lands, in which many conservationists suggest “habitat and other natural values can be improved by increasing the diversity and reducing the intensity of farming (Marris 201).” By changing farm lands into habitats will decrease the agricultural production, and thus less profits. Therefore, many farmers and economists are not in favor of this idea. Marris also talks about planting more native species in private gardens; however, it is not easy for people to implement this idea. Since many of these plants attract bugs and insects, many house owners don’t want to grow anything in their gardens. I agree with the idea that conservation should occur in everywhere; however, we need to work harder to convince people to help to make a difference.

| Leave a comment

Designer Ecosystems and Conservation Everywhere

In Chapters 8 and 9 of Rambunctious Garden, Emma Marris continues her attack on societal perceptions on nature and attempts to change most of her readers’ views, using designer ecosystems and the coexistence of nature and industry as examples. From ancient streams that were “more like swamps,” “eucalyptus woodlands” that aren’t “going back to the way it used to be,” and the Duwamish River in Seattle, Marris shows us once again why setting a pristine baseline for nature is impossible, and how we can work with urbanization to diversify and better nature, along with ourselves (123, 129).

Chapter 8 discusses designer ecosystems, which can vary from “restoration projects” primarily focused on a natural image to “building de novo to achieve a particular goal” (125-6). Apparently, ecologists are “beginning to see the possibilities of designing, engineering, cooking up something new,” by focusing in on designer ecosystems that are more associated with the phrase “whatever works” than anything having to do with restoration (126-7). In one example, Galapagos penguins are endangered due to rats in Seattle that eat the penguins, so scientists have reacted not by trying to force the rats out of Seattle but by “drilling more nesting holes into the rocks for the birds” – a compromise, in working with what they have and doing their best to accomplish a specific goal (127). Marris describes designer ecosystems pragmatically, as they work within a modern, urban context without attempting to restore an area to a historical baseline and a pristine wilderness.

Marris continues with this idea of working with what you have in nature in Chapter 9, Conservation Everywhere, in which she talks about the possibilities for a “hybrid future” where nature and industry can successfully co-exist (133). Cari Simson, a staffer at the Duwamish River Cleanup Coalition in Seattle, calls this an “eco-industrial vision” – a vision that consists of “making the most out of every scrap of land and water, no matter its condition” and complementing “our wildernesses with conservation everywhere else too, from industrial rivers like the Duwamish to the roofs of buildings and farmer’s fields” (134-5). Marris suggests that one can help conserve wilderness by letting their lawns grow as much as possible, making space available to species on farmers’ acres of land so that they can exist more easily, and changing agricultural practices to make more space for species.

While Marris’s argument is very convincing, it’s almost condescending to me to read some of what she writes – on the last page of Chapter 9, she writes that “(s)treet trees are not just attractive shade-providing devices…Street trees are nature…If conservation is to take place everywhere, we must all learn to see nature as the background to our own lives and not just as islands far away” (151). Are people generally that ignorant to nature, so much so that they can only see “street trees” surrounding them as “shade-providing devices,” and they can only see nature on “islands far away” from their urbanized lives? I don’t think so – people are more thoughtful than that. And for all of the criticism that Marris had earlier for the leading authors of conservation from the 19th Century, she suggests that one of her goals in tying nature to industry is so that people “can take a moment and connect with nature” (143). Wasn’t that what Thoreau and Muir wrote about earlier? People can still find and appreciate nature around them without this dichotomy of pristineness and the Anthropocene that Marris repeats – and this isn’t far from what Muir and Thoreau wrote about centuries ago.

| Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Marris Chapter 8 & 9

In chapter 8 of Rambunctious Garden, Marris talks about designer ecosystems. Designer ecosystems are ecosystems developed to achieve a specific goal, such as “nitrogen reduction, sediment capture, or the maintenance of one or a small number of species.”  This is a different type of conservation, as opposed to trying to restore land to a baseline. This method of conservation is much better than trying to recreate an ecosystem of the past. This is because nature is constantly changing and baselines do not take into account for an area has changed. What was there before might not be good for today. Furthermore, designer ecosystems can make an area even better than it was before. Take for example, the conservation goal of saving the Galapagos penguin. The penguin is endangered and only two thousand remain. One of the threats to their survival are introduced rats who eat the chicks. One solution to the problem would be to get rid of the introduced rats. However, a better solution that was used was for scientist to drill more nesting wholes into the rocks for the birds. This increases the number of chicks that can be born, so the population can increase, and not be so effected by the rats. The drilling of the nests does not restore the ecosystem to a baseline, but it does make the ecosystem better for the Galapagos penguin. Creating designer ecosystems is a much better conservation tool than returning it to a baseline. Designer ecosystems can make a habitat better since it is working toward a goal, and it can also allow humans and nature to live together and work together better.

In chapter 9, Marris talks about different conservation views and how they tie together. She mentions strategies she had talked about in earlier chapters, such as rewilding, assisted migration, and novel ecosystems, and how even though they all seem very different, they are all about “making the most out of every scrap of land and water, no matter its condition.” Marris says that conservation should be everywhere in order for us to get the most out of protected areas. Little areas of nature may not seem like much, but they really are something. Take her example of a small park in the middle of industrial access roads at the end of Duwamish Diagonal Avenue. It is in the middle of industrialness, but it is still peaceful and quite, and there are even animals, like the Canadian geese, and a seal. Industrial areas can have nature as well, like with the example of the Hostess Cupcake factory roof, and can help to bring people closer to nature and move species. As Marris says, this kind of strategy is quite easy for citizens to do and they can use pretty much any space. I think is would be a really good strategy to be implemented everywhere. It might seem like a lot, but it is a small first step that everyone can take in order to people to become more connected and closer with nature.

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden Chapter 8-9

In Chapter 8 and 9, Emma Marris offers solutions to help nature and human’s coexistence with it. She suggests designer ecosystems and conservation everywhere as two ways to help nature.

Marris encourages conservationists to look into the future and create something that will be valuable instead of resurrecting something that is lost. She explains that designer ecosystems will make the ecosystems even better. In the past, many ecologists theorized that before human’s arrival, “ecosystems were always maximally efficient at such functions as purifying water, supporting diverse life, keeping sediment from washing away, and so on” (126). At the present, however some ecologists desire to engineer a completely new ecosystem that will add complimentary features to aid the species living there. For example, old ships will be sunk to create habitat for coral reefs and numerous fish species. “But the most radical kind of designer ecosystem is not emulating any baseline at all but building de novo to achieve a particular goal.” Such a goal can be nitrogen reduction, sediment capture, or maintenance of an endangered species. The story of the Galapagos penguin’s near extinction due to an introduced species of rat was not tragic but hopeful. Instead of exterminating the rat, a task that is so inefficient and impossible, the scientists drilled nesting holes in rocks for the chicks to hide. Therefore, in place of a baseline habitat for the penguin they simply put a better and improved habitat.

Designer ecosystems asides, Marris also suggests the idea of “rambunctious garden”. As the title of chapter 9 suggests, “Conservation Everywhere,” conservation should essentially spread everywhere and to places we have never though of. Marris states that the “project of conservation is not just defending what we have, but adding lands to our portfolio and deepening value of the lands in play” (135). Since most of the land on the planet has already been used, a greater focus on deepening the use of the land is of the essence. Corridors can be leveraged to connect fragments and prevent the leaking of species and gene pools.

Lastly, she urges people to plant their own private gardens rambunctiously. They may not look pleasing to the eye, but these gardens represent a more diverse and intrinsically valuable habitat. Marris suggests that farmers should get paid for letting several aerial species into their farm and nest on their plantation. Industrial spaces can be filled with green instead of waste, allowing water to be absorbed by the plants and reducing the heat island effect through photosynthesis.

I believe those are excellent ways to conservation. Classical ecologists have lavish funding into a dream to bring back the past when they could have allowed for a new future such as in the case of the Galapagos penguins. Even though there are always hidden variables but the failure of baseline ecosystems far outweigh those of designer ecosystems. Moreover I believe an united effort by the whole population through rambunctious gardening is essential for conservation and aesthetically pleasing habitats.

 

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden – Chapters 8 and 9

Chapters 8 and 9 of Rambunctious Garden by Emma Marris discuss designer ecosystems and conservation on lands that might not be viewed as ideal. In chapter 8, Marris discusses designer ecosystems. Designer ecosystems are ecosystems that are designed for a specific goal, such as nitrogen reduction or the preservation of an endangered species. Rewilding with proxy species and assisted migration create designer ecosystems. In chapter 9, Marris discusses conservation in areas that are not considered ideal, such as industrial centers and cities. She points out that nature and industry can coexist. This can be achieved by adding native plants to rooftops, planting species in unused corners of industrial sites, and recreating gardens. Marris ends chapter 9 by discussing reconciliation ecology, which is the science of inventing new habitats to conserve species diversity in areas that are heavily affected by humans. For example, Marris suggests turning a garden into a rambunctious space filled with native plants. She ends the chapter by pointing out that cities and urban areas can be some of the most diverse and beautiful places in the world.

I agree with Marris that designer ecosystems can be extremely effective. This is because creating a designer ecosystem is not nearly as expensive as trying to restore an ecosystem to a specific baseline. This is especially true when an ecosystem has experienced both biotic and abiotic changes. Once this has occurred, the ecosystem is at a point of no return and cannot be restored to the way it was. However, the problem with designer ecosystems is determining which goals are the most important for a particular habitat. Choosing one specific goal might cause harm in other areas. Since ecosystems are so unpredictable, adding or taking something away might have an adverse effect on another species in the ecosystem and might do more harm than good. Nevertheless, designer ecosystems can definitely help preserve endangered species.

I also agree with Marris that some lands must be unmanaged. This allows for evolution. If humans control everything in an ecosystem, they are acting as God. This will not allow for natural selection and evolution, and will ultimately decrease species diversity. Some species and ecosystems need to develop on their own. I also agree with Marris that parks should be surrounded by wild areas. This will create corridors and sustain animals with large ranges. Ultimately, this will increase species diversity.

The arguments that Marris makes in chapter 9 are particularly interesting. She talks about bringing “pavement, houses, and malls” as the foreground of nature in our minds. This is very difficult to do and requires a change in thought and philosophy. However, it is possible. Since the majority of the world’s population is urban, urban areas must be addressed. Increasing ecosystem services and species richness in these areas is crucial to maintaining a healthy Earth. However, I believe that incentives that reward people who help conservation might not be efficient. This costs a lot of taxpayer money; instead, it might be better to fine those who do not adhere to proper techniques.

In chapter 9, Marris suggests turning urban gardens into rambunctious spaces filled with native plants. Although this would be ideal to increase species diversity, I do not think that people would be willing to do it. Most people would not want to sacrifice the beauty of their garden for the greater good of the community. This will not only bring down the perceived beauty of the home, but it will also bring down the price of the home. Nevertheless, turning a garden into a wild space can definitely benefit the environment in a positive way and act as a model for ecologists everywhere.

| Tagged , | Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden: Chapters 8&9

Emma Marris has argued throughout her novel, Rambunctious Garden, that “pristine wilderness” is unrealistic and unfeasible to recreate. Human activities have influenced nature for as long as we existed. It is impossible, if not difficult, to reverse all the impact that has been done or to restore ecosystems. Marris further supports her argument in chapters 8 and 9. She talks about creating “designer ecosystems” that can realistically benefit nature. Together with the idea of “conservation everywhere”, both humans and nature can benefit and coexist with one another.

Marris believes that designer ecosystems are “a best-case future” (Marris 131). They would “create ‘new environments that are ecologically sound, aesthetically satisfying, economically rewarding and favorable to the continued growth of civilization'” (131). Parks would still be kept for those who want that true feeling of nature, but a majority of these types of environments would be designer ecosystems. These are essentially the rambunctious gardens which Marris appropriately titles her novel. René Dubos, an advocate, microbiologist and environmental thinker, is convinced that managed nature designed to support humans and other species will prosper in the future (130). Perhaps one of the most appealing characteristics of designer ecosystems is from the economic standpoint. It would be far more affordable for governments to maintain these rambunctious gardens than “pristine wilderness” efforts. These ecosystems would utilize land and make them more efficient.

In addition, species would be aided with appropriate habitats. Marris provides us with an example of sinking old ships to provide places for coral reefs to populate (126). Another example would be penguin habitat manipulation. “The manipulation doesn’t return penguin habitat to any particular baseline; it makes the habitat better than ‘normal’ for the birds (127). Nonetheless, there are many people who argue in favor of “Island Civilization”, where “humans retreat to very dense cities, voluntarily limit their own population, and let the rest of the planet run wild” (132).

In these chapters, Marris clarifies why rambunctious gardens are more realistic and beneficial to nature and society. I certainly favor the idea of designer ecosystems simply because it is more plausible to achieve man and nature coexistence. I understand the beauty and love for “pristine wilderness”, but we can create just as beautiful (or even more) ecosystems. Historian Roderick Nash addresses that the “garden scenario” is “human control of nature” that is both total and beneficent” (130). Soil composition and fertility is well maintained, rivers are clean and pure. If designer ecosystems can benefit in many ways, it seems as if we have the best of both worlds. There will still be true nature in addition to these created environments. This can please advocates of pristine wilderness and rambunctious gardens. Moreover, a lot of money will be saved that can be used to better both systems.

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden Chapters 8-9 Response

In chapters 8 and 9 of “Rambunctious Garden,” Emma Marris describes various innovative alternatives for conservation around the world. In chapter 8, “Designer Ecosystems,” she talks about people engineering ecosystems in order to reach a particular goal. This way, they can design the ecosystem to function the way they want it to and to get the species diverse and its appearance a certain way. This method is certainly different from most conservation techniques. “But the most radical kind of designer ecosystem is not emulating any baseline at all but building de novo to achieve a particular goal. This is heady stuff for restoration ecologists, who until recently made their living trying to recreate ecosystems at historical baselines.” (126) This shows that designer ecosystems, rather than focusing on making an ecosystem look and act like it did in the past, function so that there is greater species diversity and the new changes, whether biotic or abiotic, are accounted for. In this method of improving the ecosystems, ecologists focus more on the current environmental conditions and think about the future and how to make it more sustainable going ahead compared to more traditional conservationists who try to make ecosystems look the way they once did before. This idea of designer ecosystems may in fact be better than our current conservation methods because it accounts more for the changes that have been made to the ecosystems. Rather than making them appear pristine and untouched, we should aim towards creating a more sustainable and healthy environment for various species to coexist and thrive in. In chapter 9, “Conservation Everywhere,” Marris describes many different styles of nature conservation. “Rewilding, assisting migration, and embracing some exotic species and novel ecosystems may seem like disparate strategies, but they are all at some level about making the most out of every scrap of land and water, no matter its condition.” (135) This shows that she is trying to get the point across that people can make small changes in their own lives and still benefit the overall ecosystem. I found her idea about turning backyards and other parts of peoples’ homes into a conservation site. “What’s wonderful about these kinds of strategies is that private citizens do not have to wait and hope that their government or some larger conservation organization will carry them out. Every owner and renter can make any space work for nearly any conservation goal, whether they have a tiny balcony, a slot in a community garden, or a ranch in Texas.” (145) This is especially important for people who live in cities for example, because they may feel like they do not have adequate space to make an effort for conservation. Although the beneficial lawn may not be as aesthetically appealing compared to more traditional lawns, they are certainly better for the ecosystem since they are able to house more species, thus increasing the species diversity right in a person’s backyard.

| Leave a comment

Marris 8 & 9 – Conservation Everywhere – 10/2

In Chapter 8, Marris informs us of designer ecosystems. She begins by asking us to imagine a stream. The conventional idea of a stream is a singular curve with fresh water. However, Marris stops us there and tells us that’s now how streams have always been. The ones we automatically picture are man-made to be restored to a baseline… except that’s not how they were. Thus, millions of dollars have then been wasted.

“If our goal is to decrease sediment load, we should focus on that and not worry about making the stream look the way it did at presettlement time, because nothing is the same as it was presettlement (124). These efforts are more concerned (again) with turning time backwards instead of looking forward. Aesthetics, though not entirely irrelevant, seem to be receiving priority over more important problems. Marris writes that “restoration ecologists have been trapped by the seductive vision of healing wounded nature and returning it to a stable ‘natural’ state…they are beginning to see the possibilities of designing, engineering, cooking up something new” (126). Designer ecosystems allow ecologists to not bother with a baseline, which in the first place lacks enough information, to even conceive. Instead, they can tailor ecosystems to the current species and other problems, such as nitrogen levels that need to be tackled. Monitoring nitrogen levels also seems to be less consuming overall than attempting to remove species.

In Chapter 9, Marris sums up arguments and notions from past chapters, such as assisted migration, rewilding, exotic species, and novel ecosystems. Marris writes that though these approaches differ greatly, they “make the most out of ever scrap of land and water, no matter its condition. To make the most of our protected areas, we must think beyond their boundaries and complement our wilderness with conservation everywhere else too” (135). These places include roofs of buildings and factories, farmer’s fields, industrial rivers, and even our own backyards. While I understand utilizing the roofs of big factories, such as the Hostess one, it seems a lot far off to have ecosystems on every block of New York City. Marris deploys the gestalt switch as the perfect example of how she believes nature should be, “impervious surfaces—pavement, houses, malls where nothing can grow—as the foreground and everything else as the background nature” (135). Obviously problems can arise from this, such as a lack of organization, compromise, and more.

As I’ve said before, I don’t support the previous arguments of assisted migration, rewilding, and the invasive species. Marris ties everything together in “Conservation Everywhere”, once again discussing how the romantic idea of pristine wildness needs to be compromised and ultimately lead to a rambunctious garden. Instead of trying to revert back to an unknown baseline, she emphasizes seeing nature in a different light. Nature should be embraced, as it is a natural part of life, and should be found everywhere, even the most unpredictable places. This is a significantly optimistic and in my opinion, more realistic, beneficial, and beautiful outlook.

| Leave a comment

Marris chap 8&9

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.

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden Chap 8 & 9

Chapters 8 and 9 of Marris’ “Rambunctious Garden” differ largely from traditional conservationist efforts discussed in previous chapters. Marris introduces us to a new term in chapter 8, “designer ecosystems.” Rather than striving to achieve a specific baseline, Marris suggests focusing on “building to achieve a specific goal,” whether it be reducing nitrogen levels or performing maintenance on small ecological areas. In a nutshell, “designer ecosystems” are created to make the area better than it normally would be; efficient and effective. Restoring ecosystems back to a specific baseline is a stick issue. It’s a lot of money, and even more work. While “designer ecosystems” can be just as time consuming as well as cost inefficient, it seems to be the more practical option. Certain goals may be easier to achieve than restoring an entire piece of land or an entire ecosystem to its pristine condition. Noted expert Margaret Palmer is cited, saying that baselines are of an arbitrary nature and do not take in to account the change of the ecosystem over time. Also, human interference must be taken into account when discussing baselines.It is extremely difficult to restore a specific baseline given the thousands of years of change, thus a “designer ecosystem” is likely the more plausible option. Marris evaluates this process based on a few certain criteria: the goal, the size of the project, the budget, and how much of the ecosystem has already changed.
Chapter 9 of “Rambunctious Garden” discusses various viewpoints of conservationist from around the world and that conservation should exist everywhere, not only in parks designed to conserve. Marris’ primary foci, North America and Europe, both contrast one another in a number of ways. The North American conservationist philosophy presented in the book is focused largely on Yellowstone National Park. The goal, according to Marris is to create more space, or “corridors”, for migration purposes. In Europe, national parks and reserves are often riddled with cattle and sheep that graze the land while other inhabitants, such as the birds mentioned in the book, live off the land. The birds are also used to this open-field type of ecosystem where mostly herbivores live. Marris wants us (mostly Americans) to stop thinking that nature should only be found in national parks or reserves that eventually become a tourist attraction. Rather, humans should make an effort to conserve on a global scale; even if it means planting more trees and plants in your backyard at home. It may not look pretty, but at least the environment will last for that much longer.

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden Chap 6 & 7

In chapters 6 and 7 of Marris’ “Rambunctious Garden,” the author focuses on finding a plausible solution to “invasive species” and the conservation of “novel ecosystems.” Invasive species are typically viewed as detrimental and harmful to the ecosystems they are introduced too; such as the case of the flightless wren, zebra muscles, and the Asian tiger mosquito. All of these species have harmed their respective un-natural ecosystems, thus rendering them “invasive” or “exotic.” Marris firmly believes that humans should not interfere or fight invasive species, because the underlying problem rests with humans, not the animals. Although Marris does provide several examples in Chapter 6 of the harm that invasive species can cause, Marris herself is somewhat of a proponent of invasive species. Contemporary conservationists may call her crazy; however, Marris identifies several benefits that come along with invasive species, and the benefits seem to outweigh the risks. As suggested by the title and Marris, humans should embrace invasive species. Rather than the generic view of invasive species as harmful, many are, according to Marris, “well behaved” and “innocuous.” In various cases, invasive species might actually end up furthering the state of the ecosystem. Marris points out that invasive species increase biodiversity and sometimes, the invasive species may benefit from that specific ecosystem because they are well-suited to live in that environment. Marris goes on to criticize the overuse of a variety of resources in order to combat invasive species because of the cost, but mostly for their ineffectiveness.
Chapter 7 focuses largely on the concept of “novel ecosystems.” Marris cites two ecologists, Lugo and Mascaro, as two other supporters of this concept. The concept of a novel ecosystem stems from the idea that introduced and native species can co-exist and flourish. Despite a shroud of criticism and skepticism surrounding this idea, Marris sees it as the future of conservationism. I certainly won’t be so quick to judge as Marris is, because she seems to brush off a lot of criticism regarding invasive species. I do believe that there is a reason for certain species being referred to as “invasive.” If every ecosystem benefited from “invasive” species, then they would not be invasive. When any new species is introduced into a new ecosystem, it must have some detrimental effect on the natural environment because those species are not in their natural environment.

| Leave a comment

A Love-Hate Relationship: Novel Ecosystems

After reading five chapters of Marris’ Rambunctious Garden, it is easy to infer that traditional ecology spurns the idea of invasive species coexisting with native species; invasive species are bad, native species are good. Years of field study and research have formed orthodox views that support the idea that invasive species hinder ecosystems due to their harmful nature, severely impeding biodiversity and ecosystem health. As Marris’ book states, “A species invades, and the ecosystem collapses, species go extinct, and complexity and diversity are replaced with a monotonous and weedy landscape dominated by invaders” (97). Proof has been seen for centuries all around the world. Zebra mussels in the Great Lakes, the yellow crazy ant in Australia, or the aggressive species introduced to Stephens Island that killed off ten of twelve native birds, leading to a cascading effect on other species serve as only a few examples. With so much proof, it is difficult to view exotic species otherwise. Chapter six and seven of Marris’ book, however, shine a new light on invasive species and propose the contentious idea that perhaps exotic species are not so bad after all.

Throughout chapters six and seven, Marris provides readers with an alternative vantage point, presenting the claim that exotic species may, in fact, be beneficial to an ecosystem. Marris’ first example pertains to an instance in which an introduced species of trees actually saved three native species from going extinct: On Rodrigues Island, fast-growing exotic trees were chosen to reforest the land and “almost accidentally” saved the island’s two endangered songbirds and a fruit bat. Marris furthers her argument by introducing two modern ecologists, Mascaro and Lugo, who also support the notion of “novel ecosystems,” ecosystems defined by anthropogenic change that are not under active human management (114). The stories support examples of native and introduced species living together diversely, sans “monocultures and other such nightmares.” She also makes the argument that targeting invasive species is simply not economical. Ridding an ecosystem of all invasive species requires a large amount of time, effort and money, and the results are not always permanent. In short, Marris provides readers with the general idea that “…some exotic species are a huge problem, the vast majority are not.” (98).

But is this really so? When assessed objectively, this blanket claim seems to fall short. It is true that a number of invasive species are introduced and eventually mellow out, but the impacts of exotic species are far direr than made to seem. Invasive species have high competitive ability, fecundity and their extremely quick growth rate is supplemented by the lack of natural regulators such as parasites or competitors that have yet to adapt to the new species. In fact, introduced species rank amongst the top five causes of modern extinction. What about the “good” invasive species Marris talks of in her book? They have a very high failure rate.

All in all, we cannot merely say that invasive species are good. We must strike a balance between giving exotic species free reign and entirely ridding areas of introduced species. I agree strongly with Joe Mascaro’s quote, “This isn’t about conceding defeat; its about a new approach” (122).

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden CH 6 and 7

It would seem that when an “invasive species” enters an ecosystem, they would cause native species to go extinct because of the new competition for food and space, or because the native species would become prey. However when an invasive species of trees were brought to Rodrigues Island, they were able to bring back three species of animals that were soon to become extinct. Though these trees helped the island, they were still cut down by environmentalists because they were “invasive” and not a part of the baseline economy.

It has been a misconception that invasive species cause harm to their new environment. Many actually have no impact, and some are actually helpful. There are some invasive species that have been a nuisance and caused damage like the Zebra Mussels, but cutting down the trees in Rodrigues Island was a real waste of time and money. Rather that effort should be put in to remove the invasive species that are causing real damage.

Dov Sax said that invasions actually bring about diversity to many oceanic islands, however this idea can be a little misleading. With the advent of human arrival to islands like Easter Island, 68 more plants had been introduced, increasing the diversity of the island. Though 7 species of animal went extinct, which defeats the purpose of diversity, he brings up the fact that the extinctions were not caused by the introduced species on continents. I really like the idea of bringing exotic species into nonnative ecosystems in order to help clean up and regulate them. I didn’t know this was a possibility, but this type of introduction of species shows us how assisted migration can also be beneficial.

In the seventh chapter, Marris talks about a type of modern ecosystem that many ecologists have overlooked, the Novel Ecosystem. It is a “new, human-influenced combinations of species that can function as well or better than native ecosystems and provide for humans with ecosystem services of various kinds—from water

filtration and carbon sequestration to habitat for rare species.” Though this type of ecosystem seems unorthodox, Marris points out how beneficial they can be, and also that nonnative species are able to thrive amongst each other. This shows us that species are able to find their own niches in time, and create a stable system that could easily be mistaken for as native. However this idea seems very unlikely, and the only reason I can believe it is because of the evidence that Marris provides.

If the novel ecosystems do work, since most ecologist do not know its future and how it will progress, it seems that one of ecologists greatest dilemmas will be solved; if you give time to an environment with nonnative species, it will” work itself out. ” I am still weary of this idea because some invasive species, especially the Zebra Mussel does not seem like it will get better any time soon. Marris does say that ducks are eating them, however, we do not have an infinite supply of ducks to eat them.

 

| Tagged | Leave a comment

Marris Ch8-9

Marris supports the idea of designer ecosystems, as they are similar to her idea of a rambunctious garden. A designer ecosystem is a “restored” ecosystem where ecologists attempt to bring an ecosystem back to the targeted baseline by tempering with aspects of the environment. For example, stream restoration is a type of “restored” ecosystem that ecologists work on in attempt to reduce nitrogen levels. Ecologists aim to restore streams to their previous appearance where they meander down through soil. To restore streams, “wire baskets filled with rocks or the root balls of dead trees are chained in place to slow stream flows.” Marris explains that restoring an ecosystem is not really restoring it as it does not put the ecosystem back to its baseline, but builds a new ecosystem. A designer ecosystem seems similar to a novel ecosystem in that both ecosystems involve tempering with an ecosystem to make it productive and improve nature. However, Marris’ example of a failed prairie restoration job does sound similar to a novel ecosystem. In this failed restoration, mixed species of a variety of prairie ecosystems were planted on an area. This resulted in domination by Sporoboblus airoides, “which doesn’t exist as a dominant anywhere around for hundred of miles.” Although it is not stated that the species are not invasive, they are not stated that they are native species of the area either. This seems to blur the lines of a novel ecosystem and a designer ecosystem.

There are many ways to make the Earth greener without having to give up on human modernization. In the past people aimed to conserve nature and keep it away from human hands. However, more people are beginning to look at nature by infusing it with modern society. Marris mentions a “gestalt switch” where people change their views of the main focus in saving nature. Previously many people believed that “nature is the foreground, human-dominated lands the background…[but now] pavement, houses, malls where nothing can grow—as the foreground and everything else as the background nature.” Instead of sacrificing everything to keep nature in its pristine state, people are coming up with ways to work urbanization with nature. For example, in Banff National Park in Alberta there are wildlife overpasses and underpasses that allow humans and wild animals to travel where they need to go. Marris states that conservationists need to intermix variety of lands to form connected nature like parks. This is seen in Europe’s farm-like conservation system, where “National Parks and nature reserves are often intensely grazed by cattle and sheep.” This system combines humans with nature, as farmers do not have to leave or give up their land to conserve nature. It also gives farmers incentive to help preserve nature. There is debate about using agricultural methods to conserve nature. Agriculture has led to overusing land and possibly using even using more land according to Ivette Perfecto and John Vandermeer. These two ecologists suggest working with agri-environement schemes so species would be able to use the land as their habitat or as “corridors,” like a stopover during migration. For example, Duwamish Diagonal Avenue is an example of a “corridor” for migrating species, as well as a place for people to get in touch with nature.With so many methods to save nature, it is possible for the environment to fuse with urban society.

| Leave a comment

Chapters 8 and 9

In Chapter 8, Marris discusses “Designer Ecosystems.” The gist of this concept is to construct ecosystems that rather than attempting to recreate historical situations or situations to maximize aesthetics, ecosystems should be crafted in such a way that is both beneficial to humans and the organisms living there. One example she mentioned was using large boulders to maximize the output of plant and animal communities in streambeds. While these boulders are not naturally occurring, bringing them in is thought to have beneficial effects on the ecosystem as a whole. Some other examples of this are wire baskets filled with rocks to slow stream flows, and sinking old ships to provide places for coral reefs to live. The thought behind these actions is that human interference does not always have to be thought of as a bad thing. Through research and appropriate action we can help to keep ecosystems more sufficient and lively for years to come. I agree with this philosophy because the world we live in is changing all the time. Whether it be climate, soil composition, or pollution; the earth is not in the same state it was hundreds of years ago. For this reason, it is clear that historical views of nature are becoming outdated. A forest that thrived 500 years ago might quickly die out today. The conditions of the world today should be gauged and appropriately adapted to rather than striving for a time long since past. Designer Ecosystems are a good way for people to help the environment as a sort of return for all the negative things human activity does to ecosystems.

Chapter 9 discusses the different views of conservationism around the world. The two main counter philosophies Marris brings up are the ideas of North American movements, and those of Europe. An example from North America is Yellowstone and the goal of creating corridors in order to allow for more space especially for bigger animals. Another proponent of the North American philosophy that comes up a lot in the book is that of historical ecosystems and “restoration.” The European model is quite different from this. The example that Marris gave was that when she went to see a bird sanctuary in the U.K., it was on a farm. European conservationists tend to focus on nature in areas that are also being used for something else such as farming. The thinking behind the bird sanctuary is that these birds are used to living on open plains maintained by herbivores, which is a very similar situation to farmland. The reasoning behind these methods partially comes from the fact that in Europe there were far fewer “pristine” examples of wilderness to work with than in North America. Either way, this method of conservation seems more appropriate to me. Across the globe more and more land is being used by humans for gains so it is fitting that conservationists include this ever-increasing percentage of land to the land they try to improve. As time goes on, examples of “pristine” nature will dwindle whether we like it or not so it is good to get a start on this more “modern” form of conservation in my opinion.

| Leave a comment

Marris 6 & 7 – Exotic Species – 9/27

In Chapters 6 and 7 of Rambunctious Gardens, Marris presents two arguments on viewing exotic species. The conventional wisdom as of now is that exotic species are invasive. Marris quickly tells us, hwoever, that “the vast majority are not. Science is finding that some are quite well behaved and innocuous, or even helpful” (98). Be establishing this, Marris relates back to her original argument that we should embrace nature, not try and change it. She stresses that battling exotics is resourcefully consuming and unnecessary. Ultimately, she is saying that we, as humans, are the true enemy.

On one side of the argument are the majority of ecologists and conservationists who brands exotics as invasive. Marris presents extreme examples of this, including Bill Clinton’s executive order on war against invasive species and Shahid Naeem’s nighttime raids. There exists several arguments about how and why exotics do well in certain environments over others. Such explanations include lack of predators, lack of resistance, propagule pressure, and a reduction in the variety of life. Regardless of the reason, many still seek to obliterate non-native species from ecosystems in an attempt to revert back to a vague baseline. Marris combats these assertions by giving examples of beneficial organisms and inaccurate naming of exotics. She further informs us of how some ecologists are promoting and introducing exotics to help endangered species and hinder undesirable ones.

The opposing side of the argument are “a brave few” who embrace exotic-dominated ecosystems, novel ecosystems. Novel ecosystems refer to “the more dramatically altered systems” (114). In other words, an ecosystem whose composition of species has changed dramatically within the last few centuries—regardless of anthropogenic change. Marris hypothesizes that many are scared of change to explain the inclination of opposing exotic species. Exotic species usually kept in check by the surrounding organisms. The ecosystem as a whole is more stable and natural because of the lack of human intervention. Non-natives are hardly cited as the cause of extinction of other species. Even so, the extinction is a product of nature.

Ultimately, I agree with Marris and believe that the war on invasive species is an unnecessary one. Not only does it exhaust time and money, but it seems to be an endless circle which requires high amounts of attention. Exotic species are not new nor are they a recent phenomenon. I believe that “survival of the fittest” and evolution are a part of nature and therefore, should be allowed to happen on its own course. As Marris says, exotic species that adapt will create more diversity in the future. If a problem does arise to the point where the exotic does become invasive, they I think we should be able to deploy an extent of human intervention (which relates back to the notion of a rambunctious garden). “As the Earth responds to the changes we humans have made, does it make sense to destroy ecosystems that’s thrive under the new conditions?”

| Leave a comment

Chapters 8 & 9

Marris’ starts off chapter 8, Designer Ecosystems with the image of a stream. We all picture a stream to be clear flowing water, but that seems to be a thing of the past. Today, these streams have gone extinct and what remains are muddy streams branching off into several pools. Because of this, the rise of stream restoration communities have emerged. Some scientists argue on what the streams should look like. They have cleared trees and dramatically altered water levels for the sake of returning the streams to the pristine image they once held. Now scientists are worried and believe that efforts should be focused on solely reducing sediment load. Some even think that restoring the complex ecosystems will be too difficult. However, there is an alternative – to design the ecosystem for specific measurable goals such as “nitrogen reduction, sediment capture, or the maintenance of one or a small number of named species” (Marris Page 125).  Restoration ecologists are faced with the difficulty of not being able to reproduce the exact same ecosystem we once had, but instead, use “shortcuts” in an attempt to get close. Ecologists have changed their way of thinking, “Implicit in many restoration projects is the notion that a historical baseline is not just somehow morally better but ideal for restoring any number of features that a system might have lost over time, including biodiversity, ecosystem services, and recreational value” (Marris Page 126). The problem is that even if streams are restored to what they once appeared in historical times, it may seem restored to the naked eye, but it may not be performing to its natural historical level. Hence, a designer ecosystem may be better than this before mentioned restoration. Richard Hobbs, advocate of designer ecosystems, describes some terms, “Biotic changes are changes in the living components of an ecosystem … Abiotic changes are changes in the nonliving environment … when a site only shows one type of change, a hybrid ecosystem often results” (Marris Page 128). Despite the change, if the resulting environment has a use, it’s not the end of the world. We can take advantage of the new land and reap its benefits. Marris ends the chapter by declaring her wish to see nature run wild without human interference. Marris then goes into her next chapter titled Conservation Everywhere. She starts the chapter with a description of her visit to the Duwamish River. The river’s supporters are hoping to see a hybrid ecosystem where the river is part habitat and part industrial waterway. She explains that the value of conservation is to add more types of land to the list of hopefuls that can one day become of use. Some problems conservations are facing are due to the concept of species area relationship. The smaller the fragment becomes, the fewer species will remain. However, with corridors, species can migrate from one fragment to another. Conservationists are trying to create corridors however land ownership becomes an issue. The answer lies with agricultural and ranch lands which keep steams, lakes, and forested areas natural. Another problem is the fact that yield will decrease, so scientists are trying to come up with alternatives to using farm land for crop growth such as growing within skyscrapers. One idea is to introduce nature into city life, turning into a metapopulation. It involves a lot of compromise on part of the garden owners. Seemingly, this does not seem practical for most city dwellers.

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden: Chapter 6 & 7

In chapter six and seven of her book, Rambunctious Gardens, Emma Marris argues against the culture of fighting invasive species and supports the idea of allowing novel ecosystems to flourish. Although Marris makes it clear that not all invasive species are detrimental, she still minimizes the severity their impact can have on certain ecosystems. In addition, her support for novel ecosystems faces huge opposition from the existing attitudes towards non-native species.

Marris argues against the traditional view proposed by ecologists, such as Charles Elton, without giving serious attention to the devastative effects invasive species exhibited in the past. Elton believed that exotic species that establish themselves in an environment are likely to cause damage. Marris tackles this idea by claiming that the enemy is humans, not exotics (141). She argues that humans are largely responsible for transporting species to various ecosystems and end up expending a vast amount of resources to reverse the consequences. As a result, Marris supports the idea of allowing non-native species to continue living in ecosystems to which they were accidently introduced. However, she does not give proper attention to the invasive species that have ravaged unsuspecting ecosystems. For instance, the accidental introduction of brown tree snakes to Guam has utterly decimated the bird population. Moreover, since the snake has no natural predator, its population has skyrocketed and caused major problems for residents. Hence, while Marris makes a point that it is counterproductive to fight against invasive species, we cannot simply allow non-natives to grow out of control because the consequences can be devastating.

In chapter seven, Marris suggests that we change the way we view novel ecosystems. She points out that many ecologists dislike these ecosystems, which are comprised of exotic species, because they are not pristine (165). Hence, they are typically viewed as artificial because they did not co-evolve over millions of years. However, changing the perception of novel ecosystems is no easy task. The government is already highly vested in eradicating non-native species. In addition, since the succession pattern of novel ecosystems is unpredictable, many are afraid of embracing the idea. Yet, novel ecosystems have just as much biodiversity as native ecosystems and have even proven to be more productive than their native counterparts. As a result, Marris makes a good claim for embracing novel ecosystems but still faces hurdles from the traditional views held by others.

Altogether, Emma Marris presents a valid claim that humans are largely responsible for invasive species and that not all non-native species are detrimental to the environment. However, her approach of simply embracing the growth of exotic species in their new environments overlooks the harsh consequences that some invasive species can have on certain ecosystems. Likewise, her position on novel ecosystem also faces hindrances because she goes against the traditional perception held by most ecologists. As a result, Marris’s ideas concerning invasive species and novel ecosystems are not likely to be embraced in the near future.

| Leave a comment

Marris Chapters 6&7

In chapter 6 of her book, Marris does something similar to what she did in chapters 1 and 2. As she has presented new ways of looking at nature as something that can coexist with humanity, in the later chapters of Rambunctious Garden she presents her case against the long held negative prejudice of invasive species and the exotics and a case for breaking away from such prejudice. That some invasive species can actually flourish and help the native species. She reminds the readers that the cause of interrupted and destroyed ecosystems is usually not the invasive species but humans. She says, “Ultimately, the enemy is not exotics; the enemy is us (98).

There is no doubt that when some new species are introduced to a new place, they might be detrimental to others living in the same parts of the same ecosystem. For example, the brown tree snake introduced on Stephens Island killed off “ten of twelve native forest-dwelling birds”. And consequently, the extinction of the native species negatively affected and has forever changed the dynamics of the island’s fruit trees. As demonstrated, Marris does not deny that movement of species at times have detrimental results on the area.

On the other side of the argument, nonnative species might help native species flourish. They might also “create more diversity in the future(109)” and support rare natives. For example, exotic plants with special qualities such as being able to suck metal out of soil found in Chinese brake fern can be intentionally placed with the purpose of cleaning the soil. Marris even goes to claim that maybe “the despised invaders of today may well be the keystone species of the future’s ecosystems, if we give them the space to adapt and don’t rush in and tear them out (109).”

The “exotic-dominated ecosystems” are what Marris calls novel ecosystems. It is a new approach to embracing invasive species instead of rejecting them. One example she gives of a flourishing novel ecosystem is the “mango forest”. Long time ago, mangoes were planted in a new place and they have grown and flourished bearing much fruit. Not only are they growing, they are thriving with other species in a “healthy ecosystem” (115). There are mosquitoes as well as trumpet tree, strawberry guava and rose apples from around the globe in Asia and even a white owl as well as pigs. Mangoes have thrived in a new environment. This new approach, Marris says, “can also mean ecosystem services, increased diversity, and brand-new species (122).”

In chapter 6, when Marris poses the question of why we despise and attack new species so much, whether it’s because we truly fear the extinction of native species or just fear any change in the ecosystem itself, it is something worth pondering about. As much as I was convicted to move on from the older and therefore inaffective view of nature in the beginning of the book to the more appropriate and affective perspective of nature, I am convinced that it’s important to let go of our prejudices on exotics and invasive species and make ourselves open to new approaches.

| Leave a comment

Post 9/30/12: Rambunctious Garden 8, 9

The preceding chapters seem to be about shedding some light on misguided ecological presumptions about conservation and preservation. In chapters 8 and 9, however, Marris’ focus seems more shifted toward an economic standpoint. She emphasizes the point of utilizing every square acre, yard and feet for something, anything—from hosting wildlife to the growth of species pertaining to human value to simple aesthetics. For certain, humans are not putting every piece of inhabited or used land to its most efficient potential (irony in non-business economics for a heavily capitalistic society on this side of the hemisphere), and for reasons beyond ecology people are hesitant to accept some of the proposed changes (as perhaps too much of a city boy, I would prefer not to have bugs whizzing past every three streets, even as New York City opens its doors to beekeeping hobbyists). Yet, I would have to point out that her presumption of the rambunctious garden being healthier than the lawns we have now seems just as dangerous as the critics that she is trying to respond to. A rambunctious garden in the backyard is a real gamble; we do not know the migratory patterns, growth and attraction—heck, anything really—about what such a garden produce, as past ecological studies have shown about variables. Will we allow flora and fauna that will promote a nonvirulent ecosystem, or are we going to condemn a block full of houses because of some outbreak of something or other? Nature is funny that way; just because things work out in the end doesn’t mean it will work out in the short run or the interim.

Nevertheless, Marris’ economics-based ideas of what natural processes—catalyzed by anthropological means or otherwise—are convincing. They are not necessarily nitty-gritty, to-the-numbers convincing (thankfully, or this book would be more of an accounting balance page or a congressional bill than a pleasantly argumentative book), but she is eloquent in tying the money-saving potentials to her aforementioned ideas of rewilding and assisted migration. While it may not be as interesting for the scientists, it would certainly whet the eyes of the fat cats out there, who would subsequently assist the scientists in their field of work (and maybe make a pretty penny out of it). If money makes the world go round, we might as well use it as a tool to get people noticing the environment, no?

I am personally wary—or maybe petrified—by the idea of wild gardens on every patch of green in New York City. Perhaps they are mentally overdramatized (it’s not like there will be four-foot blades and territorial mammals hissing from the bushes, right?), but the balance seems… difficult to achieve. While the story of Seattle’s plagued river still being able to host fish and flora is an upbeat and bright one, it will take a little more convincing to let the small lots along Park Avenue grow into an active ecosystem (and I use the work active in the more literal sense, then it is probably implied, since insects and birds probably already use them as landing pads). Am I taking her ambitious tone too literally? I wouldn’t discount the notion. Alas, one of the many weaknesses of being a city folk.

| Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Marris Chapters 8 and 9 Response

Throughout Rambunctious Garden, Marris has already made her case that creating a “pristine wilderness” is near impossible. She has stated many times that there are other ways to help nature. In Chapter 8 and 9, she offers solutions to help nature and ways for humans to coexist with nature. Marris suggests designer ecosystems and conservation everywhere as two ways to help nature.

Designer ecosystems functions mainly to make the original ecosystem even better. In the past, many ecologists have assumed that before humans arrived, “ecosystems were always maximally efficient at such functions as purifying water, supporting diverse life, keeping sediment from washing away, and so on” (126). However, there is currently some desire to engineer a possibly new ecosystem such as adding additional features to aid the species living there. For example, there are rats eating the chicks of flightless bird in an ecosystem. Instead of getting rid of the rats, scientists “are drilling more nesting holes into the rocks for the birds” (127). This does not reset the ecosystem to the original baseline, but it does give the birds are greater chance to survive. In other words, these designer ecosystems are made to make the habitat better for the species.

Marris also expands her idea of a “rambunctious garden” by telling the reader that conservation can happen everywhere. She states that the “project of conservation is not just defending what we have, but adding lands to our portfolio and deepening value of the lands in play” (135). Since most of the land is already being used on the planet, there should be a greater focus on deepening the use of the land. Corridors can be use to connect small areas together. This will prevent species from leaking and “gene pools can stay large and vital” (137). Connectivity appears to be one key aspect for conservation.

In addition, Marris focuses on how regular people can help connect with nature. Many state conservation agencies have urged people to let nature take over their garden. It may not look pleasing to the eye, but this type of garden creates a more diverse and rambunctious feel to it. Marris states that “If New Yorkers planted more fertile plants and loosened up their gardening standards, bees zooming across the five boroughs could tie isolated specimens together into a metapopulation” (146). Of course, this would create a place with more insects and possible pests such as mosquitoes. In the end, “individuals and communities will have to gauge their own level of tolerance for such threat” (149).

Marris’s idea of a “rambunctious garden” definitely makes much more sense now. Since reverting nature back to a “pristine wilderness” is impossible, people should live in coexistence with nature. After all, “plants and animals are all around us, in our backyards, along roadsides, in city parks” (150). The cities are diverse places for this reason. Marris hopes to grow nature larger than it currently is. However, this will require everyone to change their view on nature. In addition, it will also require a change to the current method of conserving nature. Convincing everyone to agree on the same vision as Marris may be a challenging task in the future.

| Leave a comment

Marris Chapter 8+9

Chapters 8 and 9 of the “Rambunctious Garden” offer a different approach to conservation. In previous chapters Marris discussed the process of rewilding according to a specific baseline. However, in these subsequent chapters, she introduces a new term: “designer ecosystems” in which land is conserved based on a specific goal rather than a baseline. Some goals include “nitrogen reduction, sediment capture, or the maintenance of one or a small number of named species” (Marris 125).

Ultimately, this is a better approach than conserving land based on a baseline because according to stream restoration expert, Margaret Palmer the baselines are “arbitrary” because it does not “(take) into account the changing nature of the landscape” (124). Nature undergoes both abiotic changes such as climate, soil chemistry and biotic changes such as extinction of species (128). Therefore, a major fault with conserving nature according to a baseline is that nature is constantly changing and it is difficult to recreate an ecosystem that occurred thousands of years ago because since then there have been changes both in the species composition as well as climate. Replicating this ecosystem requires huge efforts, both monetary and manual labor.

Creating designer ecosystems is a better approach because baselines are too complicated and arbitrary. On the other hand, having a clear goal like nitrogen reduction is more feasible because it is easier to measure the nitrogen content of water than it is to recreate the ecosystem of the Pleistocene era. Goals such as nitrogen reduction and removal of excess sediments will help the ecosystem. For example, in the Chesapeake Bay and the Gulf of Mexico the nitrogen “mostly comes from fertilizer, and boosts the productivity of plankton,” which in turn uses the oxygen in the water and as a result, creates excessive amounts of slimy algae (126). However, even this has to be carefully monitored because nitrogen reduction may also lead to high levels of mercury in fish (126).

In her next chapter Marris returns to her idea of the “rambunctious garden” where conservation happens everywhere. In fact, she even suggests that rather than having a lawn, families should use their backyard to house smaller species or “metapopulations” such as insects, plants and fungi. Hanski, a metapopulations researcher at the University of Helsinki adopted the idea of conservation in his backyard, and according to a biologist, Helsink reported 375 species including 2 endangered species of “’one wasp and one beetle” (Marris 147). However, there are few downsides to this method of conservation; firstly, it is not aesthetically pleasing because in order to house the metapopulations people have to refrain from cutting the lawn and let it grow naturally. Secondly, there is a lack of an “organized mechanism” for the amateur gardener to speak to scientists about what occurs in the piece of nature he/she is taking care of. According to Marris, for there to be a rambunctious garden, society has to change its view of pristine nature and accept “nature that looks a little more lived in than we are used to.”

| Leave a comment

Marris Chapters 8 & 9

One idea Marris brings up in these chapters is that regarding “building to achieve a particular goal” (126). Rather than focusing solely on returning nature to a “baseline” that is often falsely held, it would be far more beneficial for us to decide on a specific goal we wish to achieve and then progress and build on that foundation. She provides us with examples of these goals, ranging from “nitrogen reduction” to “sediment capture” (125). Although all of these processes could require both funds and effort, they seem more practical than having the broad goal of returning to a pristine, untouched piece of land that would be significantly difficult to maintain. A concise summary regarding this process is made on page 127, where Marris suggests that this process can be evaluated based on a few factors: what it is you are striving for, as well as the “size of project, budget, and how much the place has already changed” (127). After assessing these aspects of the proposed project, one might even come to the conclusion that “a designer ecosystem may be better than the recreation of a historical ecosystem” (127). I appreciate the idea Marris brings up regarding many ecologists’ flexible approach to designer ecosystems, often fueled by the optimistic motto of “whatever works” (127). Given the difficulty of predicting the exact behavior of plants, animals, climate and ecosystems as a whole, this open-minded perspective will be beneficial when it comes to adapting to an environment that is undergoing constant change. We cannot hold on to this superficial baseline of what we assume is “pristine wilderness”. In chapter 9, Marris continues to bring up interesting suggestions as to how we should interact with the nature around us. I support the ideas she brings up regarding utilizing spaces in industrialized regions, such as the land surrounding parking lots. Perhaps we could turn these areas into more interesting places that host a variety of plant and animal species as opposed to solely concrete and pavement. This is what Marris refers to as appreciating the nature that surrounds us. It also addresses the possibility we have of creating more nature. It was particularly interesting to read about New York City and the potential increase in the diversity of our city if we “were willing to plant species with less pest resistance and accept the tattered leaves and petals that come with it” (146). I understand the difficulty of achieving this as many are concerned with the “conventional aesthetic standards,” which is an understandable concern, however, also an unfortunate hindrance to the potentials of our environment.  I am fascinated by the idea of “bees zooming across the five boroughs” that “could tie isolated specimens together into a metapopulation” (146).  It would be very interesting to observe “the insect fauna” and diversity this process would attract and the effect it would have on the city as a whole. Marris continues to explore the endless possibilities of incorporating nature into our daily lives by examining privately held gardens and the ability to use these smaller-scale gardens when it comes to experimenting and providing larger scale projects, such as those in agriculture, with feedback and results. This could be beneficial as “gardeners can afford to be ahead of the curve” and perhaps take more risks that those who financially depend on the targeted processes (149). Marris concludes chapter 9 with the basis behind these unique efforts, suggesting that if we solely accept “pristine wilderness” as nature, we are not allowing those who live in more industrialized neighborhoods to appreciate and enjoy the “humble natural settings” that do exist and are dismissing the great possibilities of “spiritual and aesthetic experiences” that urbanized areas have to offer (150).

| Leave a comment

Marris Chapters 8 & 9

In chapter 8 of her novel, Marris discusses designer ecosystems–not an emulation of any baseline, but the best possible version of that ecosystem. Essentially, designer ecosystems are created to make the habitat better than normal; the goal is to make the area work and thrive most efficiently and effectively. Trying to restore an area to its baseline is an extreme amount of work, complex ecosystems have not yet been fully figured out. “The organisms and the relations between them that have emerged from million sof years of natural selection are likely going to outperform anything we cobble together n our computers, whether the goal is spaces for recreation, management of energy and nutrients, protection of biodiversity, or provision of services” (130). Marris wishes for an “unweedy and untidy” rambunctious garden and, similarly, Rene Dubos wished for “new environments that are ecologically sound, aesthetically satisfying, economically rewarding and favorable to the continued growth of civilization” (131).

In my opinion, I agree with Dubos; that seems like the most sensible and overall satisfying goal. Fundamentally, though, that idea lies on a foundation of anthropogenic acceptance. It boils down to the two opposing viewpoints of accepting or not accepting humanity’s inevitable interaction with and transformation of their natural surroundings. Some people are proponents of “island civilizations,” where there’s a separation between man and nature, while others, supporters of design ecosystems, lean toward “managed nature, designed to support humans and other species” (page 132).

As for chapter 9, Marris weaves together all the concepts she previously discussed up to this point–assisted migration, rewilding, exotic species, and novel ecosystems. I found myself agreeing with her point of view throughout; there truly was a strong emphasis on interconnectivity of man and wild. Similar to the Duwamish River Cleanup Coalition’s “eco-industrial vision,” a balance can be found between the natural and industrial worlds. “To make the most of our protected areas, we must think beyond their boundaries” (135). Industrial areas, like the roofs of factories such as the Hostess Cupcake factory in New Jersey, can transform the tops of their buildings into “green roofs,” which serve as habitats for plants and insects, simultaneously “reducing water runoff and counteracting the urban heat island effect, where dark roofs and pavements suck up sunlight” (143). This is an example of what Marris and other scientists refer to as “corridors”–small, natural areas that serve as bridges between larger habitats for various species. Implementing the creation of these natural spaces is a large step in overall conservation, considering how great of a role corridors play in the migration of species or the settlement of species. In the same way, farms and agricultural land are or can become “agri-environments” that serve both economic and preservation needs. Marris suggested that businesses, those of which have strips of outdoor land on their property, landscape with self-sustaining plants so as to create or add to the rambunctious garden that exists in so many places overtly or discretely. It simply requires adjustments be made to our aesthetics, accepting a more natural, wild look than we’re accustomed to. The Highline is an example of a “small city garden as a ‘reserve’ for nature,” (146) amidst the concrete jungle and business capital of the world. Ultimately, striving to find a balance between industry and wilderness is a more realistic approach to conservationism than investing all efforts and energy into reverting back to an assumed baseline environment.

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden – Chapters 8 & 9

In Chapter 8 of her book, Marris talks about the concept of “designer ecosystems”, opening with a story about the archetypal “streams” we, along with most ecologists, all imagine – a clear line of water flowing down a cliff or mountain. These are the types of streams restoration ecologists have been trying to recreate, until it was recently discovered that the streams in the eastern United States, were actually more like ponds than streams in early history. As a result, numerous streams have been torn down, in an effort to start all over and recreate this new revelation of what they looked like before, which in Marris’ view, is rather fruitless. The alternative to this, is as she puts it, a designer ecosystem, where instead of restoring an entire ecosystem, you design or reengineer it to fit specific goals that can make the area better, or help a certain species (page 125).  She gives another example of this idea of reengineering, the plight to save the Galapagos Penguin. Rats that have been introduced to the area where these penguins live eat the chicks, resulting in the species’ endangerment. However, instead of getting rid of the invasive rats, scientists have drilled more nesting holes for the penguins, which would allow them to reproduce in greater numbers, hopefully allowing the species as a whole to stay ahead of the species reductions caused by rats (page 128). Interestingly enough, this example particularly also adds to her point from her previous chapters, about how invasive species don’t necessarily need to be killed off to prevent damage to ecosystems, and that there are ways around it – such as in this penguin instance.

Proponents of these designer ecosystems envision a world covered in “managed nature, designed to support humans and other species” (page 132), while those who oppose it argue that they prefer more “island civilizations”, where humans and nature are kept separate, with humans in dense urban cities, and the rest of the planet left alone for nature to thrive. Marris, on the other hand, hopes for a combination of both – that ecologists will come around to seeing the benefits of these engineered ecosystems that allow humans and nature to co-exist, but also leave some areas wild and untouched, just to see what can come of them.

In Chapter 9, titled “Conservation Everywhere”, Marris begins to tie together the ideas and themes that she has been weaving throughout the preceding chapters of her book. She writes, “rewilding, assisted migration, and embracing some exotic species and novel ecosystems may seem like disparate strategies, but they are all at some level about making the most of every scrap of land and water, no matter its condition” (page 135). She emphasizes that connectivity to nature is key in conserving it, and that scientists must bring together all types of land to create that connectivity. “Ideally, reserves should be scientifically designed to achieve conservation goals agreed upon by interested parties while being sensitive to the needs of the people who now live or once lived on the sites in question” (page 138). She goes on to provide very interesting examples of ways such connectivity can occur – she mentions Ford Dearborn truck assembly plant in Michigan, and the Hostess Cupcake factory in New Jersey, and how they both now feature green roofs, which replicate ecosystems and create a home for various plants and bugs while at the same time, reducing water run-off and counteracting the urban heat island effect. I believe that this is a perfect example of the Rambunctious Garden Marris has been advocating for throughout the entire book – a mutually beneficial conservation strategy ideal for the urban setting.

| Leave a comment

Invasive Species and Novel Ecosystems

People often fail to acknowledge the distinction between simple exotic species and invasives. There is generally a negative impression associated with all exotics as being invasive and people often go on great lengths to eliminate them. According to Ch 6 in Rambunctious Garden, the words exotic and invasive are often interchanged. Most people believe that simply because a specie was introduced from a foreign habitat it makes it invasive. However, considering a proxy which fills in a missing niche and a feral cat which eliminates an entire bird on an island is too simplistic and foolish. As stated by Marris, the general impression of most exotics remains quite negative– a species invades and the ecosystem collapses, species go extinct and the complexity and diversity are replaced with a monotonous and weedy landscare dominated by invaders. However, such a point of view is quite primitive and is only valid for only a certain instances. Exotic species come in a variety of different form, and only some of them are malignant invasives.

In other cases, exotic species often increase the biodiversity of the place, help an endangered species recover or provide food for the native population. I am quite surprised that Marris does not make a distinction between invasives and exotic species. She presents examples of instances where invasives are beneficial, as well as talks about the ecological and economic consequences caused by invasives such as zebra mussels and yellow crazy ants. By definition an invasive species is the one that results in malignant consequences, therefore invasives will most likely not have any positive influences. Foreign species that help can not be classified as invasives, they are simply exotic.

Nevertheless, invasive species are a major concern and result in significant economic and ecological losses. Government agencies around the world are trying to combat the threat and have taken several steps towards hindering the movement. However, often times invasive species inadvertently find their way into foreign habitats and wreck havoc–like the brown tree snake in Guam, but most exotics often fail, die off or the natives evolve and become accustomed to them.
Another key idea Marris introduces is that of novel ecosystems– a place where exotic species have formed new ecological relationships and have become important or even keystone species. Several novel ecosystems are often a result of inadvertent human activities, but not maintained by humans. Proponents of the idea, support the involvement of exotic species and argue that they function just like or even better than native systems.

I believe the idea is practical and focuses more on the function rather than the identity of the species. Baselines and pristine wilderness is hard to establish, exotic species are present in almost every ecosystem and have become an integral part of them. Nature and the environmental process should not be interfered with. If exotic species go through natural selection and help form a balance then we should not consider them any less than the natives, and let them fulfill their respective niches.

| Leave a comment

Marris Ch6-7

Marris does not seem to think that invasive species are as harmful as people think them to be. She first explains how people currently view invasive species, which is: invasive species will only bring harm to the environment it is introduced. Because majority people believe that foreign species will take over the new environment and destroy the native species of that environment, the positive aspects of invasive species are shaded. For example, on Rodrigues Island, when the forest was being cut down the three species living on that island faced extinction. This was because they depended on the fruits and nectar from trees in the forest, as well as the insects living in the forest. The situation became extremely dire as the number of bird species was declining down to ten birds. So to save the species, the island was reforested with exotic species. “The trees were chosen without regard to conservation and included some notorious pests.” However, the introduction of the exotic species did damage the environment, but had saved it instead. Marris states that prejudice against the exotic species because they were still “invasive species” led to their exile from the Rodrigues Island. This proves that Marris does not really think of foreign species as invasive species if they prove helpful to nature in areas they are introduced to. Also, Marris brings up the Dov Sax’s paper American Naturalist, which spoke of increased “diversity of overall oceanic islands.” Sax’s research showed that invasive species were not illustrating the competition over resources, which would lead to native species extinctions, nor were they displaying a take over of the ecosystem. Marris concludes from Sax’s paper that extinctions did not occur because of “introduced species on continents.” Marris’ standpoint opened my eyes to the positive effects of “invasive” species, but the negative effects from purposely introducing foreign species overpower the positive aspects.

The success of novel ecosystems seems beneficial for nature and people even though some ecologists disapprove of them as they consist of majorly of invasive species. In Puerto Rico, the people treasure some invasive species-such as the flame tree and the mango tree-thriving there. However, some ecologists are so prejudiced against invasive species that they even prevented Puerto Rico from making an invasive specie its’ official plant. This prejudice should be changed. Because invasive species are located in different areas and not creating any harm, they are increasing the chances of that breed’s survival. For example, the flame tree is an invasive specie in Puerto Rico, but if it were not there it may have gone extinct as the flame tree is threatened in its native land-Madagascar. Lugo’s research of how the pine tree-an invasive specie on Puerto Rico’s pine plantations-was more productive than its neighboring natives. Ecologists should not grudge against novel ecosystems just because they do not illustrate the “stereotypes of invasive species…[forming] monocultures.” Novel ecosystems are still a part of nature and they are helping improve nature with their stability and productivity.

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden Chapters 6-7 Response

In chapters 6 and 7 of “Rambunctious Garden,” Emma Marris focuses on the concept of invasive species. In chapter 6, “Learning to Love Exotic Species,” Marris starts off by describing some of the harms that invasive species may cause in certain habitats. She introduces some of the reasons why so many conservationists argue against the idea of introducing new species into ecosystems. However, as the title of the chapter points out, Marris is actually promoting the idea of invasive species. Her viewpoint is that the benefits of introducing new species are far greater than the risks associating with doing so. “While some exotic species are a huge problem, the vast majority are not. Science is finding that some are quite well behaved and innocuous, or even helpful. An spending time and money battling exotics simply because they are not ‘supposed’ to be where they are drains time and money away from more constructive conservation projects.” (98) This shows that she believes that rather than fighting against invasive species, we should accept the introduction of new species into different ecosystems since they do help them in most cases. She points out that invasive species drastically increase the biodiversity in an ecosystem compared to the state of the ecosystem before they were introduced. In some cases, endangered species that were moved into a new ecosystem end up thriving because they are well-suited for that environment. In chapter 7, “Novel Ecosystems,” Marris further discusses her idea of invasive species in ecosystems. She gives several examples of new types of ecosystems that have been influenced by human interaction since new species were introduced. She talks about how many novel ecosystems are functioning as well as, if not better, than the original ecosystem that was there before without the new species. “These new systems likely do spell homogenization and extinction, in some places. But they can also mean ecosystem services, increased diversity, and brand-new species. And we are going to have to start studying these places. They represent the future of our planet, like it or not.” (122) Marris claims that although there are possible negative consequences associated with invasive species and novel ecosystems, the positives are worth it. She believes that novel ecosystems will be the way to go in the future to make ecosystems more rich and diverse.

From these two chapters, I have learned a lot about the possible benefits that can come from invasive species. Before this, there have been many negatives described about invasive species. Her different point of view does introduce some interesting points. However, I feel that some of the extreme consequences that can come from introducing new species may be too much for many conservationists to start advocating novel ecosystems. Perhaps, sometime in the future, after there is more research and experimentation done about the sustainability of novel ecosystems, they can catch on with other conservationists, but until then, introducing invasive species still seems like a risky thing to do.

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden: Chapters 6 & 7

In Chapters 6 & 7 of her novel, Marris focuses on “invasive” or “exotic” species and the idea of emerging “novel ecosystems”, which, according to an ecologist she spoke to named Erle Ellis, now take up around 35% of the world’s ice-free land (pg 120). Species that have been introduced to ecosystems where they have not been found before are referred to as exotic species, or nonnative. However, it is when those species begin to cause problems in the ecosystems they have inhabited – by preying on native species, taking all the native species’ food supply, etc. – that they become “invasive”, and largely viewed by ecologists as a problem that needs to be eradicated.

Marris gives a number of examples of such “invasive” species that have wreaked havoc on the ecosystems they have been introduced to. She mentions the case of the Stephen Island’s flightless wren, which was driven to extinction by a population of feral cats that were accidently let loose on the island (page 98), as well as zebra mussles of the Great Lakes, flammable cheatgrass, and the Asian tiger mosquito, each of which have caused significant damage to the areas where they have been introduced.

However, Marris then goes on to suggest that perhaps we are overreacting about the issues these invasive species cause, and that we should re-examine our attitudes towards them, instead of spending countless money, manpower and resources trying to get rid of them. She points to various examples of introduced, exotic species that have not been harmful to their habitats, and in some cases have even helped save some of the native species from extinction, as the case with the Turkey Oaks which helped keep Britain’s blue tits from going extinct (page 106). She also mentions how we have spent so many resources making sure these exotic species don’t flourish, for fear of “genetic pollution, as the case with the ruddy duck and the white-headed duck in the UK (page 109), when there is really no need for these efforts and all that the cross-breeding of these ducks was doing was creating a new species, as part of the “novel ecosystems” Marris advocates for.

Marris expands on the idea of novel ecosystems in Chapter 7, where she mentions ecologists Lugo and Mascaro, who are proponents of such ecosystems, where introduced and native species can live together and flourish in diverse mixes, something which many traditional ecologists are still weary about. She mentions the example of the “mango forest”, a novel ecosystem where mangos that were planted a while ago have flourished and created a forest of many exotic species otherwise not found in the area. Marris says that these novel ecosystems represent the future of our planet, and whether this is so I’m not sure, but something tells me there may be more to this than mentioned in these chapters, since these invasive species must be hated by so many ecologists and conservationists for a reason, and Marris seemed to have brushed off that hatred rather quickly.

| Leave a comment

Marris Chapter Six and Seven

The first thing which I understood from reading chapters six and seven in, “Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post Wild World” is how Marris wants to elaborate on when a species is introduced to an environment the species can either be an invasive species or an exotic species. Furthermore the introduction of species into a new environment is the main cause of modern species extinction. Although they may be the leading cause of modern extinction, invasive species tend to lead to an increase in the local biodiversity, while also causing a decrease in the global biodiversity. The main thing that one has to think about when talking about introducing species to an environment is how there were natural filters that have to be kept in mind. The first filter which is what humans bypass when they add a new species into the environment is the Geographical filter. This filter refers to Rivers or Oceans, in other words something thats preventing that Species X from moving from Location A to Location B. The next filter is the survivability filter, in other words can the species survive in the environment it has been placed in, is the temperature too hot? The third filter is the competition filter, in other words can it adapt well to this environment or will the native species just be too much competition for the new species to handle.

Regarding the case of exotic species, this is what normally occurs when a species is introduced to an environment. Basically what this means is that the species will live in the environment and no drastic changes will occur to the environment. It will just live peacefully in the environment. In fact it might live so well that in some cases they may just be surrogates for old species which may have previously gone extinct.

However, invasive species are the ones that everyone hears about. This is when a species is introduced and it leads to great changes in the environment. For one thing the invasive species tend to have a faster growth rate and a higher fertility rate. This allows them to reproduce faster and thereby increase their population exponentially. Furthermore they are also used to having to compete so they’re good at it. Also, these new species don’t have any of their predators around to hinder there growth and if they are predators themselves the native population doesn’t know that they should fear this new species, not at first anyway.

Marris brings an example regarding brown tree snakes as an invasive species, she says “The brown tree snake, native to Australia and nearby countries, has killed off ten of twelve native forest-dwelling birds on the island of Guam after arriving as a stowaway in cargo ships.” She is clearly showing here how it had a huge negative effect on the environment. However, she also provides us with an example of where invasive species helped the environment such as on Rodrigues Island where two species of birds and a species of bat were dying off due to deforestation. But, they replanted the forest with an invasive tree that helped these species avoid extinction. In fact, if the trees they had planted were native they would have grown too slow to save these species, so here the invasive species played a beneficial role in helping the environment.

So, regarding invasive species they are not always bad for the environment, however due to certain prejudices that people have about ‘invasive species’ they are often not looked at with such a positive outlook. So, when it comes down to it, you really just have to see if the new species is hurting the environment, helping the environment or not effecting the environment. The problem with this view however is that if it does end up hurting the environment, it might be too late to do something about it.

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden Chapters 6 & 7

In chapters six and seven of Rambunctious Garden, Marris expresses her thoughts on invasive species. Many environmentalists perceive invasive species as harmful and dangerous to the environment such as, “In 1999 Bill Clinton signed an executive order declaring war against invasive species, defined as “alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health.”” And as written in the book, the current conception of invasive species is, “they out compete and eat up complex native systems, replacing them with few dull weeds.”Through these two chapters, Marris aims to reject those beliefs and prove that invasive species can beneficial to nature.

Marris included, “In 1998 a scientific paper declared alien species to be the second gravest threat to vulnerable U.S. flora and fauna, after habitat destruction.” This just shows how highly people held the threat level of invasive species. However, this is only taking into account the negative aspects of invasive species. A research named Dov Sax reported the advantages of invasive species in 2002. He reported that Easter Island, which once had 50 native species, now has a greater diversity of species present on the island. Although seven species have gone extinct after the arrival of alien species, the total number of species has increased to 111. The advantages clearly outweigh the disadvantages. Another scientist named Mark Davis also disagreed with the fact that alien species will immediately compete with native species. They will sometimes help the native species flourish better than before. He uses the example of the Pyura praeputialis, which is “a squidgy brown sea-squirt-like creature from Australia.” This creature increased biodiversity on Chilean rocky tidal shores, creating a landscape for invertebrates and algae. Invasive species are also known to save the native species inhabiting the area. In Rodrigues Island, the songbirds and the fruit bats were almost close to extinction until the invasive species overtook the area, and “almost by accident” saved the species from extinction. Marris uses chapter six to convince the readers that invasive species are not completely harmful, and that they can be beneficial.

In chapter seven, Marris talks about her idea of a novel ecosystem. A novel ecosystem should not be compared with an ecosystem similar to that of a baseline. A novel ecosystem has been touched and altered by humans, but is left alone afterwards to thrive and change on its own. Contrary to what scientists believe, the novel ecosystem can be an area of greater diversity than those environments which have not been touched. With the prospective hybrids in place, as well as the native and invasive species, there is no limit for growth.

Through these two chapters, I can say that I was convinced in believing that invasive species are indeed helpful to our ecosystem, to an extent. Such as the example given before, if the benefits outweigh the harms, I feel that invasive species should not be exterminated or completely be unwanted. Invasive species offer more than just biodiversity, as they can help the environment grow and advance, as well as save our endangered species. I believe the scientists and environmentalists should gain a stronger interest in these invasive species and provide methods of supporting them.

 

| Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden: Chapters 6&7

Emma Marris commences on the notions of invasive species and novel ecosystems in Chapters 6 and 7 of her novel, Rambunctious Garden. Invasive species, also known as “exotic species”, have been previously introduced to particular ecosystems by humans. Most scientists refer to these species by the former term because they are commonly believed to be injurious to their new environment. For example, “some introduced species can cost farers and ranches big money, as they destroy crops or displace more palatable species on the range” (Marris 99). On the other hand, we have novel ecosystems – man-made niches that are not natural. They are not closely maintained by humans. Surprisingly, these novel ecosystems are found to perform well. Some in fact, perform better than other existing ecosystems because invasive species help native species thrive.

In novel ecosystems, invasive species are present to help support rare native species. Rewilders have introduced species specifically for this purpose. Marris gives us the example of the Atlantic shad. It swims in the Pacific Northwest to help feed endangered salmon (109). In addition, introduced species increase the level of biodiversity in the long run. Both the introduced and native species will learn to adapt and coexist with one another. These new ecological relationships are only possible if we give them a chance before removing them all. We are constantly at war with species we think are “invasive”, such as the Phragmites. Park specialists are on a continuous look out to destroy these plants. It has been discovered however, that the Phragmites is a global species.

According to Marris, Joe Mascaro found “forty-six novel forests dominated by a variety of different species and growing on lava flows of varying ages at various altitudes” in Hawaii (119). There were as many species in these novel forests as native forests. Mascaro argues against the destruction of these modified niches, specifically because they are useful in the restoration of native species. They provide “crucial habit[s]”. Furthermore, he found that these novel forests had great productivity. With regards to soil nutrients and biomass, some matched while others outproduced native forests.

Nonetheless, it is hard for most scientists to accept the concept of invasive species and novel ecosystems. The world’s novel ecosystems have already changed to accomodate both the introduced and native species. However, it is still evident that invasive species can be extremely detrimental to native ecosystems. Instead of helping native species, introduced species are widely believed to cause extinctions. A dramatic example stated by Marris is “the brown tree snake, native to Australia and nearby countries, [killing] off ten of twelve native forest-dwelling birds on the island of Guam after arriving as a stowaway in cargo ships” (99). Novel ecosystems are possible if scientists can determine which introduced species can be a huge problem. Otherwise, there will always be a constant battle as to whether or not we can fully accept invasive or “exotic” species to create novel ecosystems.

| Leave a comment

Ch 6+7 of the “Rambunctious Garden”

When a new species is introduced to an ecosystem a major concern on part of conservationists and environmentalists is whether the new species will become “invasive.” In Chapter 6 and 7of Marris’ “Rambunctious Gardens” she gives numerous examples of nonnative species that have caused the decline of native species. For instance, in Stephens Island, a nonnative cat caused the extinction of the flightless wren. The wren did not have any predators, so it did not develop the ability to fly overtime and as a result was an easy prey for the cat. Furthermore, in Guam the brown tree snake, originally from Australia, killed “ten of twelve native forest-dwelling birds” (Marris 99). Ultimately this decline affected other populations in the ecosystem, in Guam the fruit trees were less dispersed because there were few birds left to carry the seeds across the land.

When the term “invasive species” is used, it has a negative connotation; it almost implies that the species is destructive. However, Marris also shares examples of “invasive species” that have a positive effect on the new ecosystem. For example, in Rodrigues Island during the 1970’s its native species of two songbirds and a fruit bat were declining rapidly almost towards the point of extinction; however, following the introduction of an exotic species of timber, the land was reforested and ultimately increased the population of the declining species to healthy numbers.

In fact according to Marris “the vast majority (of exotic species) are not (a huge problem)” (98). The term of “invasive species” was revamped by some scientists to “novel ecosystem” to include species that have both a positive and negative effect on the ecosystem. Still, there are many scientists who believe in the restoration of the native species even if it means taking out an invasive species that could be helpful. For example, ecologist Shahid Naeem of Columbia University “‘would love to get rid of every invasive species on the planet and put all the native species back in their place” (100). Moreover, in 1999 Bill Clinton also signed an executive order “declaring war against invasive species.” From these two examples, it is clear that there is a lot of contention towards invasive species and they are rarely seen as having a positive influence on the ecosystem. In fact, after Bill Clinton’s executive order, it influenced many volunteer efforts to combat the threat of invasive species. For example, Marris’ states that she recalls volunteering at a Seattle park to pull out English Ivy and holly because the species was spreading too rapidly.

Now, however, Marris believes that exotic species have the potential to create more diversity in the future and will eventually “evolve by adapting to local challenges and by genetic drift” (109). Instead of “invasive species” a few scientists have coined the term “novel ecosystems” to describe ecosystems that have been drastically changed in its species composition within a recent time period. These scientists noticed that many introduced species eventually calm down over time; for example, the strawberry guava was a very pervasive plant that eventually won the hearts of many Hawaiians and caused no conflict. In my opinion certain harmful invasive species such as the zebra muscles and phragmites should be removed because they will destroy the ecosystem, whereas the strawberry guava actually benefits the people of Hawaii and should not be removed just because it is a nonnative plant.

| Leave a comment

Rambuctious Garden 6-7

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

| Leave a comment

Post 9/27/12: Rambunctious Garden 6, 7

As I continue to peruse Rambunctious Garden, it seems like more of my (perhaps shallow) presumptions about conservation are being increasingly challenged with common sense. And that, in truth, makes sense, as propaganda has often been biased and seen through rose-colored lenses. Marris’ arguments about exotic species and novel ecosystems, for instance, make sense, because they delve into the intricacies of the data rather than derive from blanket statements so easily acknowledged for their simplicity. I’ve probably said something along those lines in prior blogs, but that is honestly how I feel about these chapters.

How invasive species affect ecosystems is about as predictable as mid-run meteorology (as in it is simply unpredictable). Like Marris said, the concept of rewilding is somewhere along this line of invasion, yet it shows some practical promise (as well as a larger amount of theoretical promise). Assisted migration can also be considered to be invasive, yet with sufficient forethought and research, potential consequences from the movement may be mitigated. The term “invasive species” in itself has probably put a bad reputation to such foreigners; hopefully scientists will exchange that term for a friendlier nom de plume.

However, I do have one critique about Marris’ ideas about the novel ecosystem. Because the “invasiveness” of a species is a case-by-case dilemma (is it directly causing the endangerment of a species, for instance), would that not be reason for more mitigation of funds into individual environments? (Whether it is more efficient than current preservation techniques is up for discussion, but the ambiguity is there.) It should be no surprise in the number and diversity of ecosystems that exists, especially in isolated areas such as islands and lakes, apparently. Thus, each area would have to be at least cursorily studied to examine the effects of nonnative species. It just seems like there is potential to throw more money into an already risky investment, good cause it may be.

Nevertheless, Marris is correct in her assessment. Her statements regarding actually dangerous invasive species in a bit more muted than I would have liked, but for the sake of her argument to defend them it may have been a better choice to reduce some of the more incendiary rebuttals. Indeed, we as humans who created the anthropocene era must account for the natural ecosystems as well as novel ones (since technically all ecosystems are novel anyway), though I would hazard to guess that finding that balance between which species to keep and which to remove will be a murky battleground for years to come, especially if virulence of a species is actually considered. That war is probably happening now, as is shown in Ariel Lugo’s battle with The Nature Conservancy about the nonnative Leucaena trees in the Virgin Islands. Only time and awareness will tell what scientists will do. (Interestingly absent from the book as of yet is the mention of any native species that perhaps become bloated with the introduction of another species, or by some other consequence, creating the feared monocultural wasteland commonly referred to in these two chapters.)

| Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Marris Chapters 6 and 7

In Chapter 6 and Chapter 7 of Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post Modern World, Emma Marris turns her focus to the benefits of introduced species. She explains that, although there has been a historical view that all species that were introduced to an area by humans are a threat to their new environment, this is not always the case.

Chapter 6 of the book opens with an example of an introduced species that harmed its new ecosystem but Marris goes on to provide many examples of cases in which the opposite has occurred. In many, if not most cases, introduced species do not do as much harm as people expect.

In Chapter 7, Marris discusses Novel ecosystems, which thrive with both introduced and native species. In some cases, biodiversity can increase with introduced species. In fact, introduced species may evolve in a new environment, thus increasing biodiversity.

I believe that, given the information from these chapters, an ecosystem that includes species which are not native is not necessarily a bad ecosystem and it may not be so bad to introduce a species to an ecosystem if it is done carefully. Although an ecosystem may be able to survive and even thrive after a species has been introduced, this is not always the case. For this reason, I believe that it is important that people continue to be extremely careful about introducing a nonnative species to an area. The information provided in these chapters does not justify an idea like rewilding in my opinion. It may, however, justify certain cases of introducing species, such as assisted migration of an endangered species that has almost no chance of surviving any other way, as long as it is done extremely carefully.

| Leave a comment

The High Line

The High Line is an elevated railway that was abandoned and, years later, was converted into a park. In Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post Modern World, Emma Marris explains new ideas about nature with a focus on the ways that nature can exist in a urban setting. The High Line is a rambunctious garden because it was a manmade creation that was taken over by nature when it was abandoned then humans stepped in once again so that this nature could be preserved but also experienced by the people of the city.

Stalter’s paper gives some background information about the High Line and tells a bit about the plant species that grew on it. The High Line was built in 1934 to separate the rail and pedestrian traffic along 10th Avenue. The High Line was then abandoned 1980. In the decades that followed, wild plants began growing on the elevated rail line. The High line became a highly diverse natural habitat with limited human interaction even though it was located within Manhattan.

Recently, the High line has been developed into a park and the natural plants now share the space with pathways and recreational areas. This allows the people of New York City to experience that natural environment that has managed to grow in such an unlikely setting.

The interaction between humans and nature is perhaps one of the most important parts of nature in an urban setting. Therefore, although the development of the High Line as a park made the area less pristine, I believe it made the space even more of a rambunctious garden

I had been to the High Line a few times before I went for this assignments but I had never paid much attention to the pollinators before. Most of them are small and easy to miss if you aren’t looking for them. This time, though, I got to really see them up close as I took the time to try to snap clear pictures of them while high winds were blowing the plants that they were on.

     

| Leave a comment