Chapters 8 & 9
In Chapter 8 of Rambunctious Garden, Emma Marris brings her focus towards more revolutionary ideals. Different from the first two- thirds or so of the book, this section brings us to the possibilities that may come from changing our view of the natural world. Marris even says that ecologists’ views are changing to think less about restoration of areas to baselines and more towards preservation of natural systems and resources. After having examined and analyzed several main issues tackled by today’s ecologists and conservationists from types of restoration to invasive species and the process of rewilding, Marris makes her point of stating clearly that designer ecosystems looks to be a way for nature to be maintained in the future.
Although this method of designing ecosystems, as Marris describes is in ways progressively better than trying to recreate an entire ecosystem from a historical point of view, it has both benefits as well as trade offs. With more specific goals at hand, such as lowering the nitrogen levels in streams or rebuilding riverbanks to decrease erosion and sediment degradation the chances are greater that more wildlife ecosystems will be preserved. However, at the same time there are consequences such as the increased chances of fish in waters where nitrogen-lowering initiatives are taking place to store mercury in their fatty tissues. In this section of the book, Marris argues that just because an ecosystem is restored to look like it was in the past or to look stable does not mean that its ecological processes are thoroughly beneficial. A point blatantly made by Marris is that at the end of the day, as much as ecologists know about any given ecosystem, the intricate processes within a particular system are not fully understood. Ultimately, Marris envisions the best way for nature to be conserved is for it to be via this new method of designing ecosystems with a key goal in mind.
With this in mind, Marris goes into the next chapter, Conservation Everywhere, to explain and unfold her idea on the future of conservation in more detail. In this chapter Marris describes a world where ecosystems are not designed separate from human existence but looking to integrate into the anthropocene with the use of corridors to expand the habitats of migratory species as well as those that occupy larger areas beyond the national parks and preservations in which they are contained. In this way, greater biodiversity will be able to flourish as species have a larger area to roam. Marris tells of how humans who now have a greater population in urban areas rather than in the suburbs, will in the future, by her predictions, dominate in urban areas- having less of an ecological impact. With this migration of humans to city areas, there would be even more spaces to be turned back into livable habitats for the earth’s species. Marris says that pavement is not forever, suggesting that as we turned grasslands into parking lots, we can revert them back to being natural landscapes. Over these two chapters, Emma Marris takes us into the future she sees in conservation and human interaction with the natural world as we become ever dominant. I am not so sure how much I agree with the connected corridors idea she ha for expanding conservation efforts. However, turning more parking lots and industrial structures into areas that can be used for wildlife seems as though it would be beneficial for animal and plant species as well as the human population.
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.
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).
