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

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 – 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

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

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

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 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

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

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

The High Line

            The highline was very different from what I imagined it would be. I had never been there before but I though it would be an ordinary park where various (dull) plants would be growing amongst the older tracks. I read that it was elevated, but did not take much consideration of it. However once I walked down 23rd ST towards 10th AVE and saw the stairs leading up to the park, I realized it was something really different.

This park basically defined my perception of what Marris describes a Rambunctious Garden to be. The park is so manicured but at the same time has wild natural feel. The long (clean) white path with architecturally suave benches makes the parks look like it was all artificially made. The city building backdrop and the layout of the park make the plants and wildlife, which on their own would look very wild and natural, instead seem as if a gardener had painstakingly planted the plant to look as natural as possible.

The fact that an abandoned city railroad, something many people would not assume would be a place to hang out and relax, is now a park where people can relax and get a little piece of nature during their lunch breaks turned park is enough to say that the High Line is Urban Nature. Though there are many people walking around the highline, it still feels very serene. It is really a place to get away from the hectic, fast paced city life, while still being in the city. Being close to the Hudson River adds to the serenity by the winds that drown out the noise from the cars and construction nearby. Nature is considered to be an escape from daily life, and the High Line is one of the places to do it on the West Side.

I was also very surprised by all the wildlife diversity. I did not see many pollinators (only a bee perhaps because of all the people walking around), but there were many different types of plants. When reading Stallers paper, he goes on for a very long time about the different plants, animals or insects that can be found. Though the paper mentions the many plants that can be found in the park, once getting to the park you can really see the variety. Stalter’s paper mentions a lot about the diversity of the park, which does add to the Rambunctious Garden definition, I don’t think the diversity is as important as what the park looks like and what it does for its goers.

Photos

http://www.flickr.com/photos/87762520@N06/

| Tagged , | Leave a comment

Rambunctious Garden, Chapters 6&7

In the first five chapters of her book, Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World, Emma Marris discusses various conservation methods only to shoot them down and advocate her proposed method of the rambunctious garden. Most of the time, the negative aspects or consequences of a method involve invasive species. One conservation technique involves restoration to a baseline with the overall goal of attaining a pristine wilderness where only native species exist. The issue with this is that most ecosystems, if not all, have been tainted by invasive species over time, which makes such an accomplishment practically impossible. Another conservation practice is that of rewilding, which heavily involves the introduction of invasive species to ecosystems in an attempt to somewhat restore balance along the food chain. A prominent counterargument to this practice is that the invasive species may not survive in the new ecosystems or that they’d adapt too well and overpower native species, effectively failing to restore the balance. The third conservation scheme is assisted migration, which is the process of relocating various species from an environment in which they are struggling to live to a more suitable habitat. Again, there is no guarantee that these invasive species will survive or not take over the ecosystem entirely.

On the contrary, the sixth chapter of the book, entitled “Learning to Love Exotic Species,” stresses that invasive species are not really as bad as they are made out to be. There is definitely a substantial amount of evidence that makes them look bad, and that seems to be what people focus on the most, but “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” (141). Marris offers several examples to support her claims, such as the case of the Pyura praeputialis, a creature from Australia that has helped boost biodiversity on Chilean rocky tidal shores by creating a habitat where large invertebrates and algae can flourish. There are also the examples of exotic grasses becoming homes for native birds and southwestern willow flycatchers nesting in the exotic tamarisks (151-152). With those illustrations put out there, Marris then leads into the seventh chapter of her book and breaches the topic of novel ecosystems, which are “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” (161). The term ‘novel ecosystems’ basically refers to ecosystems that have been altered by humans and invasive species over time yet are still functioning well. At this point, these exotic-dominated ecosystems that were created, for the most part, by human hands are all we really have. They may not seem ideal to some conservationists, but they “may be our best hope for the future” (176).

Up until this point, I was convinced that invasive species were something to be frowned upon. They seemed to be the one problem that always got in the way of a good conservation tactic, but that is no longer the case. By now, they are essentially unavoidable anyway. If they are profuse and valuable, I don’t see why we shouldn’t take full advantage of them. They’re probably our best shot at sufficient conservation, so we should definitely take what we can get and encourage it wholeheartedly.

| Leave a comment

The NYC High Line

In Rambunctious Garden, Emma Marris criticizes previous practices of conservation of nature that focus on expelling the human element from nature. She presents the idea that humans should not be excluded from nature but rather involved in and intertwined with it. Her concept of a rambunctious garden is essentially nature made and maintained by humans.

The High Line on the west side of Manhattan, I believe, is the perfect description of Marris’ rambunctious garden. It was built in the 1930’s as an “elevated commercial rail line” to reduce the number of trucks and trains traveling along side pedestrians by introducing an alternate route. The highline carried commercial freight from 1934-1980 but the introduction of the interstate highway system in the 1950’s resulted in a decline in freight traffic and the final freight train to ride the High Line was in 1980. Deconstruction was began in the 1960’s of the southernmost section but and organization called Friends of the High Line stepped in and began advocating for the preservation of what was left from 13th to 34th street. Now, the High Line is a walkway above the building servicing as the perfect location for primary succession.

Going to the High Line a few days ago, I had absolutely no idea what to expect especially since the first time I had ever heard of it was when we were assigned to go there. My friends had informed me that it was an abandoned railroad system that has been transformed into a garden. I simply expected railroad tracks and some plants on the side, but BOY, was I surprised!

I was greeted by a beautiful terrace above the buildings, with tons of sunlight and an amazing diversity of plant and animal species. Although I was unable to identify them, I saw an infinite array of plant, shrubs, trees, flowers and several pollinators such as bees and flies. In my opinion, this is the perfect example of Marris’ rambunctious garden, a piece of nature that not only coexists with humans but was actually created and maintained by them. Another example of the way humans coexist with the highline was stated in Richard Slater’s The flora on the High Line, “human visitors to the High Line have probably inadvertently transported seeds to the site, a source of new species,” which contributes to the vast diversity of plants present.

All in all, I greatly enjoyed my visit to the High Line and am grateful that our city maintains projects of this kind that not only protect nature but create a beautiful place for New Yorkers to relax and enjoy it.

Pictures from the High Line, the library was full.

| Leave a comment

The High Line!

For almost 50 years, the High Line railroad served as a means of commercial transportation and carried commercial goods through the city. Eventually, in 1980, the final trip along the railway was made and it was since abandoned. Parts of the railroad were demolished, other parts completely torn down. Unkempt species grew as humans had little interaction with the High Line. What was once a main vein of transit in New York City had become an unsightly feature that negatively affected surrounding property values. Luckily, some saw this as an opportunity to integrate nature into a highly urbanized area. What resulted was a citified garden with “a multiplicity of everchanging habitats” (Stalter 390).

Unfortunately, the day I visited the High Line was a bit gloomy and windy; many of the area’s pollinators had probably scurried away in search of shelter. I was only able to capture a few bumblebees hovering around flowers and low-lying plant communities. On a previous visit during mid-August, however, I saw a much more diverse community of species ranging from bugs of all sorts to a monarch butterfly. As Stalter states in his study, humans may have also played an inadvertent role in pollinating the High Line by transporting seeds while walking. I thought about this as I looked around at the flora around me. It is quite ironic that something so industrial it was once labeled “Death Row” could become something rich with life. In fact, Stalter states “the High Line may have one of the highest levels of species richness of any temperate zone urban environment in the region” (Stalter 389). Variables that would seemingly negatively affect species gave way to such diversified organisms.

In the midst of one of the most urban areas in the world, a lovely elevated “park” exists. A rambunctious garden, perhaps? I would say so. When the High Line was built in the 1930s, no one could have guessed what it would end up becoming. Over time, the High Line adapted to the changing environment around it and luckily, the Friends of the High Line saw this as an opportunity to preserve the diverse nature that had emerged. In fact, I went to a community board meeting the same day and one of the topics of discussion pertained to a new housing plan that suggested erecting three new apartment buildings around the High Line. Rather than tear down a part of this urban garden, the building plan intended to integrate it into the project.

While the High Line differs from what most people believe to be conventional greenery, it was nice to see that the elevated park did not have to be pristine or seem like a whole other world for it to be rich with nature. In the midst of tall, futuristic apartment buildings and car horns, the High Line provides an escape from boisterous society for the humans that dotted its large patches of grass.

| Leave a comment

Marris Ch. 6 & 7

Prior to chapters six and seven, Marris talks about the dangers of introducing invasive species to an ecosystem. In these two chapters, Marris tries to dispel the negative stigma of invasive species by showing the various reasons why invasive species can be beneficial and why people still might not see invasive species as a positive.

Marris first talks about how invasive species can be beneficial to an ecosystem. One example Marris uses is how a foreign species of trees was able to help save two species of songbirds and a species of fruit bat that lived exclusively on Rodrigues Island (97). These three species were in danger of going extinct when the forest was cut down on the island, thus reducing their fruit source. A nonnative species of “fast-growing timber” were chosen to quickly replant the island, but in the end the rapidly growing plants served to save these three species since native species grew quite slowly and would not have been able to stop the endangered species from going extinct (98). Invasive species can play important roles in the ecosystem. In a similar example, invasive species can actually help nature flourish by taking of the roles of extinct species. In Hawaii, exotic birds are taking over the dwindling native bird species’ important duty of dispersing seeds (105). Sometimes the Without these exotic birds stepping in, seed dispersal might not be happening at all in Hawaii. In fact, some studies show that exotic species may even be considered to be functioning better than native species. One study compared a native only forest with former pine plantations of a similar age showed that the pine plantations were “richer in species, had greater aboveground biomass and used nutrients more efficiently” (113). If functionality is measured through species diversity, amount of biomass produced and the efficiency of using nutrients, then exotic species may function better than native species. In addition to this, exotic species may be able to help not only the ecosystem, but humans as well. One such species is the Chinese brake fern that can take arsenic, a harmful poison, out of the soil. Contrary to popular belief, the invasive species do not seem to be overly terrible and can be quite beneficial to the ecosystems.

Marris then offers an answer to why invasive species are held in such negative light. She suggests that this conception of invasive species partially comes from what people consider differences between species. For example, there are two cousin species of duck, the white-headed duck from Europe and the ruddy duck from the Americas (107). Though they look different and act different, the fact that they are able to successfully create a hybrid shows that they are compatible. The hybrid is becoming dominant, but many people are worried that each separate species will go extinct. Yet some scientists argue that the DNA from both species still carry on so it doesn’t matter if each species separately goes extinct.

In conclusion, Marris provide some great examples to show how invasive species and novel ecosystem can be beneficial to the biodiversity despite misconceptions.

| Leave a comment

The Benefits of Exotic Species and Novel Ecosystems

While the concept of human introduction is prehistoric, the understanding of an invasive species is much more recent. In chapter 6 of Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World, Marris describes it as a moved or non-native species that naturalizes and is able to reproduce in its new environment such that it “becomes a rowdy nuisance” (99). Some of these species include zebra mussels in the Great Lakes and pigeons in New York City.

Marris discusses whether or not invasive species are as bad and evil as the general society believes it to be. While it is generally argued that when a species invades, the “ecosystem collapses, species go extinct, and complexity and diversity are replaced with a monotonous and weedy landscape dominated by invaders,” an example within Rodrigues Island actually disproves this argument. With two types of songbirds and a fruit bat living on this island, almost all of these rare species became extinct because of deforestation. However, exotic species were used to reforest the island “for timber and erosion control” (98), and the rare native species began to regrow in numbers.

There are National Park Service teams that have “treated more than one thousand square miles” (100) and travel from park to park in the United States with a mission to destroy and remove any invasive species that is not native to the local area. While this may seem like a great idea to protect sensitive native species in danger of extinction, not every new species is harmful to their introduced environment. In fact, if new species show potential in helping diversify the environment in the future, they should not be removed. It seems to me that these strike teams are too focused on keeping ecosystems “prehistoric” or untouched.

Marris continues to negate the idea that invasive species are always a bad thing by explaining other factors that cause extinction of or harm to certain species. Many bird extinctions come from birds being killed, not via eating birds’ prey. Sometimes, introduced species may not automatically compete with native species or prey on unsuspecting natives. In fact, “invasive species” can contribute to an increase in diversity in ecosystems in the future. For example, Easter Island had around 50 native species before humans stepped on the island, but gained 68 new species thereafter.

Other than contributing to potential increase in diversity of species in an ecosystem, exotic species have positive benefits like removing toxins from the soil, regulating erosion, and controlling undesirable species.

In chapter 7, Marris discusses the idea of a novel ecosystem. A novel ecosystem is not necessarily an untouched piece of nature, but an environment that has been influenced by humans in the past, and then left on its own to go through changes without human interference. Marris briefly mentions that many ecologists consider novel ecosystems as not worth studying because they don’t find them as “pristine” as other ecosystems (112). Unlike some forgotten ecosystems, the High Line is a great example that has gotten a lot of restoring and revamping through Friends of the High Line. This public park stretches over one mile on the West side of Manhattan. Once a railroad for freight trains, this elevated structure was closed down and left to ‘run wild’ for a few decades, but has recently turned into a beautifully maintained and diverse environment.

Marris further supports the idea that exotic species are not detrimental to an environment by using novel ecosystems as an example. Many novel ecosystems, which are composed of many exotic/invasive species, actually function better than native ecosystems. Novel ecosystems have the most potential for supporting a diverse environment will continue to evolve and diversify many species—especially with the prospect of hybrid species.

After reading these two chapters, Marris has convinced me that exotic species can actually be beneficial to an ecosystem, and not as detrimental and harmful as the general society believes. Although humankind should be mindful of certain invasive species that may pose threat to specific native species, people must remember that not only is this pretty rare compared to initial beliefs, but also such a small possibility compared to many of its benefits. More ecologists should be interested in and focused on studying novel ecosystems.

| Leave a comment

The High Line

As I walked up the stairs on 23rd street between tenth and eleventh avenue, all I could think of was this trip that I had for so long delayed due to a belief that the High Line was simply this mundane green space somewhere out on the west side. However, 25 little steps later my predictions were proven wrong. Instead I walked in to this surprising, refreshing and beautiful garden that I knew would be a spot I would come back to on my own in the future. I would assume that most New Yorkers similar to me think of the big parks like Central Park, Madison Square Park or Bryant Part when they seek solace and peace from the busy streets of New York City. Who would have known a ten-minute bus ride from my college was another vast rambunctious garden waiting to be discovered.

The High Line resembles a “commercial railroad paralleling 10th and 11th avenue” because simply it was exactly that during 1934-1980. The original High Line, which opened up in 1934, was designed as a solution to “Death Avenue” by allowing freight trains to travel at an elevated level rather than side by side with pedestrians and automobiles. Its purpose was filled as the “West Side Improvement Project,” but post 1950’s its purpose was no longer needed, due to the introduction of the Interstate Highway System.  Slowly by slowly the highline was starting to be broken down in the 1960’s, nonetheless the Friends of the High Line organization stepped in alongside the Rail Banking program to preserve what was left of the High Line through 13th-34th street. Eventually this abandoned area became an ecologic phenomenon as it served as an ideal location for primary succession. The “abandoned lichens, bryophytes, forbs, grasses and woody vegetation grew unmolested by human and train traffic,” and transformed the High Line into another serene place tired New Yorkers could go for comfort (Slater.)

I believe that the High Line serves as a perfect example of a Rambunctious Gardens as author Emma Marris describes. She defines the term as nature that is “tended by us,” and it can be any of strip of land that contains any sort of greenery (Marris, 2.) The High Line is exactly that considering its origin is an abandoned railroad track, and even more so considering that human disturbance has further evolved this area as a vascular plant site. When walking through it the natural pollinators are present suchas the various dandelions and bees, however this place truly proves itself as a rambunctious garden because of its location. It is elevated through Manhattan and many of the building surrounding it have created their own little terrace Rambunctious Gardens to further increase the greenery of the location. All in all the High Line is another example of how humans are bring nature in their cities in any free space possible. Just like Marris I believe that this is the correct conservation method to incorporate in cites.  

 

 

  

| Leave a comment

Pollinators of the High Line

The High Line covers several Manhattan neighborhoods on the West side. With many access points, which are near multiple public transportation stops, this public park stretches for over one mile between 10th and 11th Avenues on top of the old freight rail line. As an elevated park, the views of NYC’s skyline and other storefronts are pretty unique.

After sections of the freight railroad were shut down in the 1960s, the High Line turned into a messy and wild environment, unkept and unmaintained. A non-profit organization called Friends of the High Line began to work towards preserving the High Line and turning it into a public park. From as early as 2002, specific species like “lichens, bryophtes and vascular plants at the High Line” were collected and classified (Stalter, 388). With all the data compiled, the results showed that the High Line had “161 species in 122 genera in 48 families” (Stalter, 388).

It is discussed that multiple factors contribute to the public park’s diverse variety of species. Some include human visitation as a “possible source of transported seeds and new species”, and human disruptions like littering, trampling, soil compaction, and fires (Stalter, 300).

Therefore, in an attempt to limit some of the damages caused by humankind, the High Land has many rules, enforced by the park’s personnel. Some of these rules include, NO: walking on gravel/plants, picking flowers/plants, using amplified sounds, using bikes/boards/skates, littering, etc. It seems that the High Line wants its human visitors to create as little a disturbance as possible to its man-made and man-maintained environment.

When I visited the High Line, I did not notice such a wide spectrum of species, as Stalter states there is. I mostly saw bumble bees and honey bees, and many flies. Many of the pollinators I saw, however, where around yellow flowers and purple flowers of the High Land, which were consistently found in patches along the park. I did see some weird red and long bugs and a few birds, too, but other than that, it was difficult for me to distinguish many species from each other since they all looked generally similar to me.

| Leave a comment

The High Line & Stalter

Emma Marris’s concept of the rambunctious garden is that of, in simple terms, manmade nature. It requires profuse human involvement in conservation, unlike many of the other methods that she criticizes in her book, Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World. In accordance with this notion of the rambunctious garden, Marris deems it possible and to a certain extent necessary for humans to coexist with nature. Furthermore, this can occur in basically any environment, regardless of whether it is rural or urban or something else entirely. Humans can actively incorporate nature into their lives and surroundings and allow it to flourish while still functioning undisturbed alongside it.

An abandoned railroad track in the middle of Manhattan is probably the last place one would think to find nature. In the heart of what is often considered to be the world’s greatest urban area lies the High Line. Preserved in the hopes of forming a pedestrian walkway, the elevated area that lies just west of 10th Avenue between 13th and 34th Streets began to sprout vegetation after its use as a commercial rail line ceased. Eventually, the pedestrian walkway became a reality, and since then the High Line has become a beautiful attraction, offering a peaceful walkway with plenty of benches for pedestrians that is barricaded on both sides by greenery.

In my opinion, the High Line matches up perfectly with the definition of a rambunctious garden. Human hands constructed the whole space from before it even became the High Line, and the site continues to be influenced by humans in several ways on a daily basis. For example, it is maintained by humans in order to ensure that the vegetation survives and continues to bloom as well as remains on the sides of the walkway. An article by Richard Stalter, entitled “The flora on the High Line, New York City, New York,” only enhances my aforementioned opinion of the High Line being a rambunctious garden with its observations on the human interaction regarding the park. According to Stalter, “human visitors to the High Line have probably inadvertently transported seeds to the site, a source of new species,” (387) which plays a factor in its high species richness and diversity. As for human coexistence with the High Line and the park’s endurance of the urban extremity that is Manhattan, it seems to be doing just fine. There are most likely a large handful of New Yorkers that are not aware that the High Line is even present, and they are not living their lives any differently because of it. This goes to show that we really can have nature in our own backyards, as Marris suggests. Even in New York City, with “drought stress in dry weather, low fertility of soil, human trampling and cutting vegetation, and the smothering of plants by debris such as tires, bottles and additional trash,” (387) the High Line has continued to prosper. Some of it is even shaded by the city’s signature skyscrapers, but that hasn’t stopped the nature in that spot from developing. Thus, although it initially seems rather unlikely, the High Line possesses all of the qualities of a rambunctious garden, which in turn helps support Marris’s argument that such a thing really is possible and beneficial.

(I’m in the middle)

| Leave a comment

Visiting The High Line & Stalter

Within New York City, a place surrounded by tall buildings and filled with traffic, there is a strip of vegetation along 10th avenue from 13th to 34th street. A railroad abandoned for 46 years was observed to have gone through something similar to primary succession on bare rocks or on islands. The railroad that was used to deliver commercial goods was abandoned from 1934 to 1980. During this time, “lichens, byrophytes, forbs, grasses and woody vegetation” formed along the rail line untouched by humans. (Stalter) For vegetation to grow by itself in a place filled with skyscrapers and little plants produced with human hands is a good example of Marris’ rambunctious garden.

The High Line was once known as the “Death Ave,” because of the “dangerous mix of rail/motor traffic and pedestrians along its path.” (Stalter) After the rail line was abandoned vegeation began to form on its own, providing evidence that it is possible for nature to grow in cities. Marris believes that nature should be adapted to the city environment instead of just protected and preserved. From her observation, nature is able to adapt to the changing environment created by humans, and even if humans went out to protect the environment in its pristine form from human hands, it will still be affected by humans. So with the success of the High Line building nature on its own, Marris is able to show that nature can adapt to urban areas.

After the High Line was abandoned, there was much discussion as to what to do with it. Some wanted the rail line teared down, while others wished to preserve it and transform it to a walkway. The Friends of the High Line wanted to save the rail line and claimed that its transformation would “enhance economic development of the area.” (Stalter) When it was decided that the High Line would be preserved, many species were discovered . The specie richness was observed to be “greater than the specie richness of four nearby New York City  sites” and might just have “one of the highest level of specie richness in any temperate region.” (Stalter) This was clear during my visit to the High Line on September 20. During my visit, there were a variety of plants though most of them seemed similar.

Besides the plants looking similar, the pollinators were as well. I spotted many bees there, a small flying insect, a few moths, and a sparrow. From all the bees I observed, it was visible that they were all different species. Some bees were fat, others were thin, and the shape of their wings were different too. Some bees appeared to have a larger stinger than others as well. Given the different appearances, it was clear that there were different species of bees.  These different breeds of bees coexisted well with one another as some even gathered at the same plants to gather pollen. It seems that some plants attracted bees more than others and some plants attracted only one specific type of bee. From my visit, I. noticed that most of the plants that looked alike were spread out along highline more than others plants that I had only viewed in certain spots.

| Leave a comment

Chap 6-7

In these chapters, Marris discuss if invasive species are as bad as we believe them to be and ecosystems that have evolved after the introduction of “invasive” species. One example to disprove invasive species are bad is Rodrigues Island. There are three rare species that live on this island: two types of songbirds and a fruit bat. Almost all of them went extinct due to deforestation of the plants. However after the introduction of exotic species of plants such as timber specie, the species grew back in numbers. Now people are removing the plants to make room for native species that wouldn’t have been able to keep the song birds and fruit bat alive due to their growth speed. Marris states that most exotic species are not harmful but we deem most to be harmful which wastes money and resources to eradicate them. That’s not to say some aren’t harmful such as the zebra mollusk. The common argument against invasive species is that introduced species tend to destabilize ecosystems and reduce their diversity. Invasive species destroy the ecosystem leaving only a few types of species left.

Extinctions are actually almost never the cause of species extinction directly. Few bird extinctions come from new birds eating food sources but killing the birds. Invasive vegetation also doesn’t exist to the complete nonexistence of other plant species. Some evidence shows islands have increased diversity such as Easter Island who had 50 native species, lost 7, but then was introduced to 68 plants after humans came.

Introduced species may not automatically complete with or prey on natives. Exotics species may increase diversity in the future. To prove this, the term novel ecosystems are introduced. Novel ecosystems are defined as new human influenced combinations of species that can function as well or better than native ecosystems and provide for humans with ecosystems services of various kinds. Examples are water filtration and carbon sequestration to habitat for rare species.

Novel ecosystems are not usually under human management except in cases where it is intentionally changed and then left to change however, and some changed by humans from a distance unintentionally, such as climate change, extinctions. It is more common to see introduced and native species living together than exotics dominating an ecosystem.
Species seem to mellow out later after decades and the composition of the species become mixed. For example, zebra mollusks dominated at first, but then were eaten by ducks that later grew in numbers.

There are reasons to keep novel ecosystems which may seem to be ecosystems disturbed by invasive species. Novel ecosystems have proven to be useful for restoration of native species. Novel ecosystems can also provide habitat for native animal species. Novel ecosystems just show signs of evolution and if one believes in that, it should be kept as is. Although species might have to be introduced directly or indirectly due to humans, we could see novel ecosystems as natures’ response to humans.

| Leave a comment

Perspective (Chapter 6 & 7)

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

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

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

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

 

 

 

| Leave a comment

Exotic Species and Novel Ecosystems

Exotic species have been labeled as “invasive” since most of them excel in their new environments, eventually displacing native species or disrupting the ecosystem. Chapters 6 and 7 of the Rambunctious Garden discarded the popular view of exotic species and revealed alternate research on the other, lesser known, effects of exotic species. Most traditional ecologists view exotic species as a danger to most ecosystems in the world. This is because existing exotic species around the world have shown devastating effects such as economic damage or altering native species populations (by hunting them or simply over population). These invasive species are either nuisances to humans or they cause problems in ecosystems around the world, potentially causing the extinction of several species as they invade.

Emma Marris provides insight on why exotic species may not be as dangerous as they seem and why removal of these species would waste money. The disadvantages of exotic species are highlighted in the media, which makes the tamer and more useful exotic species ignored. The uses of exotic species falls in line with many modern conservation ideas like rewilding or assisted migration. Many species can be used to fill in niche roles in ecosystems and some of them have little impact on ecosystems in general. The main objection of many ecologists to exotic species is mostly due to their non-nativeness.

Another concept that is touched upon is the novel ecosystem, or a dramatically altered ecosystem, and how exotic species in the ecosystem have evolved the ecosystems and made them stronger. These exotic species tend to be invasive at first, and the, despite what many ecologists want to believe, the other species manage to adapt and control the invasive specie, like how native ducks learned to eat Zebra mussels in Lake Erie. Marris writes in her chapter how man of these novel ecosystems are more “vital and energetic”. These ecosystems are not controlled by humans which allow natural selection to take over, resulting in a healthier ecosystem; research has shown that ecosystem services like water filtering or erosion control are better in these novel ecosystems.

Humans have to admit that these novel ecosystems and exotic species are a result of human interaction, and similar to what Marris says, these novel ecosystems have already evolved and adapted to the exotic species and human interaction, thus trying to restore the native species is the same as going against nature/natural selection. I like the idea of letting natural selection run its course (unless the exotic species are really toxic) and develop more complex ecosystems that are adapted to the growing human influence on the world. This idea seems to focus more on letting nature be rambunctious, but there should be some human intervention or control if the ecosystem is endangered. My main objection to these chapters is how little importance is given to the native species that are endangered, and how they are portrayed as a necessary casualty of novel ecosystems.

| Leave a comment

The High Line and Stalter

The Chelsea High Line is a park located on an elevated railroad track, running along 10th Avenue between 14th street and 34th street. Due to the fact that I’ve never visited the high Line before I wasn’t really sure what to expect. I couldn’t help but wonder how an entire ecosystem would be able to survive in an area dominated by development and the uprooting of natural ecosystems. However, as I stepped onto that platform I was amazed to witness how in a matter of a few steps I could be transferred from a city that is in constant motion, to one that exemplifies the very meaning of serenity, beauty and nature. During my visit on September 20th, I noticed that different varieties of bees were the pollinators that were in the largest abundance. Although there was a little breeze during my visit, I couldn’t help but notice that at every patch of flowers there happened to be a few bees pollinating the plants.

The High Line seems to be a perfect example of what Emma Marris refers to in her book as a “Rambunctious Garden.” Unlike the efforts of the conservations to make a distinction and separation between nature and human interaction, the High Line strives to combine the two into an ecosystem where nature and man can coexist and live together in harmony. Instead of constricting nature to reserves in order to create “pristine” ecosystem, Marris points out that we should allow nature to adapt to its modern day habitats. In the second chapter of her book, “Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post Wild World,” Marris states “Conservation can happen in parks, on farms, in the strips of land attached to rest stops and fast-food joints, in your backyard, on your roof, even in city traffic circles. Rambunctious gardening is proactive and optimistic; it creates more and more nature as it goes, rather than just building walls around the nature we have left.” Instead of forcing nature to become how we believe it should be, we must allow it to form in its own way. The High Line is a perfect example of nature adapting to its surroundings and with the assistance of many pollinators, such as bumble bees and honey bees, the High Line is able to flourish and survive as a natural ecosystem.

In his article, “The Flora of the High Line,” Richard Stalter provides further information as to why the High Line can be classified as a “Rambunctious Garden.” Stalter mentions that the High Line has a greater species richness and abundance than many other areas in New York, including Ellis Island, Liberty Island and Bayswater State Park. I found it very hard to believe, however at the same time amazing, that an ecosystem as successful as this could survive in an urban area as advanced as the heart of New York City. It really goes to prove the fact that we don’t have to isolate nature from human interaction in order for it to thrive.

| Leave a comment

Stalter and NYC HighLine

The last time I was forced to go to the High Line was last year for my first Macaulay seminar class and I didn’t think too much of it. Now, a year later I return again to this place because of my Macaulay seminar class and I still don’t think too much of it.

However, I’d be lying if I said that I don’t appreciate it. I mean honestly it is a nice place to take a walk and admire the view. In fact, when I used to go to the Highline it was because of the view and how nice it looks. In all honesty, I have to thank the Rail banking program since because of their determination the highline wasn’t destroyed.

According to what I understood from the Stalter paper the primary succession (which according to his paper is initiated on sites where vegetation has not existed previously) that occurred here was different than in other places and for that reason the environment developed differently.

The main cause for the environment developing differently was human involvement (even though it was minimal).Some human involvement includes trash disposal (littering), the inadvertent invasion of species and pollution. By pollution I’m referring to the fact that there was an excess of sulfur dioxide in the environment, which then hindered the growth of lichens.

 

One thing I have to say which surprised me the most from this paper was how of all the parks they did research in the New York Highline was the park with the most diverse amount of species. Some of the parks where this research was conducted include, Ellis Island, Liberty Island, Hoffman Island (also known as Swinburn Island) and Bayswater State Park. In all honesty, I expected either Ellis Island or Liberty Island to have more species richness. So, even though Ellis Island and Bayswater State Park have more Species, The New York City Highline still has the most species richness with 38.8 species per ten thousand square meters (hectares).

 

Anyway, when I went to the Highline with Isadore and a few other classmates we happened to come across on the way there we were told to look around for pollinators. But, in all honesty most of what I was able to get on camera were bumblebees or honeybees (at least I think they were those type of bees I’m no zoologist and I’m not the greatest at differentiating bees.) Furthermore, there were also other types of insects like flies and other types of insects, which I couldn’t identify but they were insistent on not letting me get them on photo.

| Leave a comment

Chapter 6 and 7

Exotic species are species that were introduced by humans rather than appearing naturally. Most of these exotic species are believed to be invasive. They disturb the ecosystem since they wouldn’t have been there if it wasn’t for humans. A novel ecosystem is one where many exotic species are present. Sometimes, a novel ecosystem may even thrive better than one formed naturally. Even though invasive species are thought to be detrimental to an ecosystem, they can sometimes help native species. With such benefits, both species continue to survive with each other’s support. Most people believe that these exotic species only cause harm and try to prevent them from living in an area.

One benefit exotic species provide is diversity in ecosystems. With the addition of new species ecosystems include many more species. Sometimes, these invasive species can help provide a more balanced ecosystem. In order to create more of these novel ecosystems, we have to remove the harmful invasive species and introduce ones that will help it. In many ways, a novel ecosystem is easier to maintain. Since human interaction is allowed, there wouldn’t be a need to prevent humans from interacting with it.

Marris says that many species are considered to be exotic when first introduced to the environment. However, after some time the species will learn to adapt itself to the environment and fit in. Eventually, these exotic species become part of the ecosystem. Most of the time, these species help better that particular ecosystem. In many ways, letting an ecosystem grow on its own is much better. This way, exotic species can be included along with the native ones.

I think the notion of novel ecosystems may be a successful one. It allows for human interaction with these areas so there doesn’t have to be restrictions. Also these exotic species help to make the ecosystems better. It also seems that such a project wouldn’t need an absurd amount of effort or money to complete. Therefore, it would be a wise choice for us to develop ecosystems in this fashion. I honestly believe that novel ecosystems are the way to go if we were to preserve nature. Nature is always constantly changing. If this is so, we might as well allow these ecosystems to develop to their fullest potential.

| Leave a comment

HIgh Line

Although the High Line is reputable as a park built upon on abandoned railroad track, I have not visited such area until this assignment came up. I have heard about it but did not really think about how it would look like until I was walking from the train station to meet up with other classmates to walk around the park. When I first saw it, I did not expect it to be on a suspended railroad. I thought it would on railroad tracks at ground level. After I had climbed the stairs and reach the top, I realized the park was nothing like the image I had of it. The park was a lot more beautiful then I expected it to be. There were many flowers and insects going through the plants. I mostly saw bees but I caught a glimpse of a butterfly or two before.

There were many tourists around taking pictures and walking along the park. To one side of the entrance I entered through, the 23rd Street one I believe, tall buildings were towering over the park while to the other where many stores such as restaurants, pharmacies, etc. Although this park is surrounded by city life on both sides, it still flourishes very well. I believe that the Highline fits into Marris’ concept in her book.

Although the Highline is in the city, and at some areas has tall buildings towering over it, the plants still grow there and flourish. According to Stalter’s paper, humans played a part in how the plants grow. It is said in the paper that “material washed from passing trains and wind—deposited soil added” to the mineral content of the soil. It also said humans may have accidentally transferred seeds to the area, another human interaction to the park.

The Highline shows nature can coexist one with nature not without fencing in the area and that humans may potentially add to the beauty or diversity of it just as birds and insects do. Even though the nature has been touched by human presence, it does affect it negatively as other people may believe when human interact with nature. This visit to the Highline was very pleasing and did change my perspective of how we can affect our surroundings in a positive way.

| Leave a comment

High Line and Stalter

A wasp

The High Line on the West side in Manhattan has an abundance of nature, as evidenced by my visit there and Stalter’s report on the ecology there. Even though it was starting to rain and very windy, I could still find several different pollinators around the plants on the High Line. Because of the wide array of nature interacting with humans in the middle of the city, the High Line displays Marris’ concept of a Rambunctious Garden.

A bee

I had gone to the High Line several years prior but I had never noticed the variety and extensiveness of the plant fauna there since I was only interested in the interesting architecture surrounding it. Walking through the High Line I noticed a very large range of plants and flowers which I did not expect to see in the city. I was surprised by the dense areas of plants which were thriving on the High Line. Many pollinators seemed to like one certain type of plant and I found a variety of different bees or flies mainly around them. I think I saw a couple of different bees and perhaps a wasp, as well as flies and some other unknown insects. I also spotted several birds and a few butterflies but I was unable to capture a picture of them since they flew away rather quickly. Along with the nature there is also a lot of human traffic. There are many tourists there and the variety of people visiting the High Line is also very diverse.

A bee

Another bee

Some sort of insect

Stalter confirms in his article and report that there is a very large variety of plant life and species at the High Line. He discovered a total of 161 species there, with 82 native and 79 introduced. Stalter goes on to describe how the “species richness at the High Line is greater than species richness at four nearby New York City sites.” Stalter also concludes that one factor for the high diversity of species at the High Line is human disturbances. This supports Marris’ idea of the rambunctious garden. Marris talks about how all nature is affected by humans and how well nature can adapt to human interference. The High Line is a great example of this. Disturbances by humans brought a lot of the plant life to the High Line, which in turn may have attracted the many pollinators that are there currently. The High Line is not a “pristine” or untouched portion of nature. On the contrary, the High Line was originally an abandoned railroad track and over time it grew into the urban ecological system it now is. Nature is clearly thriving in the area while still interacting and adapting to the constant human traffic that visits the High Line each day. The High Line is truly a rambunctious garden in the city.

A fly

 

 

 

 

Me at the High Line (third from the right)

 

| Leave a comment