Login
Join This Site
If you want to add yourself as a user, please log in, using your existing Macaulay Eportfolio account.
-
Professor Jason Munshi-South
jason [at] nycevolution.orgITF Ben Miller
benjamin.miller [at] macaulay.cuny.eduITF Kara Van Cleaf
kvancleaf [at] gc.cuny.edu NY Times Science Section
- Hundreds More Nazca Lines Emerge in Peru’s Desert November 23, 2024
- Dr Martin Makary Chosen to Head the FDA November 23, 2024
- Iran Declares It Is Doing More Nuclear Enrichment After I.A.E.A. Rebuke November 22, 2024
NYC High Line
“Within the confines of New York City lies an overlooked oasis of green…the abandoned elevated high line.” Richard Stalter opens his piece on the High line with these words and to me that’s what it was. I’ve never heard of the high line before this class, so I thought it would be somewhat deserted. However, once I got there it was bustling with life. I couldn’t believe how many people were there. It was more crowded than the streets of Manhattan yet there were places where one could lounge and rest. To top it off, sprightly plants were on both sides of the high line for a majority its length. The abundant number of plants takes one to a place where they forget he is in the city to the point where seeing billboards and parking lots from the elevated platform a strange sight.
If there was a place to accurately describe Marris’s view of a rambunctious garden. The high line embodies the idea of humans and wildlife living in unison. People are sitting, listening to music, reading, there are food vendors, and little kids playing. There was even a bride, groom, and their bridesmaids and groomsmen taking a stroll through the high line. The plants are also evenly distributed and in some areas it feels as if they completely surround the people at the high line.
With the merging of man and wildlife, there are still separations so neither is completely overwhelmed by the other. There are signs to remind people not to invade the area specific to the plants and concrete pathways for people to stay on. There is also an unspoken separation of pathways. While there is no sign or marker indicating which way to walk, the people organize themselves and keep to their right, allowing for a smooth walk with no obstructions.
While I visited the high line, I felt that while my timing had its pros, there were some cons. I couldn’t find any animals other than a single bird that made taking a picture of it incredibly difficult and a cabbage butterfly. There were other bugs, but they were too small to be caught by camera. I was disappointed by the lack of animals I saw because Statler’s statistics made me hopeful of seeing numerous animals I rarely see in the city.
Invasive Species and Novel Ecosystem
Exotic species often have a negative impression for most people because they are considered invasive species. Most people think, “as species invades, the ecosystem collapses, species go extinct, and complexity and diversity are replaced with a monotonous and weedy landscape dominated by invaders” (97). However, that is only some of the cases for exotic species. In many cases, exotic species are not necessary invasive. They can help native species as well. Invasive species can flourish to create a habitat for natives or become their food source. They sometimes help endangered species to grow in number. The problem is that most people and the government associate exotic species with invasive species, and try to destroy them as a conservation effort. However, removing invasive species is not feasible because seeds can survive for decades and target species can return after they had been killed (101). They need to realize the benefits of invasive species and to reduce their effort to remove exotic species.
One important benefit that exotic species can do to an ecosystem is to increase its diversity. Extinction is often outnumbered by invasion, where the types of species in an ecosystem actually increased. Also, some exotic species takes up the empty niches of the ecosystem, which makes the ecosystem more complete and balance. As a result, we should only deal with exotic species that are causing problems, and introduce the ones we want in order help develop a well-balanced ecosystem (108). We should forget about native and non-native categories when evaluating an ecosystem as long as the ecosystem is better off in terms of its functions. Also, we will embrace new species and invasive species as native species as time moves on and as generation passes. The line between native and non-native species changes as time changes. As a result, a novel ecosystem is a great and less confusing system to implement.
A novel ecosystem is “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” (112). In most cases, exotic species are initially invasive when introduced, but they will behave over time (116). When exotic species grow in number, they become a big part of the environment. Native species learn to adapt to new species by building resistance (118). As a result, exotic species are not invasive if they are given some time. Exotic species-dominated ecosystems function better than native forests due to higher biodiversity and more balance when niches are filled. Therefore, we should not remove exotic species. We should to let the exotic and native species work things out on their own.
The fact that humans are part of nature, we cannot confine our idea of nature to a time before human arrived. Nature should be when the environment is on its own processes that are not under human control instead of a list of things that were there years ago without human intervention. It is important that we let ecosystems to balance themselves on their own against exotic species. We should introduce species to an ecosystem planning that they will benefit the ecosystems, and leave them to balance through natural selection. That way, a novel ecosystem is truly natural to let all niches to be filled for maximum completeness.
The High Line
A rambunctious garden, as described by Emma Marris, is not a place isolated by walls or fences, it coexists with humanity. Rambunctious gardening is proactive and optimistic; it’s not a romantic notion but a part of our everyday lives. A rambunctious garden can be found anywhere, one doesn’t have to escape his/her daily life to witness it, its all around us and develops with the humankind. A rambunctious garden is evolution in action, a practical form of conservation, which can flourish anywhere. The High Line, an abandoned railway line that runs along the West Side of Manhattan, fits perfectly with the notion of a rambunctious garden. It represents an ecosystem that coexists with the city life and continues to diversify.
The High Line possesses every characteristic, which makes it a suitable candidate for a rambunctious garden. It’s in confined to an area within a busy city, it continues to cultivate despite human disturbances and trampling, and possess an unlikely location. One may suspect that an abandoned commercial railway line, deprived of proper sunlight and nutrient rich soil, may never be suitable to sustain such large biodiversity per ha, but that’s what makes it rambunctious. Primary succession and pioneer species took over the abandoned place and cultivated it to withstand the human hindrances.
The railway line currently stretches 20 city blocks between 13th and 34th streets and parallels 10th avenue. It is no longer just an abandoned strip of land, but has become an urban oasis and a public walkway, which is constantly visited by locals and tourists. As investigated by Stalter in his study, the pioneer species at the site were primarily mosses and grasses. The growing and dying of pioneer species added organic matter, which allowed for vascular plants to grow and thrive and also contributed to the slightly basic pH of the soil.
Furthermore, Stalter’s study concerning the biodiversity and flora, reaffirms its classification as a rambunctious garden. The High Line is one of the most biologically diverse and species rich system in the New York-Tristate area with over 161 species, 122 genera and 48 families. The study also shows a density of 38.8 species per ha, which is greater than sites like Ellis Island, Liberty Island and Bayswater State Park.
The biodiversity of the highline is truly remarkable, and strengthens the support for maintaining and supporting rambunctious gardens, interestingly enough only 59% of the species at the High Line can be classified as “pristine” or “native”, but still the system continues to thrive and seems very natural. The high level of diversity has been made possible by human interactions, mostly humans are considered to be a hindrance for an ecosystem, but in case of a rambunctious garden, humans act as inadvertent pollinators.
Nevertheless, after visiting the High Line myself and examining the pollinators and the coexistence of nature and humanity I am convinced that nature doesn’t always have to be pristine and rambunctious garden can exist anywhere and support a species rich ecosystem.
High Line
Like Central Park, the High Line is a well known location of nature that is preserved. Even though I’ve been there before, I didn’t take the time to appreciate the plant and animal species. However, this time i was able to take my time and observe. I went during noon and surprisingly there weren’t many birds and pollinators around. After wandering around, I begin to stop pollinators and butterflies. It was nice to observe the High Line for its purpose. The plant life in the area seemed very well preserved. One interesting thing was that I was unable to find any trash or litter on the High Line. It seems that other people realize the importance of the High Line and refrain from littering.
Marris believes that “rambunctious gardens” are the way to preserve ecosystems. The High Line fits into her concept very well. The High Line is an area where people can interact with the nature while preserving it at the same time. An example of this can be when people refrain from throwing trash on the High Line. Every one is aware that the High Line needs effort in order to be protected. Even though humans have interacted with the nature present and may have brought non-native species, its that which makes the High Line special and an example of a “rambunctious garden.”
Stalter’s paper does not change how I view the High Line. I still believe this type of nature can be considered a “rambunctious garden.” Even though the article doesn’t provide any visual guides, it does state a lot of the species that reside there. It also gives a lot of statistics about the area that one would not know from visiting. Stalter’s article complimented my visit by making me more knowledgeable of the area and what things I could expect.
Invasive Species and Novel Ecosystems
Chapters 6 and 7 of Emma Marris’ Rambunctious Garden discuss the highly debatable concepts of invasive species and novel ecosystems. The first chapter focuses on the generally negative view of invasive species. I think this goes back to the initial discussion of these species when they were described in ways that promote disgust and dislike. “Invasive” is a word that hints at intrusion and taking over of an ecosystem. While this is true of some species that go from one environment to another it is not something that we should label all transitioning species as. The reasons for a species moving are never the same. While some come on their own, possibly in search for a better environment to support life, others hitch rides on humans and other human controlled articles. A major issue that is brought up in the book is the presence of National Park Service strike teams, who decimate the populations of invasive species in the U.S. Now this conquest would seem like a good idea if all species being killed were causing serious damage to the environments they were invading. The members of the team describe their task as “saving the plant communities that have been here historically.” This goes back to the debate on whether or not the environments present years ago are what we really should be striving for today. It seems that the goal is not to protect species in danger of extinction, but rather to keep the landscape strictly how it has always been natively. I do not agree with this stance because if the plants can find a way to live together in the same ecosystem, there is no reason to cause such destruction to a species, even if it is invasive.
The second idea discussed was novel ecosystems. A novel ecosystem is not an untouched piece of nature, but rather something that has experienced some human influence and then left to go wild on is own. I find this to be a fascinating concept because it is really interesting to see how nature can “reclaim” areas that humans once used. This is very reminiscent of the High Line in NYC. The wildlife in that particular park grows around the long since used train tracks. This interaction between nature and past human activity is quite incredible. It was stated on page 112 that a lot of scientists do not study these ecosystem because they think they aren’t worth the trouble. I think this is a serious overlooking of something that needs to be explored more, especially in the world we live in today. With urbanization taking over all around, the “pristine” areas of nature that are so renowned are dwindling. The novel ecosystem is something that will soon be the norm because of all the human activity going on. I think that research of novel ecosystems and how nature “reclaims” these areas are extremely crucial in order to preserve species in years to come.
Response to Chapters 6 and 7 of Rambunctious Garden
In chapters 6 and 7 of Rambunctious Garden, Emma Marris discusses the concepts of exotic species and novel ecosystems. Exotic species are species that are not native to a particular area and have been introduced by humans. Many ecologists and conservationists consider these species to be invasive, and believe them to be detrimental to the habitats where they reside. Novel ecosystems are defined as ecosystems that contain many exotic species but function as well, if not better, than native ecosystems. These novel ecosystems provide humans with many ecosystem services such as water filtration, carbon sequestration, and a habitat for rare species. They are altered by humans, but not actively managed.
Many ecologists today argue that exotic species are detrimental to ecosystems and lead to decreased species diversity and extinction. Although this is true for some exotic species, Marris argues that for the majority, it is not. In fact, she argues that exotic species can be beneficial to habitats. The benefits of exotic species include supporting rare native species, controlling undesirable species, removing toxins from soil, and regulating erosion. Marris also points out that exotic species may create more species diversity in the future because they will evolve by adapting to local habitats.
Marris uses novel ecosystems to support her view that exotic species are not detrimental. She points out that many novel ecosystems, made up of exotic species that did not evolve together, function better than native ecosystems. In fact, many novel ecosystems are more diverse than their native counterparts. However, many ecologists shun these ecosystems because they are not pristine. Nevertheless, these novel ecosystems have the most potential for evolution, since exotic species need to find ways to survive. This can lead to new species and increased species diversity. In fact, many hybrid species, or combinations of native and exotic species, are being created in novel ecosystems.
Marris brings up some interesting points in these two chapters. After digesting all the evidence, I believe that exotic species should not be removed from ecosystems; they should be embraced. This is because exotic species benefit habitats in many ways. There is no need for ecologists to waste a tremendous amount of time and money on eliminating exotic species when most of them are beneficial. Exotic species rarely cause extinctions. In fact, exotic species are taking over the roles of extinct species and can help native species flourish, as demonstrated by Rodrigues Island in the Indian Ocean. This Island saw three endangered species saved by the introduction of exotic species.
I believe ecologists should invest money in studying novel ecosystems, including urban environments. Very little is known about novel ecosystems and why many of them are able to function so well. In addition, more money should be devoted to studying which exotic species will benefit an ecosystem and which will harm it. I believe the only exotic species that should be removed are the ones that are sure to be detrimental to the survival of the ecosystem. All the other exotic species should be allowed to stay. This is because, as the reckless invader hypothesis states, the dominance of an exotic species will decrease over time.
This chapter has left me with one question: Will there be a point where native species no longer exist and all species are exotic? I believe this will happen, but only time will tell.
The Rambunctious High Line & Salter
The High Line seems to be the embodiment of Emma Marris’s idea of a “rambunctious garden” because it is an ecosystem that interacts, grows, and coexists alongside human development. For over 12 years, the park has been able to survive the destructive human hand and is currently flourishing in the backyard of New York City.
The High Line’s resilient nature and improbable location already distinguishes it as a rambunctious garden. The park is cultivated on top of an old railroad line that runs along the West side of Manhattan. Along the elevated strip of land, nature is cramped and constricted by the boundaries of human development. Plants are confined to patches of soil that are bordered by fences and walkways. In addition, skyscrapers limit sunlight in some areas, while noise and air pollution add extra burdens to the ecosystem. Yet, plants and their pollinators have managed to bypass such substantial hindrances and continue to grow within the constraints of their new environment. As a result, the High Line matches the description of Marris’s “rambunctious garden” because it is cultivated in our own “backyard” and has withstood the harsh conditions of an urban environment.
Richard Salter’s study on the flora of the High Line mostly reaffirms my viewpoint that there is no better example of a rambunctious garden than the one embodied in the High Line. In addition, the study also allowed me to understand that rambunctious gardens are feasible and should be encouraged. For example, Salter observed that the High Line’s species richness was greater than four nearby New York City sites. Meaning, even on that narrow stretch of compact soil, the ecosystem was thriving more than some city parks. However, my only reservation is the fact that primary succession is limited. This should inevitably lend itself to more plant diversity. In addition, since a walkway runs through the middle of the High Line, humans inadvertently transport seeds and new species to the environment. Hence, the high species richness of the High Line could have less to do with the actual environment and more to do with external factors that promote its growth and diversity. Yet, regardless of what factors contributed to its development, the High Line still stands as a good example of what a rambunctious garden should entail.
Overall, our visit to the High Line helped to place Emma Marris’s idea of a “rambunctious garden” into visual perspective. I can now envision the possibilities of integrating a highly developed urban environment with nature that once seemed fragile. In addition, the pollinators of the High Line helped me pay close attention to interdependent characteristic of ecosystems. Regardless of Salter’s explanation for the high species diversity of the High Line, I believe that “rambunctious gardens” are plausible and should be supported in cities like NYC.
Invasive species as exotic species in novel ecosystems
In Chapters 6 and 7 of Rambunctious Garden, Emma Marris reinforces the main concept of this book by using examples of positive change in ecosystems by redefining invasive species as “exotic species” and discussing the need for novel ecosystems rather than exotic ecosystems. She strongly suggests that the ecological and scientific community has been stubborn on studying new ecosystems and, once again, changing their beliefs in a baseline, except the baseline now features all native species.
Apparently, scientists have turned their back on the so-called and negatively phrased invasive species that have in some cases “turned out to help rather than hinder” ecosystems all over the world (98). The “culture of fighting ‘invasive species’ is very well entrenched in conservation,” writes Marris, and “one hear a lot more about these villains” – harmful invasive species – “than the shier foreigners, and for many ecologists and conservationists, they have become the enemy” (98-9). The aim of governments for decades has been to make ecosystems invaded by other species “livable for native plants” and appropriate for unyielding conservationists, who stick to their beliefs despite the research that defies them (101).
Marris proves to us that “extinctions that are directly attributable to introduced species are quite rare,” and that ecosystems are “much messier, more dynamic, and more complex than the black-and-white battle metaphors can capture” (104). In some cases such as in Hawaii, introduced species, formally invasive, are “taking over roles once performed by extinct native species” and hybridizing with native species in no harm to their ecosystems (105). And these places are novel ecosystems: “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” (112).
When some novel ecosystems are compared to the native and relatively unaltered ones, they are “richer in species, had greater aboveground biomass, and used nutrients more efficiently” (113). Native and nonnative species exist in hybrids or in diverse mixes, where forests in Puerto Rico and so-called praires in the Midwest of the US flourish. Marris continues criticizing conservationists, by saying that they were “more interested in maximizing the number of native species than in minimizing the number of ecosystems,” blatantly ignoring the potential to assess positive change in various ecosystems (121). Instead, they pursue their own goals, whether or not writers like Marris and like-minded ecologists can persuade governments to change their attitudes and adapt, just like their environments have.
While Marris’s argument is overall very convincing, the scope of applying exotic species to worldwide ecosystems is limited; there’s a reason that she devotes a couple of pages in Chapter 6 to discuss the often disastrous consequences of exotic species in ecosystems, and why they have been called invasive species by the scientific establishment for so long. Additionally, not all ecosystems are novel, meaning that they’ve in a positive way – many simply haven’t, and they won’t for years to come. Lastly, Marris portrays the scientific community in more and more of a negative light for each chapter that she writes; I’m not so sure if they’re as stubborn and outdated in thought as she makes them out to be.
Chapter 6 – 7
Marris’s Rambunctious Garden, Saving Nature in a Post-Modern World delves into the topic of invasive species, or rather “exotic species” in her next two chapters. In chapter 6, Marris begins by providing examples of previously native specie inhabited lands that have undergone a “take over” of sorts by an invasive species. However, the label of an invasive species seems to be based on prejudice. This label was originally attached to those exotic species that inhabited foreign lands. Now the label is predominately circling around those species which cause harm towards humans. Studies have shown that most invasive species in fact do not cause as much harm as we may believe. One example of this new approach towards invasive species came under great debate amongst scientists. The example mentioned how islands that were consumed by invasive species did have problems where several isolated species suffered extinction. However, the fact remains that the number of species on these islands more than doubled. Some argue that the number of species was a result of many common species found on other foreign lands. Another example brings to light the question, “If newly arrived species have an advantage because natives have not evolved resistance to them, isn’t it also true that they will have no evolved resistance to the wiles of the natives?” (Marris Page 105). The chapter goes even further to discuss the possibility of hybridization between an invasive species and a native one. The hybrid product of the two species could be either invasive or native, creating confusion in identification. The problem is not because of the species that happen to move to a new land. The problem lies within ourselves. We are the ones drawing lines between species. If a species can freely mate with one another, who are we to keep them from doing so, or to eradicate the parent species? The problem returns to the introduction of the chapter – the problem is us: our prejudice towards invasive species. It seems that we, human beings, do not fear the imminent result of an extinct species, but more likely that we, ourselves do not like any change. What purpose do we have for naming a species invasive if we were the ones who introduced it to its new lands several thousand years ago? Are they no longer invasive? Even if we go back in time and find which species lived where, the process seems futile to return species to where they once belonged. Why not let species live and dwell as they choose naturally? The answer to this lies within humans, not nature. The second chapter discusses “novel ecosystems”. These novel ecosystems are the results of an invasive species that has gone and rampaged throughout the specified land. The name provides a lighter and more positive description to some, but to others, the positivity holds true. One example provided explained how, despite what studies have taught scientists throughout the ages about how theses “novel ecosystems” would suffer and die out, the actual result shows that the ecosystem is faring much better than any normal one. Novel ecosystems are now more common than native ones. Generations of human beings will begin to see a new land dominated by a new species again become dominated by another new species. Ecosystems will grow more complex and fuse. Studies have even showed how invasive species “calm down” over time. They become less harmful as more species are introduced that hinder their booming growth. The natives will also, one day, gain resistance. It is not a losing battle, but rather a new perspective of the winner.
High Line, Stalter – 9/20
It’s hard to believe not only that we have the High Line within New York City, but also the number of people who are still unaware of it. Located along the West side, on 10th avenue and stretching 20 blocks is a fresh oasis in a city with a reputation needing one. The High Line, originally a commercial railroad, which became abandoned, was relatively free from human intervention. This allowed vegetation to grow “unmolested by human and train traffic” (Stalter 387). I’ve been to the High Line countless times before, however, I have never stopped to notice or wonder about the helpful pollinators that help make this happen.
A few handsome gentlemen and I were able to observe a variety of pollinators. From what we saw, bumblebees seemed to be most popular, though not dominant. We also observed other species of bees (honey, long-horned, and leafcutter), as well as butterflies, and other insects whose functions we were not completely educated on. We found a majority of the pollinators we witnessed from 23rd street up to about 27th street. Unfortunately, many were unapologetically photo-shy or too into their work.
Most of the anthropogenic interference was atmospheric rather than direct tampering. Stalter’s study was published in 2004, before the High Line’s redevelopment took a change in course. In Stalter’s study, he reports observing high vascular plant species. The species per area are compared with contrasting locations. These include islands that receive high human traffic (Ellis Island) and more isolated ones (Hoffman Island). Some of the factors he credits the vast diversity to are in fact committed by humans, albeit unintentionally. Countless conditions have played a part in the vegetation of the High Line. As a relatively undisturbed environment which high sun exposure, the High Line may be a special case. Stalter explains that “xeric succession on the abandoned High Line may have been altered by the rate at which soil forms or accumulates…the growing and dying of the mosses, lichens and grasses added organic matter to the soil” (389).
The Friends of the High Line have made it their mission to preserve the High Line. In a city with high real-estate value, letting nature run wild was not an option. A happy compromise has been reached with The Friends allowing nature to flourish, yet keeping it in check. The vegetation of the High Line has been chosen by The Friends to recognize the wild pioneers that had colonized it.
I definitely believe that the High Line embodies Marris’ idea of a rambunctious garden. As mentioned, human interference, such as transporting seeds and new species through visitation, can help explain the diversity. Up to this point, we have mostly been learning anthropogenic changes affecting nature. In this case, nature and humans are beneficial to each other. The High Line is living on a man-made structure and being tended by man. In return, the High Line has spurred development to its surrounding areas, giving back to its neighbors.
Marris Chapters 6 and 7 Response
The term “invasive species” often has a negative connotation associated with it. Many ecologists assume that “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). While some species do destroy ecosystems, exotic species or “invasive species” can actually benefit some ecosystems and species living in the area.
According to Marris, Davis argues that exotic species can help native species flourish by providing more to the ecosystem. He describes that the introduced species can take “over roles once performed by extinct native species” (105). Furthermore, exotic species can create more habitats and landscape. As Davis explains, “[disturbance] create a more variable landscape, with more kinds of habitats, thus increasing the changes that one niche will suit the arrival” (105). The introduced species can also bring new opportunities and availability of food and nutrients. With all these benefits, it is difficult to see why ecologists would even label exotic species as “invasive.”
Marris also points out that there is some bias associated with the type of species considered to be “native” or “invasive.” Ecologists loosely define these two terms. Since they are loosely defined, almost any species can technically be “invasive.” For example, Kristin Saltonstall confirms that the Phragmites is not an exotic species. Instead, it is a global species that exist in places such as America and Europe. However, it ended up being an aggressive species, so it “behaved” like an invasive species (108). While ecologists strongly believe that these exotic species are causing problems, they are already in many ecosystems. Most are already benefiting the ecosystems and it is entirely possible that these “invasive” species are actually native species. Marris points out “the despised invaders of today may well be the keystone species of the future’s ecosystems” (109).
The ecosystems Marris sees in the future are novel ecosystems. Novel ecosystems are essentially ecosystems that have significant human influence, but they can “function as well or better than native ecosystems and provide for humans with ecosystem services of various kinds” (112). Of course, many traditional ecologists reject this idea because this implies that an ecosystem filled with many exotic species can perform better than a natural ecosystem. Despite their beliefs, “novel ecosystems are now more common than intact ecosystems” (114). In addition, these novel ecosystems look remarkably similar to a “normal” ecosystem. If a regular person was to compare a novel ecosystem with a regular ecosystem, it would be extremely difficult to notice any large differences.
Novel ecosystems create many benefits for the native species. This ecosystem provides certain habitats for native animal species if the original content disappeared. Furthermore, it also provides many services such as filtering water and controlling erosion. Marris describes the ecosystem as “vital and energetic” (121) and compared it to human cultures. Again, it is hard to see why ecologists would despise exotic species and novel ecosystems from this list of benefits. Since there are many novel ecosystems around the world, these ecologists should be studying why these ecosystems are successful instead of ignoring them. There will probably be even more exotic species in different areas in the future. The growing number of novel ecosystems around the world makes them “the future of our planet” (122).
The High Line and Stalter
I visited the High Line for the first time on Thursday, September 20th and I was quite amazed by what I saw. I started off at 23rd street and then walked up a few blocks, and then down to 20th street. I saw many different plants and pollinators, including different bees, small flies, and butterflies. The High Line is so different from the surrounding areas, with all the buildings, and stores and traffic and whenever I looked around and saw the buildings and then at the plants again, it felt like two different worlds. This, I thought, was a large part of the beauty of the High Line. It’s pretty amazing to see how a railroad could be transformed into a place filled with different plants and species and it really fits in with Marris’s concept of a rambunctious garden.
Marris believes that we shouldn’t try to restore ecosystems of the Earth into pristine wilderness that was supposed to have existed before humans disturbed it, but rather to have humans accept that they are in charge of nature and to mange it and make it so that we are creating environments where nature and humans can coexist and interact. The High Line is just that. It is not just a closed off space of nature, but rather a place where nature is being conserved and restored and people can go there and connect with nature. People restored and manage the place, but they aren’t just putting any plants and making their own ecosystem. Many of the species there are native species. Those species, along with many others might not be there if not for the management of humans. Having native species grow back while humans manage the area to fit into the urban environment is a good example of rambunctious gardening.
Stalter’s paper doesn’t change my view of the High Line, but it does make me appreciate it more. In his study, Stalter found that “species richness at the High Line is greater than species richness at four nearby New York City sites.” The High Line has 38.8 species/hectare while at Hoffman Island, it was 21.8 sp/ha, 37.9 sp/ha at Bayswater State Park, 19.8 sp/ha at Liberty Island, and 22.8 sp/ha at Ellis Island. I wouldn’t have thought that the High Line would have so much species richness since it’s in an urban environment and was created not so long ago. One of the possible reasons Stalter gives for the high level of plant species is “human disturbance including trash deposition, trampling, oil compaction and fire.” The disturbances in cause the habitats to keep on changing, but the species there are still able to adapt to it. Just as Marris said, nature is resistant and adaptable. I think the High Line is a great project and should be an example for future conservation projects, especially in cities.
The High Line
In the book Rambunctious Garden, Emma Marris criticizes that many conservationists approached conservation in a misleading way. Marris believes that there are no such things as pristine nature. There are evidences of human influences everywhere in the world. I think that the High Line fits into the concept of Marris’ rambunctious garden because it is heavily shaped by human, and yet still have its unique natural characteristics. According to Stalter, human visitors to the High Line accidentally bought seeds and different soils to the site, it creates various habitats for different species to live in. Other human influences such as “trampling and cutting vegetation, and the smothering of plants by debris such as tires, bottles and additional trash (Stalter 387)” also play an important role of soil composition and species diversities in the High Line.
The High Line used to be an elevated commercial railroad from 1934 to 1980. It sketches from 13th and 34th street between 10th and 11th Avenue. However, the 1950s Interstate Highway System decreased the rail freight on the High Line. The High Line rails were abandoned in 1980. Friends of the High Line, which is a non-profit organization, proposed to transform the rail lines into a pedestrian walkway. During the primary succession lichens, bryophytes, forbs, grasses and some other vegetation started to appear. Then with the growing and dying of the mosses, lichens and grasses, the soil composition become richer, which allows more species to better flourish themselves (Stalter, 387-388).
During my first visit to the High Line I was impressed by its species richness. I visited the High Line on last Tuesday; it was windy and rainy. I saw all different colors of flowers, fruits, and trees. As what Stalter reported in his paper, “the vascular flora at the High Line consisted of 161 species in 122 genera in 48 families (Stalter 388).” It is amazing that this human-made strip of nature is right in the city. I also saw a lot of pollinators like honeybees, bumblebees, butterflies and etc. It was a worthwhile trip to the High Line; I can see all different types of flora without travelling outside of the city.
I believe that the High Line supports Marris’ concept of rambunctious garden, because it is not pristine, but still have its unique beauty. According to Stalter, compare to Haffman/Swinburne Island, Bayswater State Park, Liberty and Ellis Island, the High Line has the greatest number of species. Also, “The High Line may have one of the highest levels of species richness of any temperate zone urban environment in the region (Stalter, 389).” Although many conservationists believe in pristine nature, and that nature should be kept away from human interference; the High Line proves that human and nature can be coexist, and create this strip of nature with the most species diversities.
Rambunctious Garden: Chapter 6 & 7
Within these next two chapters, Marris discussed the opposing views regarding exotic species. The argument that many ecologists and scientists agree with is that exotic species are invasive species–they take over, the ecosystem collapses, species go extinct, and complexity and diversity is diminished. Ultimately, that exotic/invasive species dominate over native species and deteriorates the native ecosystem. Regardless of whether or not exotic species are useful or beneficial, like the exotic tree species that were reforested on Rodrigues Island and revived native bird species, proponents of this argument fight for legislation and action against “enemy” species. Governmental and non-governmental efforts come at a high financial cost, though. Like Rita Beard, strikers against invasive species believe it is not a matter of aesthetics, but a matter of “saving the plant communities that have been here historically. It is also about maintaining ecosystems that can withstand the ecological changes that will inevitably occur” (101). Charles Elton’s theory states that invasive species take over native niches, as opposed to finding their own niches elsewhere, causing detrimental effects.
The opposing argument states that exotic species are truly not as devastating to native ecosystems as they’re made out to be. Dov Sax found that certain oceanic islands had increasing overall diversity due to the outnumbering of invasions over extinctions. And, “extinctions are almost never the result of introduced species” (104). Ecologist Mark Davis argues in favor of exotic species, stating that “change is the order of the day in all ecosystems, and that species move around constantly, on multiple scales” (104). Disturbance is thought to make resources–food, nutrients–more available in time. Invasive species are often times more beneficial to their new environments. Ariel Lugo found that “the exotic-dominated ecosystem was functioning better than nearby native forest, if function is measured as brute production of biomass” (113). So what really makes people go against exotic species? Marris poses the question, “More broadly, when we attack ‘invasive species,’ are we acting out of prudent caution to avoid likely extinctions, or do we merely fear and dislike any change?” (107).
Ultimately, the baseline of either argument is human interaction with nature. Anthropogenic change is either direct, as in species movement, or indirect–climate change. “Exotic pests and pathogens are introduced to control undesirable exotic species” (109). Ecologists like those who use non-native species to control other non-natives, who are against exotic species but in favor of assisted migration, are hypocritical. It boils down to the initial argument over humanity’s hand in the natural world. Once it’s accepted that man is inevitably affecting the world’s ecosystems forevermore, then the argument over exotic species seems more clear. We humans are apart of the natural world, as well. Whether some take actions like introducing non-native species or indirectly affecting areas, it is all apart of natural evolution. I am an advocate of, considerably, a “laissez-faire” environment, which does not exclude human interaction. “As the planet warms and adapts to human domination, it is the exotic species of the world that are busy moving, evolving, and forming new ecological relationships” (109). Novel ecosystems are not under active human management, but still defined by anthropogenic change. Essentially, Marris sums up my opinion of these two chapters when she says that, “We may have introduced the various parties to one another…but the rhythm of life they take up and the interplay of selection pressures they produce on one another are all up to them” (121).
The High Line: A Natural Experience in NYC
One of the most visited nature sites in New York City is the High Line. The attraction spans from 14th Street to 34th Street along 10th Avenue. It was my second visit to the Highline and the first time that I actually saw the plants and paid attention to pollinators. People of all different races, genders, and styles visit the High Line to appreciate the natural elements, plants, and spectacular views of Chelsea.
Upon climbing the stairs of the 23rd Street entrance of the High Line I was surrounded by a diverse people. There were young men and women holding hands, young children begging for ice cream, old ladies telling them to be quiet. Business people looking for a break in the day, a saxophone player accompanied by a vocalist, jamming out; these were the people of the High Line. What united them? Was it nature? Was it the sounds of the birds? What was it?
Personally, I think people go to the High Line to relax. It is very peaceful up there. Especially considering that 20 feet below you sits the heart of Chelsea (on 23rd Street). Nature, on the West Side of Manhattan, seems out of place up there, but highly appreciated. What types of plants were there? I am no botanist, so my best summary is: a rainbow of all the colors you could see, but one color on one plant; some had thorns; some were dying; some were thriving; some had birds all over them; some had insects and bees pollinating like wildfire; it was different.
Pollination. Many overlook the process. It truly is an art form, and those who are good at it are relentless. The bees will stop at nothing, not even 40 mph winds. The birds only seemed to be around one plant, the fruitful looking purple one. The small orange insects that I have never seen are nested along a brown leafed plant. The day was windy, overcast, and overcrowded with New Yorkers, but these animals were in their own domain. Shielded by a fine green line, they were in their own habitat, created by humans, untouched by humans since. You get the feeling that some plants are more loved than others: some appear more vivacious. That could be a result of something that Slater points out.
He says due to shallow soil profile, soil depth ranges from 1 centimeter to 70 centimeters (over 2 feet). Perhaps this is a reason why some plants appear brown on the last day of summer and others are thriving with beautiful colors. Slater brings up an interesting point saying that the High Line has the highest species per area with respect to 4 other major coastal sites including Ellis Island and Liberty Island. It is easy to see why this may be the case. The High Line is only 20 blocks long, and just over 20 feet wide. The total number of species on the High Line is 163, which is third following Ellis Island and Bayswater Park.
Is the High Line a Rambunctious Garden? It would appear so. The High Line is a natural space strategically created by Kelco. It is built to serve nature and humans. There are practical and artful uses for this great space. Ultimately, this is now nature, that is created, should be enjoyed by the masses.
the Highline and Stalter
Although I went to the highline a year ago for IDC to see the Chelsea Galleries, upon my second visit, it was a completely different experience. This time I turned my attention away from the architecture and artistic displays, and refocused it on the inconspicuous pollinators along the boardwalk. I started the journey on 23rd street and 10th avenue and immediately I saw a bee on what I believe to be a Rosaceae plant. The bee was attracted to the inner most part where the pollen is located. As I walked towards 19th street I noticed that the bees were predominately settling on the parts of the plant with a lighter color. The bees were rarely nesting on the green plant leaves. Less common were the wasps, I managed to come across a wasp on the Rosaceae plant, but unlike the bee, its stripes are more defined and it was located on the green leaf rather than white bulb.
Other than bees and wasps, I also came across flies. The flies were harder to find because they moved around often and tended to blend with the green leaves. Most of the flies were on the tip of the leaf and towards the side closest to the boardwalk. Within a block’s distance of the fly was a ladybug. In comparison to the bees, wasps and flies, the ladybugs are less apparent. In fact, the insect was almost hidden within the leaf. Given the insect’s unusual green color, it was a bit ironic that the ladybug was hidden in a reddish colored leaf. The last of the pollinator species I came across were birds. The birds tended to nest either on the fence or on poles. I believe this is the case because the species of plants nearest to the fence is the Poaceae flora, which resembles tree branches, which birds use to create nests. In fact in the picture below it seems that the group of birds are working together to create their own habitat.
The highline is unique space that allows New Yorkers who want to escape the crowded streets of the city to enjoy a more serene stroll above the traffic. The highline does fit into Marris’ rambunctious garden. In her novel “Rambunctious Garden” she states “this garden isn’t restricted to parks and protected areas. Conservation can happen in parks, on farms, in the strips of land attached to rest stops…” (Marris 2). From this excerpt it is clear that the highline represents a rambunctious garden because it is not a secluded area of nature. Marris’ definition is inclusive of all and any type of nature that is set aside no matter the size. Given the small area of the highline, it can very well be a rambunctious garden because a major goal of the highline according to Stalter is to create a space for people and nature to interact. Based on the Stalter piece, the highline was an abandoned area that once served as a highway for freight trains, but with the organization “Friends of the High line” it became a “rambunctious garden” or a place where people and nature can coexist. I must admit that initially I did not think that the highline was in any way a “rambunctious garden,” because it seemed that the same plants were distributed throughout the entire highline. However, after reading Stalter’s work, I learned about the many species that thrive in the highline including the Poaceane, Rosaceane, Asteraceae etc. The highline may only have an area of 4.2 hectare, however it is the home to 163 total species and the embodiment of Marris’ rambunctious garden.
Marris Chapters 6-7
The negative perspective towards invasive species is fueled by emphasis on such “new germs and viruses [that] can make people and animals sick” or the “introduced species [that] can cost farmers and ranchers big money, as they destroy crops or displace more palatable species on the range” (Marris 99). By focusing on such cases as the introduced brown tree snakes species that “has killed off ten of twelve native forest-dwelling birds on the island of Guam,” (99) we are only considering the negative aspect of introducing new species to a region. When it comes to invasive species, similarly to other topics Marris addresses in her book, we could perhaps benefit from being more open minded with the ability to recognize the possible beneficial impact a species could have on the new ecosystem it is being introduced to. One example that illustrates the potential benefit of new species is that in Britain, where climate change caused chicks to hatch early, leaving them without caterpillars to eat. In this case, the newly introduced European Turkey Oaks were beneficial to the survival of the chicks as they brought with them wasps that served as food in lieu of the caterpillars. Examples like these are necessary as they illustrate the recurrent benefits that many so called “invasive species” can have on ecosystems. Marris brings up a valid point by questioning why we are inclined towards disliking the introduction of new species. I agree with the notion that perhaps it is because we “merely fear and dislike any change” (107). I also agree “the invasive species paradigm is so easy” and that it is simply convenient for us to implicitly immediately judge new species as invasive and dangerous and solely welcome natives in ecosystems (108). Ecologist Mark Davis brings up another valid idea, suggesting we should “forget about where they came from, identify species that are causing us problems…and then deal with them” and perhaps we could deal with each species as a “separate case” rather than categorizing based on native or invasive status (108). I appreciate Marris’ introduction of novel ecosystems, as they appear to be a good balance between complete conservation and radical moves such as assisted migration. Novel ecosystems are “defined by anthropogenic change but are not under active human management” (114). I am optimistic regarding the concept of introducing a species to an environment and allowing it to thrive, perhaps even assisting the processes of evolution and natural selection. My optimistic outlook towards the idea of introducing new species to an ecosystem stems from the positive results from scientists such as Ariel Lugo who “found that the novel forests [in his study], on average, had just as many species as native forests” (119). Although I, like Mascaro states, recognize that ”we will always have to deal with the risk [new species] pose to other systems,” I think we should further work towards and research novel ecosystems as it would be unfair to simply dismiss their potentially beneficial role in our environment.
High Line/ Stalter
I have been to the High Line a few times before, but I had never noticed how large the population of pollinators was until my last excursion with Melanie. Even though it is early autumn now, insects were buzzing around flowers everywhere, luckily for us. It was clear from the start of our walk down the High Line that the park supported a diverse population of flora and fauna. Pollinators we saw included an array of bees, wasps, birds, flies, other insects and a moth. It was truly interesting to see which bugs liked which flowers. The pollinators clearly had preferences for certain nectars, and some flowers were definitely more popular than others.
The compass plant’s yellow flowers were a big favorite, drawing bumblebees, flies, moths, and wasps all over. Honeybees seemed the most tolerant of any kind of flower, going from asters to [pink flowers I cannot seem to identity] to white wild spurges. We did see other insects and beetles of which we were unsure whether we could label pollinator which are not included here.
I don’t think the High Line is as much of a Rambunctious Garden as I think Marris attempts to describe in her book, but I do see where the two share characteristics. The park is not in a place where plants are supposed to thrive, but we have brought them up unto where the old railroad tracks once were, “intervening” with Nature’s Way. The process has naturally brought more animal life and more plant life as we plant more blooms and people visit. It is very much a garden in the sense that the plants are cared for and monitored. As a public park, the High Line flora are maintained, and the structure of the park makes sure the plants have the right amount of water. However, the High Line is not as much of a hands on project where we introduce species like puzzle pieces from other areas. Plant diversity was high before the High Line became a managed park and caring for those plants is a focus of the High Line project. Besides this, the aim of the High Line is not to recreate an ecosystem, but just help make the previous landscape of the abandoned railway become more appealing and accessible to the public. The plantings here are mostly based on aesthetic value of the bright flowers and that feel of the abandoned railroad, while also keeping the native species as a priority. There is no active introduction of animal species as far as I can tell, and according to the park’s website, 161 of the 210 plants species of the part of the park we traversed are native to New York.
Many of the plants that were self-seeded (those not artificially introduced to that land by humans) before the High Line came to be integrated in the park. The statistics in the Stalter paper show that the High Line environment had really created itself and shown that it was ready to be developed before we realized that we could exploit it for our own interests.
The High Line & Richard Stalter
During my trip to the Highline, it was very windy which was unfortunate when it came to spotting pollinators in mid-flight. However, I was able to spot quite a few species hovering in and around the various plant-life on the sides of the walkway.I would have to say the most numerous or prevalent pollinator species seen that day were honeybees, carpenter bees and bumble bees. These species mostly hovered around flowering bushes that alternately sprung up along the walkway, so their presence was viewable throughout. I also saw smaller flies whose species I do not know the name of as well as a small bird species that gathered in groups underneath the bushes. Something that I also found interesting at the Highline was the sound of what I think was a grasshopper coming from a particular purple bush that was planted towards the end of the strip. On my past trips to the Highline, I only vaguely made note of the plant life around me in the routine of quickly walking by urban nature. This trip, I was able to actually able hear the life that existed in such a compact and yet densely inhabited space. Here are some of the pictures of my trip and the pollinators I was able to capture in their daily routine:
Before reading the Stalter article, I thought the Highline may be a good example of a rambunctious garden by Emma Marris’ definition, because she pushes us to see any and all plots of land where plant/ animal life exists as nature, whether its an open pasture or surrounded by the worlds highest skyscrapers. From my previous visits, I was prepared to blindly walk down the strip and acknowledge a static scene of plant-life. However after my visit and reading Richard Stalter article, I was made privy to just how much live existed at the Highline and how the fact that it was an urban garden potentially help to aid this biodiversity.
Originally, before the planned reconstruction of the Highline, it had sprouted various plant-life and become somewhat of a “pristine garden” due to its lack of human contact. However, what I got from Stalter’s article is that the fact that the Highline grew out of and into an urban area with the incorporation of human interaction has lead to its increased biodiversity. Seeds, soils and minerals spread by winds, humans and pollinators from across the local city area along with the changing environmental conditions has created a home for opportunistic plants as well as those that thrive best at certain parts of the Highline. What I found interesting and a testament to the affect of environmental conditions on certain species, was how at the 29th street section of the Highline, woody species thrived due to the shadiness of the area. All in all what I could conclude both from my visit and the Stalter article is that not only does nature exist in urban areas, but urban areas and human contact can actually be beneficial to nature in certain cases.
Richard Stalter’s piece changed my view of the rambunctious garden that Marris describes because it presented he case that nature should not be shut away from human contact and that such contact may be a boon to a natural environment. Rather than just appreciating the nature in the urban areas around us we should become a part of the natural community I helping it thrive.
High Line and Stalter
The High Line is a unique park situated on abandoned elevated railroad tracks parallel to 10th Avenue between 13th and 34th Streets. In the past, the tracks were considered an eyesore that lowered nearby property values (Stalter 388). With the many changes made to preserve and transform the tracks into a park, the High Line is a beautiful green space in the middle of concrete that is loved by New York City residents and tourists alike.
Last Thursday I visited the High Line for the second time with Jenny. Despite the fact that my two visits were only about 3 months apart, I was still able to see some changes in the scenery. Both visits I started around the 23rd Street entrance and ended at 30th Street. Due to the change in seasons, many of the wild grasses and plants were beginning to wilt and the leaves on the bushes and trees began to change color. What surprised me was that there were still wildflower blooming. Between 23rd Street and 26th Street there were many little patches of yellow wildflowers, white wildflowers, and purple wildflowers scattered between tall grasses. I found it interesting that one species of these flowers would dominate that specific patch; if it was a patch of white flower plants, the entire patch was of the white flowers. Some pollinators we found in these blooming areas were a few different species of bees, flies, and birds. I found the High Line to be consistent with Stalter’s study in terms of species diversity. I was able to see a large variety of species simply by walking through the park. The environment initially seemed more grassy and meadow like, but as I walked further north, the grass and bushes changed to bigger shrubs and larger plants, having a forest, woodsy feel to it. Yet when we walked further into more sunlit areas, the plants were more meadow like once again.
The High Line fits with Marris’ idea of a rambunctious garden. The High Line is certainly an example of a “half-wild” garden tended by humans (Marris 2). Before the High Line was transformed, there were already examples of primary succession found on the tracks, showing that nature was already reclaiming the space that humans no longer used (Stalter 388). After the High Line was transformed, humans help maintain and preserve the plants. As the plants on the park continue to grow and bloom, people help encourage its growth. The High Line is nature thriving in the middle of a city.
Visit to the High Line
What used to be an elevated commercial railroad built to transport goods for more than thirty years, High Line is now a popular site for New Yorkers and tourists alike. The railroad was abandoned after the emergence of the Interstate Highway System, which made transportation of goods much easier and efficient. Some parts of the railroad were destructed and the demolition of the High Line was preferred by the real estate owners of the property beneath it. It guaranteed an increase in its property value (388, Stalter). The Railbanking program and Friends of the High Line together worked to preserve and not only to preserve but to transform the railroad to a public walkaway that exists today.
The park runs from Gansevoort Street to West 34th Streeth between 10th and 11th Avenues. Starting with the first section in 2009 followed by the second section three years later, it is now building its last section of the park which will continue until West 34th Streets.
Walking on the High Line, I was completely surrounded by different green plants and flowers of all colors yet when I fixed my gaze to a distance not too far off I saw the city filled with crowded tall buildings and streets. This rather fits Marris’ idea of a rambunctious garden. The point of the park is not to restore the already damaged nature to its “pristine wilderness” but to create more and more nature on the planet just as it is . Instead of the park existing apart from humanity, it exists with it. Plant succession on the High Line resulted in a wide variety of plant species and consequently pollinators (388, Stalter). Many could be seen throughout my walk on the park.
I personally believe that the park is amazing. It is in the middle of the bustling city and gives so much contrast and a peaceful resting place in the midst of a routine-led, hectic life. And an example that nature does not have to be untouched to be nature. Taking an abandoned railroad, more nature was created in the middle of one of the busiest and advanced cities in the world.
The Highline
When you think of nature and greenery in Manhattan you automatically think of Central Park. To be honest, I had never heard of the Highline but it sure did make a lasting impression on me. An elevated area of flowers and plants is an incredible sight that quickly grasps your attention. Many people come to sit on the benches and enjoy the surroundings of the beautiful city as well as this sort of out of place patch of elevated nature. As I walked around the Highline, I was struck by its layout. There were distinct walking areas surrounded by vast amounts of nature. What I noticed was a manhole that was hidden by some plants. This shows that humans, even though they do allow the greenery to grow naturally, they do provide a proper drainage system to make sure the plants aren’t overflowed during rains.
The Highline, located on Tenth Avenue between Gansevoort Street and West 34th, was an elevated commercial rail line built in the 1930s used to carry rail traffic above the New York streets. Currently, it’s a vast green escape for New Yorkers from the typical city blocks that include nothing but skyscrapers and taxis. The Highline is filled with lichens, mosses, plants, flowers, pollinators as we as birds that pay the area a visit. Walking through the Highline was a great experience. The small strip of nature brought a sense of peacefulness, which is really difficult to find in the big apple. The diverse plants brought numerous bees and other insects to pollinate the greenery.
The Highline definitely fits into Marris’s concept of the rambunctious garden. Marris believes that humans shouldn’t impede nature but rather attempt to restore it to a specific baseline. The Highline was abandoned during the 1980s leading to lichens, forbs, grasses and woody vegetarian to grow uncontrollably and most importantly, naturally over the area. Further, humans have transported many foreign species to the area, making it a developed and diverse scenery. According to Stalter’s study, over 161 species as well as 122 genera in 48 families can be found at the Highline. These facts justify why the Highline can e described as a rambunctious garden. The Highline was allowed to develop on its own without human intervention as well as being populated by foreign species. Marris would appreciate the Highline for its vast diversity of species as well as its beauty in a city that doesn’t have much green outside of Central Park.
HighLine
The High Line, rail line turned park, is situated on New York City’s West Side running along downtown Manhattan. It is home to vegetation and tourists. Both come from various corners of the world, but they all end up on a beautiful walkway. Plant species of all shape, sizes, and colors can be found on a great view of the city. The expansive plant life here at the High Line has flourished due to the help of supportive non-profit organizations such as the Friends of High Line and nature’s natural helpers. These natural helpers consist of several pollinators, including species such as bees, flies, and birds.
I have visited the high line several times before and the park still amazes me. The architectural design turns the park into a cultural tourist attraction for many. The park includes benches, several eateries, and even a glass overview of the traffic below. There is always music playing by the bands and musicians who come to play every time I visit. Some people even come to spend their time reading and sunbathing. The true beauty of the High Line is even further proven by the wedding couple and their photographer going around the park probably adding to their wedding album.
On my most recent visit to the High Line, the wind was quite strong. Nevertheless, I happened to come across the previously mentioned natural supporters. The bees flew from flower to flower, plant to plant, sometimes flowing with the current of the wind. After a quickly collecting some nectar, they would seamlessly float to the next plant. Once the temperature rose, more insects appeared. It was strange to see several areas lacked some pollinators. This is probably due to the different species or the interaction of human beings. I came across this one plant species where all three species of pollinators cohabited. Bees and flies flew from flower to flower without any disturbance. As I passed by, I noticed something inside the bussel of leaves. Birds were inside, sitting on the branches. Oddly enough, one of the birds didn’t seem to mind my photo taking. It is thanks to these pollinators that pollen and sometimes even seeds get passed on from plant to plant from all over the city.
Stalter’s paper, The Flora of the High Line describes the High Line in a way I find it very different from my own experiences. The High Line, according to Stalter, has several environmental variables including tall buildings that shade some plant life and human beings transporting seeds and cutting vegetation. However, the paper goes on to say that human beings leave tires, bottles and additional trash. On my experiences, I have not even noticed a single piece of trash among the plants or even on the board walks. The park seems quite clean and it retains its natural beauty amongst the jungle of the city. I do agree with the fact that since the park is present in an urban setting, it provides an example of Marris’ goal for a “rambunctious garden.” Numerous species of plant life dwell in the confides of a single park. Species of animals and insects live here and provide natural support to the well-being of the High Line. Human beings themselves seem to be quite respectful to their surroundings nowadays and any deliberate harmful interference is left at the lower street levels of Chelsea.
The High Line Response
I visited the High Line on September 20, 2012. It is a long strip of land ranging from Gansevoort Street to West 34th Street, between 10th and 11th Avenues. The High Line was built in the early 1930s as an elevated commercial rail line to carry congestive rail traffic above New York City streets. The High Line that I visited has been completely transformed since the railroad was abandoned. Now, the High Line is a beautiful path of nature that lives in the busiest city in the world. It really shows that even in a city as crowded, polluted, and urban as New York City, there can still exist a section of diverse plant life coexisting.
I feel that the High Line does fit many of Emma Marris’ concepts in “Rambunctious Garden.” It is a great example of humans working to preserve nature in a urbanized city like New York. It shows that even though humans have had influences all around the city, there can still be a strip of nature. The diverse species of flowers and pollinators are amazing to see in New York. The High Line goes with Emma Marris’ idea of connecting nature with humans rather than creating a distinct separation between the two. Furthermore, Richard Stalter’s article, “The flora on the High Line, New York City, New York,” supports the fact that the High Line does follow Emma Marris’ idea of the “rambunctious garden.” He states that “Human visitors to the High Line have probably inadvertently transported seeds to the site, a source of new species.” (Stalter 387) This shows that rather than claiming the High Line as tainted and unnatural because it has been affected by human actions, the High Line’s high species diversity is, in part, because of humans interacting with nature. The High Line is a clear example of nature that has been altered by humans, but is still considered to be pristine in its own way. The High Line has some of the most diverse plant species found in New York and is a common attraction. People appreciate the fact that there is a serene bed of nature along the streets of New York and I think that this is exactly what Marris was describing in “Rambunctious Garden.”
I think that the High Line is becoming a vital part of New York City. In the busy streets of New York, where people are yelling and screaming, it is nice to go to a calm and quiet place where there are flowers and bumblebees. There are not many places in New York City where people can see so many different types of pollinators in one place. The High Line has been a great addition to New York City since it represents the coexistence of nature and urbanization.
High Line and Stalter
The High Line is an elevated public park built on a freight rail. It is located on 10th Avenue, running between the 13th and 34th street. It contains about 20 blocks of area. I visited the High Line on September 22, 2012 at 3:00pm. It was an amazing experience since it was the first time I visited it. In my opinion, the park is the combination of nature, aesthetic, and humanity. With various plants on the side, artistic rock benches and fixtures and walkway create a beautiful and pleasant aura for visitors to enjoy their walk. The park is also full of different species of pollinators that fly from plant to plant. I could only encounter a few species of pollinators. I noticed a large amount of bees throughout the park, with small amounts of birds and other insects.
The High Line carried commercial freight form 1934 to 1980. It became abandoned when Interstate highway system encouraged truck transportation that led to the decline in rail freight. When the High Line was abandoned, Friends of the High Line fought to preserve the High Line from being demolished. Due to their effort, the High Line became a public park and pedestrian walkway that contains a high diversity of flora and fauna.
When the High Line was first created, it accumulated a shallow level of soil and organic matters as a result of the cycles of growth and death of the pioneer plants (Stalter 390). As materials and trash are being smothered into the soil and plants by train and wind, the mineral abundance of the soil increased. Also, soil compaction and fire led to greater soil quality. New species were introduced due to unintentional transport of seeds by human visitation. When Friends of the High Line transformed the abandoned rail into the High Line public park, species were introduced on newly deposited volcanic ash on sites where plants did not exist (Stalter 388). The history of human intervention created a variety of habitats that contributed to the species richness of the park today.
The High Line is a great example of a rambunctious garden. As Emma Marris stated, “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” (Marris 3). In other words, rambunctious garden is to allow human to work with nature instead of restoring our environment to its pristine look. We are to create green spaces by selecting the desired plants and/or maintaining the plants that are there already to create a “garden” of biodiversity. In a sense, the High Line is a garden because the New York City parks department maintains it. In a garden, we water our plants and decide which species to stay in the space to achieve our goal, whether it is to enhance the beauty of the property or to increase the biodiversity of the garden. The same goes with the High Line, plants were selected to plant in the area and some species were maintained to achieve a rambunctious garden that has a high biodiversity.
High Line & Stalter
The High Line, situated on an abandoned elevated railroad track along 10th Avenue, is stark contrast from the streets and traffic below on the West Side of Manhattan. During a simple stroll down the park’s pathway, it is easy to be transported away from the fast-paced city to a tranquil garden.
The abundant patches of flowers that line the path of both sides of the park attract a variety of pollinators. During my visit on September 20, it was hard to find any other pollinators other than a variety of bees. The cool breeze, coupled with the fact that I toured the area in the late afternoon (3:30PM-5:00PM), made both finding and capturing pictures of pollinators slightly more challenging. It was easiest to find pollinators in the vibrantly colored flowers in the Wildflower Field between 26th and 29th Streets, the Chelsea Grasslands by 18th Street and the Diller-Von Furstenberg Sundeck and Water Feature by 16th Street, especially uninhibited sunlight shined on the flora.
The High Line exemplifies Marris’s idea of a “rambunctious garden” well. According to Marris, the “rambunctious garden is everywhere…in parls. On farms, in the strips of land attached to rest stops and fast-food joints, …even in city traffic circles” (2). The rambunctious garden is one that takes advantage of what an area has to offer and transforms it into a sustainable form of “nature”, or as close to nature as it can become. The conversion of old railroad tracks into what is now the High Line park shows how nature can be created anywhere, even amidst the streets of New York City. With the help of pollinators, including the bumble and honey bees that enjoy the sweet pollen of the planted flora, the various species of plants are able to thrive year after year. Marris supports creating and embracing nature that may not be “pristine”. Despite the fact that the plants in the High Line were placed in the artificially made park, it can still be considered more natural than most any other part of urbanized New York City.
The findings in the Stalter piece show just how successful Marris’s version of “nature” can be in an urban area. With just a bit of hard work, the Friends of the High Line foundation was able to cultivate “161 species in 122 genera in 48 families” of flora (Stalter 388). More than half of these species are native to New York as well, proving that it is possible to recreate conditions to help restore some lost nature. Surprisingly, Stalter’s research found the High Line to have a “species richness…greater than species richness at four nearby New York City sites…[and] may have one of the highest levels of species richness (38.8 sp/ha) of any temperature zone urban environment in the region” (389). Stalter’s data shows how well the flora in the High Line are flourishing and how much it resembles the natural flora makeup of a New York City patch of nature despite the fact that it was crafted by humans.
High Line and Stalter
I visited the High Line for the first time on September 20th. After my visit to the High Line, I can definitely say that it is a fantastic place for people to relax and enjoy the scenery around the place. In fact, there was a very peaceful atmosphere on the High Line. Many people were just sitting on the benches or enjoying the surroundings on this elevated railroad. They also did not seem to mind the many pollinators scattered throughout the High Line. While people were relaxing and enjoying the scenery, my group and I were seeking out for pollinators in the area.
The High Line is a place filled with many different plants, insects, birds, and other species. While I could not find many stationary birds in the area, there were quite a number of insects. Of course, many of these insects were pollinators. One of the more common pollinators on the High Lines was the bee. The bees were often found on the pedals of brightly colored flowers including lavender pedals and white-color pedals. I often saw bees with different color and size on various plants, so this shows some of the diversity in the High Line. There were also other insects in the area including a ladybug-like insect and a small orange insect. These pollinators were sometimes difficult to spot due to their small presence.
The High Line is also a great example of a “rambunctious garden.” In Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World, Marris describes rambunctious gardens happening everywhere in the world. Instead of building walls around nature, people live and interact with the nature. When I saw the High Lines with my group of classmates, I noticed how seamless people interacted with nature. People were not really isolated from the city or from nature. Instead, people seem to be living with nature and accepting what they see on the High Line. It was refreshing to see this. However, this “rambunctious garden” is not perfect. I noticed that there was a small green wire that fenced the plants to the side of the High Line. In a way, this shows some separation between people and nature.
Stalter’s article on the diversity of the High Line supports the idea of a “rambunctious garden.” According to Stalter, humans have greatly influenced the High Line by transporting seeds into the area and by trampling and cutting vegetation. Some people will argue that the High Line is not “pristine” for these two reasons. They are right because the High Line is far from pristine. Many of the species in the High Line were probably accidently transported from a distant land. Even though the High Line may not be “pristine,” it has a peaceful atmosphere where humans and all types of species can interact in the area. This idea of people and nature coexisting and living together definitely supports the idea of a “rambunctious garden.” Perhaps this is the direction we can take to conserve nature in the future.
The High Line
Exploring the High Line this week was a truly eye-opening experience for me, especially being that I had never gone there before. My first impression was that while the elevated park seemed to be well maintained by humans, it also appeared to be an entity in and of itself. The High Line seemed to be more “wild” than other parks I had visited. The plants seemed to be growing in a manner that was less concerned with aesthetics, but more of a natural pattern for them to grow. Some species were even growing out onto the pathway and interfering with human traffic. This was a stark contrast to the seemingly permanent and definite lines between “nature” and “humanity” seen in other parks. There seems to always be a clear boundary between walking paths and nature in other parks, while at the High Line the boundary seemed to be skewed in places. Another thing that struck me about the High Line was the presence of the old railroad tracks. It was interesting to see how the wildlife had taken over these relics of days gone by and grown around and in some cases even through the tracks. I think the High Line overall, and especially the case of the railroad tracks, relates to Emma Marris’ concept of a “Rambunctious Garden.” By definition, something is rambunctious if it is lively and high-spirited. I think that Marris is using this word in the sense that her concept of nature is life in places you would least expect it. Nature doesn’t have to be a pristine forest untouched by human hands, but can be an elevated park, with various plants growing around man-made objects such as railroad tracks.
One of my first impressions of the High Line was that while it was a really interesting place, there seemed to be a lack of variety in the species there. I walked the entire length of the path and felt that a majority of the wildlife looked quite similar. I was surprised when I read the Stalter article to learn that the High Line is one of the most diverse areas of New York City. There are more species per hectare on the High Line than on Ellis Island, Liberty Island, and Bayswater State Park. This was even more impressive when I thought about how hard it must be for species to adapt to such a different environment like the High Line. For there to be more species there than in some of the most well-known “nature” areas of the city is quite remarkable.
Along my journey through the High Line I took note of any native pollinators I saw. For the most part there seemed to be high quantities of bumblebees wherever there was a patch of flowers. The bumblebee community seemed to be spread across the length of the High Line. I also noticed some type of beetle towards the southern part of the park. They were orange and black in color and at one point about 50 were swarmed onto a single plant. I’m not sure how much pollinating these creatures do as it was unclear if they could fly, but I found it interesting that there was a cluster of so many of them.
Stalter, Marris, and the High Line
So far, we have discussed Emma Marris’s Rambunctious Garden extensively, a book that criticizes old-fashioned efforts of conservation and considers a new image of nature, existing in our very own backyards, from rural to urban places. Additionally, as background for this assignment, we read Richard Stalter’s The flora on the High Line, a piece that aims to “document the licens, bryophytes and vascular plants present at the High Line” by listing data sets on the different species that exist on the High Line (389). My visit to the High Line confirmed much of what Stalter said in terms of the species diversity at the High Line, and it supported Marris’s concept of a rambunctious garden, although not entirely.
Pollinators such as birds and honey bees were present along with a diverse population of plants throughout the High Line. Colors and variations of the plants had a wide range, from grasslands full of red forbs to tall, ordinarily colored thickets full of shrubs. This follows in line with what Stalter calls the two main “plant communities exist[ing] on the High Line, the forb/grassland community and successional thicket community” (389).
In the second picture, you can see the dominance of two types of forb sections adjacent to one another. This diversity is found throughout the High Line, as is shown in the other pictures shown here. Also, the presence of shrub and grassland communities side-by-side in some places verifies Stalter when he says that shurbs were “components of both the forb/grassland and…thicket communities described above” (389).
The High Line’s species richness is due to humans, who have “probably inadvertently transported seeds to the site, a source of new species,” according to Stalter. This would also probably fall in line with Marris’s rambunctious garden, which certainly emphasizes human involvement in nature and a history of invasive, nonnative species all around the world.
However, the “selective maintenance to arrest plant succession [that] will be needed to maintain and preserve the present assemblage of vascular plant species” that Stalter describes is too similar to the ironic controlled wildernesses that Marris encounters and highlights in a negative light in her book (388). Yet, does this maintenance and conservation relate to the idea of pristine nature that Marris uses so heavily as a point of criticism? It certainly could, but the High Line is half wilderness and half for tourists, like Yellowstone Park – I don’t think Marris would completely support the High Line’s existence.
The High Line was essentially abandoned and left to various species to colonize the area and form communities successively; and now, it is a popular tourist destination and place of “natural beauty” for all New Yorkers to freely enjoy, surrounded by condominiums and construction. Even if Marris thinks that the natural beauty of a place like this is a flawed, politically correct image, I can’t help but think instinctually that the High Line should be conserved for exactly that.
High Line
On Thursday September 20, I went to visit the High Line with a few of my classmates. The High Line is an elevated railroad that was used to carry freight between buildings up until the 1980s. It is located between 10th and 11th avenue and runs from Gansevoort Street to West 34th street. The High Line was in threat of being demolished in the early 2000s but a group called Friends of the High Line decided that it needed to be saved. They vouched for the High Line to be transformed into a public park and construction on this project began in June 2006, with the first section of the park opening in 2009.
The High Line is a very interesting and beautiful place. It is so unusual to see so much nature not only in an urban environment, but also living and thriving on something that had an industrial use. What makes the High Line even more interesting are the findings of the study called “The Flora of the High Line” by Richard Statler. This study found that the High Line actually has a very high amount of species diversity. In fact, the High Line had more species per hectare than Ellis Island, Liberty Island, Hoffman Island, and Bayswater State Park. These findings are hard to believe because one would think that there would be not that many species in such an urban environment. The species diversity at the High Line really makes me appreciate it more.
The High Line fits Emma Marris’ concept of a “Rambunctious Garden.” Marris’ main point is that we should not isolate nature is a so-called pristine state, but let nature adapt to its modern surroundings. Marris argues that nature is very resilient and can survive in urban environments and that it is better to practice this kind of conservation rather than isolating nature. The High Line proves Marris’ point that nature is resilient and can adapt. Even though it is located in a very urban area, the High Line has species diversity and hosts many pollinators.
The High Line is one of the finer points in New York City. It provides a nice retreat to a quiet area that is still in the city. It is home to a variety of species that would not have been in that area of the city if not for the High Line. The High Line is a marvel of nature that adds a lot of value to New York City.
sources:
http://www.thehighline.org/about/high-line-history
Statler, Richard. “The Flora of the High Line.” The Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society 131.4 (2004): 387-393. Print.
The High Line
I have found myself at the High Line about ten times since its opening, primarily to stroll around, rest, and take pictures. Most of the time I completely ignored the different species that inhabit the High Line and focused on the architecture and buildings surrounding the place. Paying specific attention to the different plant and insect species around the High Line made me realize how rich nature actually is on the High Line.
I primarily walked around the Chelsea area of the High Line and was surprised by the number of different plants and insects in the section. I mainly saw different species of bees, butterflies and flies flying around and pollinating different fall plants. I took the bulk of my pictures near the 23rd street entrance where there were plenty of bees around what appeared to be some Autumn Bride hairy alumroots, lesser calamints, and several other grasses and plants. The bees were primarily bumblebees (I think), one with a darker abdomen and one with yellow and black belts. There was also a fly that I could not identify that was restingon a leaf near some grasses.
After looking at the High Line with the scope of a “rambunctious garden,” I think that the High Line is a great example of the concept. A rambunctious garden should be nature that is half let free to operate on its own and half managed by humans. However, at first sight, the High Line could be seen as managed by humans a little too much. Many plant species are sectioned off and not exactly allowed to grow “wildly,” but the redeeming factor is that the renovation of the High Line tracks focused on planting most of the native species and resistant species that grew on the rails before. Allowing the native species to grow while “gardening” the area to fit in an urban environment makes the High Line a good example of the rambunctious garden.
The information in Statler’s paper does not change my viewpoint of the High Line being a rambunctious garden. Before the renovation of the High Line, the tracks were rambunctious because of human activity, meaning that our presence changed the composition of the ecosystem by making it very species diverse. With the renovations, we see an actual “gardening” aspect of human influence on the ecosystem. By renovating the area, the High Line became more suitable for the urban environment, and instead of being destroyed, it preserved many native species on the track. Statler’s paper does provide interesting information on how the High Line’s current plant population is so diverse.
Rambunctious Garden – Rewilding
In chapters three and four of Rambunctious Garden, Marris introduces the concept of “rewilding.” Rewilding aims to restore ecosystems to a point before human interaction by introducing large predators similar to ones that once dominated the environment. Though rewilding may be a good idea, it does however have numerous faults and risks.
The main goal of rewilding is to restore ecosystems to their once fruitful existence by promoting the protection of species and biodiversity. It has been know that for the last few hundred years, humans have had a great negative effect on the environment. In the process, countless species have gone extinct. In order to restore some order and attempt to reverse the damages done to the environment, governments have implemented laws and programs and conservationists all over the world have been practicing their own methods.
Rewilding is one of the methods aimed at restoring an ecosystem to its pervious state. “Rewilding” is a term coined by Dave Forman and it proposes that, “the main factors necessary to keep ecosystems resilient and diverse are the regulation provided by large, top-of-the-food-chain predators; the room for these predators to do their work; and connections between predator ranges so they can meet, mate, and maintain a healthily diverse gene pool.” Essentially due to the fact that a number of the larger species have died off, there are now few predators to control the population of the middle-sized species, which results in the middle-sized species feasting on the smaller-sized and eventually eliminating in such a manor. Thus, by introducing larger sized predators into ecosystems, the population sizes of the other species can be controlled and all will be well.
One of the prevalent problems with rewilding is that after humans were introduced into the ecosystems thousands of years ago, we were essentially just another species. Ecosystems, since then, have evolved to adapt to us and so they will continue now. I believe that we are essentially no different from the lion or the shark, which dominate over their environments. Wildlife and sea life have adapted to them, so our environments are most likely adapting to us.
Though “rewilding” seems like a great idea and one that is destined to work, I believe there has to be some more studies and research before going forward and taking action. One must really understand what is actually a similar species and be aware of the negative consequences of taking such great risks.
The High Line & Stalter
I have been to the High Line several times. It is a park created on abandoned railroad tracks, currently stretching from 10th Avenue, West 13th Street to West 34th Street. The idea of a beautiful oasis or Marris’ “rambunctious garden” in the midst of bustling New York City is riveting, making it a hot tourist attraction. The fact that this is all on vintage railways makes it even more fascinating. People and nature come together. Many would enjoy its variety of flora and fauna. I did, but never paid close attention to them at an ecological standpoint. This assignment certainly opened my eyes to the different species of plants and animals on the High Line, and how they interact with one another. I was particularly interested in several species of pollinators.
I went to visit the High Line on September 20th, from 1pm to 3pm. There was evidence that Fall was just around the corner. It was windy with the temperature at mid 70s… Some flora had dried out. There were leaves on the ground and trees were changing color. Hence, it was surprising for me to find various species of bees pollinating flowers. In fact, I found different types of bees pollinating the same flora. Two types of pollinators I observed were the bumble bee and the honey bee. The first honey bee I saw was darker in color. It was pollinating the asteraceae flora. According to Stalter, the asteraceae is one of “largest families of flora” present on the High Line. The second honey bee I saw was more yellow in color, pollinating purple colored flora and rosa multiflora. The bumble bee was pollinating the same flora.
This eye-opening visit to the High Line made me acknowledge its great diversity. As I walked through the park, I saw different insects including bees, crickets, pill bugs, flies, and butterflies. I also saw birds frolicking in between the grass. At the same time, there were so many people walking through the High Line. There were also people having lunch on their terraces next to the High Line. After reading Marris’ Rambunctious Garden, I looked at the park with a whole new perspective. Not only is it a pretty place to relax and enjoy the view, it demonstrates an anthropocene. Humans walk through these grasslands. At the same time, they are disturbing ecosystems by “trash deposition, trampling, soil compaction and fire” (Stalter 390). Although these activities are not necessarily good things, they create the High Line we see today – changing habitats that account for diversity. With every visit to the High Line in the future, I will definitely close attention to the variety of flora and fauna in the middle of New York City.
The Highline
My very own rambunctious garden, right in my backyard—who would’ve thought? The Highline, a converted elevated railway track on Tenth Avenue between Gansevoort Street and West 34th, is an unexpected strip of nature in our concrete jungle. Once I walked up the steel steps overlooking the brick buildings that surround it, the Highline instantaneously transported me to a different place entirely. This walk of flora is home to various birds and bees, plants and pollinators. The variety of flowers and plants attract a diverse population of bees and insects—all of which buzzed freely among the greenery and around our heads.
In regard to Emma Marris’ idea of a “Rambunctious Garden,” I believe The Highline is just that. This strip of nature epitomizes the anthropocene that Marris discusses in her novel. Nature and humanity interact at the Highline, which not only exemplifies an anthropocene, but urban ecology. Not only is this area an attraction to tourists and residents for its aesthetic appeal, but this anthropocenic environment is medicinal to us city-dwellers looking for a little wildlife. This rambunctious garden was manmade, sure, but that’s beside the point. What matters most about The Highline is its function as a place for people to conserve and connect with nature.
Though I understand Richard Stalter’s argument about the transformation of The Highline’s natural evolutionary development during its days of abandonment, I don’t believe that the manmade garden was necessarily detrimental in any way. Stalter, in my opinion, comes off as one of the more extreme or intense conservationists who favor a laissez-faire ecosystem. I, on the other hand, acknowledge that an untouched area like the once-abandoned railway may have boasted more ecological or bio-diversity, but its functionality was zero to none. The interaction, or “engineering”, of the environment by man may be unnatural to an extent, but it’s a modern concept that allowed for a beneficial and highly popular park in Manhattan. In this case specifically, I agree that species introduction and transportation is positive. Nature can now be better experienced and appreciated due to the introduction of plants and animals, native or not, to that railway. The Highline is an escape from our concrete jungle, that I’ll be sure to visit time and again.
The High Line and Stalter
On Thursday, September 20th, 2012, I visited the High Line for the first time. I must admit that I was a bit surprised by the atmosphere. I could not believe how this one strip of land had developed in an urban neighborhood. The contrast between the High Line and its surrounding neighborhood was remarkable.
While visiting the High Line, I took many pictures of pollinators in the area. There were many different species of pollinators including bees, flies, and butterflies. One of the more common pollinators was the eastern bumble bee, which was found pollinating the compass plant near West 21st Street. Another common pollinator was the honey bee, which was found pollinating the broadleaf ironweed near West 16th Street. The long-horned bee was another common pollinator, which was found pollinating the compass plant near West 19th Street. Another common pollinator was the leafcutter bee, which was found pollinating the aromatic aster near West 12th Street. In addition to bees, there were many flies that were pollinating plants in the area. For example, there were green flies and cluster flies. These flies were seen on many sections throughout the High Line but were too quick to capture on camera. Another pollinator that was seen but not captured on camera was a white butterfly and a butterfly that was orange and had black spots. One interesting note about the pollinators on the High Line was that many of the species coexisted and did not seem to dominate over one particular area.
The High Line definitely fits into Marris’s concept of Rambunctious Garden. This is because Marris preaches that no ecosystem is pristine. She takes a laissez-faire approach to ecosystem management and believes that humans should not interfere with ecosystems and attempt to restore them to a specific baseline. Marris finds beauty in the new ecosystems that are being created today. She would definitely think of the High Line in a positive way. This is because the ecosystem on the High Line developed naturally after the railroad that used to run there was abandoned in 1980. Primary succession is occurring on the High Line and there are many lichens, shrubs, and mosses that have developed in the area, as shown by Richard Stalter. In addition, humans have transported foreign species to the area and have altered the habitat. However, as Stalter points out, these human alterations might explain why the High Line has one of the most diverse species populations in New York City. Stalter’s study shows that the High Line contains at least 161 species in 122 genera and 48 families and that the High Line has greater species richness than four nearby New York City sites including Bayswater State Park and Ellis Island. These facts show that the High Line would definitely fit into Marris’s concept of Rambunctious Garden. This is because the High Line has been allowed to develop on its own with very little interference and is still a beautiful place. In addition, people have added invasive species to the High Line and have altered it, but it still functions beautifully. Although it is not pristine, it is still naturally beautiful and very high in species diversity. Marris would consider the High Line to be a beneficial novel ecosystem.
Stalter’s research definitely has changed my viewpoint on ecology. This is because it is very interesting to see that a habitat could develop in an urban area and still be very rich in species diversity. His article makes me realize that there is no need for constant maintenance of ecosystems because they can develop on their own. Therefore, after reading the Stalter article and visiting the High Line, I believe my view on ecosystems has drawn closer to Marris’s view.
I think what was done to the High Line was a great idea. Abandoning the railroad and turning it into a pedestrian walkway is great for the city. Not only does it attract tourists, but it also attracts new and exotic species to the area. The High Line allows ecologists to study primary succession in an urban environment. It also acts as an escape for New Yorkers who want to get away from the stresses of urban life. In addition, the High Line can act as a prototype for the development of similar areas in other cities. All in all, I believe the High Line is great for New York City.
The Highline
Walking through The Highline, a bustling, new park created from an abandoned railroad track running along 10th avenue from West 34th Street to Gansevoort Street in the Meatpacking District, it’s hard to picture it as anything but a tourist attraction. However, if you take a closer look, it becomes apparent that The Highline is also home to a number of unique plant and pollinator species. Different sections of the walkway feature a variety of different plants and flowers, along with which come the pollinators – in any given area where there are flowers, there are groups of bees and other insects circling the area.
The Highline, in my opinion, is a perfect example of Emma Marris’ idea of a “Rambunctious Garden”. Here, in the middle of a crowded New York City, sits an elevated park surrounded by nature you can’t find anywhere else in the vicinity. Plants, flowers, and trees line the sides of the busy park, as tourists and residents alike line the walkways, admiring the nature, the views, taking in some sun, among other leisurely activities. This combination of people and nature is exactly the essence of the kind of anthropocene that Marris imagines, one in which each compliments the other. The nature of The Highline is one of its main attractions for people, and those same people are the ones helping preserve that natural element of the park. Instead of a world where people and nature are constantly at odds, creating a “rambunctious garden” such as The Highline combines the best of both worlds, allowing us to live with nature while also preserving it.
Richard Stalter’s article about the flora of The Highline, which existed long before the transformative project took place, does not do much to change my opinion regarding the rambunctious garden that has been created as a result. Although Stalter’s article mentions a number of various species and families of plants that have sprung up on The Highline as a result of its long abandon, I don’t think that this project has taken away from it’s natural composition. Before, while it may have been more ecologically diverse and untouched, it was basically an abandoned wasteland in the middle of the city. It had no recreational or aesthetic value, so it was largely a waste of space. With this new project, although largely ‘engineered’ in the sense of which species were introduced to the area, it’s natural element was preserved and even actively enhanced. This new Highline creates the perfect balance of nature and human recreation, which I see as a great idea for the future of our conservation efforts, especially in urban settings such as New York City.
Post 9/22/12: High Line Park
The High Line Park is an exquisite example of a metropolitan take on nature. Situated atop an abandoned railway, the longitudinal park is filled with various sorts of flora, from grass and flowers to shout and sturdy trees. The plants are not randomly dispersed about the railway, as the trees are concentrated to a shaded area near the north end of the park, while smaller growths can be seen in patches throughout the area.
Many of the pictures taken here are situated at around 20th Street and under (the fuller growths on the northward end made for poor images with my shoddy photography).
Evidently, a large quantity of my pictures taken included bees as the pollinator of choice. This is due to their larger bodies (relative to the tiny flies) and their yellow-black contrast made them easier targets for photography. Were I an actual biologist, I’d hazard my photographic skills would not get me far. Nevertheless, I also captured an image of (presumably) butterflies, white, fluttery and commonly seen flitting from place to place within the metropolis (they might be moths; if so then my mistake).
That one was a small bird, a youngling I presumed, and though it is probably not a pollinator, it was a convenient photo to take nonetheless. Photography is an art form, and that one was nice (compared to the other few dozen failures fortunately not seen here).
And yes, I was there. Although it has apparently been a significant amount of time since my last incursion; I did not recall small food stands in one of the underpasses on my last trip. I don’t think it’s a terribly intrusive addition to the park, but it does limit the traffic somewhat.
The High Line Park is a modest example of what Marris wishes to establish as a Rambunctious Garden. It is a space that, instead of being carelessly cut down for scrap (which would be a task in its own right), was refurbished to attract wildlife. Granted, it was already encouraging a variety of flora prior to its renovation, suggested by Stalter that it was partially due to the uncommon human traffic upon the closed system. It is not assisted migration per se, though it bears some semblance of rewilding. In fact, it may very well be the preservationist idea that Marris is so vehemently trying to discourage. And yet, perhaps because of its recent baseline, one couldn’t really call it a preserve in the conventional sense of using a much older baseline (pre-Columbian or pre-Anthropocene, for instance).
There was likely some destruction of such “pest” species in the construction of the High Line, as well as some research into what was “naturally” there when it became derelict. From what I could gather, it did seem more limited than the catalogue that Stalter was able to scrounge up. Of course, I’m no plant expert, so similar plants may have been recorded and I could have simply overlooked their subtleties. Yet, given all of the wildlife it has attracted (birds, some insects, a TON OF BEES, and a dragonfly that was persistently hovering over my head the entire time), who’s to say new species won’t enter the park in due time?
Thus, the High Line is something of a compromise between preservationists and Marris. There was destruction and displacement of some species, while others were reintroduced and/or encouraged. There was a presumed baseline for the renovation, yet it is recent enough to be accepting of some of Marris’ nonconventional ideas. It may not be what Marris envisioned—not by a long shot—but it’s a start, and with potential global catastrophes looming, any foothold is a good lead.
High Line/Statler
When Emma Marris talks about the “Rambunctious Garden,” she stresses the concept of “creating more nature” by avoiding the notion that the only areas that can be appreciated as nature are those that are as pristine as they were long ago. In an interview for her book, Rambunctious Garden, Marris shows viewers a patch of land between two roads that many might not consider to be “nature”. She opposes this view throughout her book, however, and stresses the importance of appreciating the nature that surrounds us, whether that be “pristine wilderness” or not.
The patch of land Marris shows us in her interview is comparable to the High Line as both areas are surrounded by urban, industrialized structures and have been managed by humans. I have a new found appreciation for such places as the High Line that are only made possible through human intervention. Prior to recognizing the High Line as one of these places, I was skeptical regarding the concept of “selective maintenance” that is so necessary in these places (Statler). I now recognize the true beauty and wonders of such places that, without human intervention, would not be able to host such vast biodiversity as the High Line does. The High Line is a prime example of Marris’ approach to what can be classified as nature. Even though the High Line does not look identical to, nor remotely close to, what it looked like thousands of years ago, it is still a place where one can observe nature.
Although approximately 50% of the Highline’s species are native and this aspect is not essential for Marris’ classification of a place as nature, the majority of the High Line’s characteristics are parallel to Marris’ perspectives. One such parallel idea is the idea that “the factors and forces involved with community development at the High Line may be similar to the factors and forces associated with primary succession” (Statler). Marris brings up the concepts of assisted migration or rewilding that also contribute to natural cycles such as growth from grass to shrubs and trees. Humans have had a significant impact throughout the High Line’s history, both during its time as a railway and now through the “Friends of the Highline’s” maintenance of the park.
After my eye-opening visit to the High Line, my opinions regarding human intervention were further reinforced by Statler’s paper. I was pleased to learn that “the High Line may have one of the highest levels of species richness (38.8 sp/ha) of any temperate zone urban environment in the region,” (Statler), despite not being untouched
or unaffected by humans. Human intervention, on the contrary, may be among the factors that have enabled the region to be so diverse. According to Statler, “several factors may contribute to the high vascular plant species diversity on the High Line,” ranging from “human visitation” to “trampling and soil compaction” as their combined influence “may account for the multiplicity of everchanging habitats which may account for high species diversity on the High Line” (Statler).
Upon first being introduced to human maintenance of nature, I was skeptical of the concept.
After revisiting the High Line, a place I enjoy bringing visitors from Sweden, a country where nature is often as rambunctious as Marris describes it as, I recognized that a favorite place of mine is indeed one of these places that are only made possible through the human intervention that Emma Marris describes in Rambunctious Garden.
Rambunctious Garden 1-2
In Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World, Emma Marris examines the incorrect way that people view conservation and presents her own view to the way nature should be treated. She explains that natures is not pristine, it always evolves and constantly changes. Instead of striving to protect and restore a “pristine wilderness,” Marris suggests we follow strive for the “rambunctious garden” that coincides with human existence and interaction.
In the first chapter, Marris presents that her “book is about a new way of seeing nature.” She criticizes the long-held belief that nature should be restores to state of its past. She examines numerous examples of ecologists ridding ecosystems of their invasive species, reintroducing native species, and attempting to bring habitats to their previous positions. Marris proved these attempts flawed by explaining that nature and ecosystems are ever-changing and do not possess a point of static. She quoted Heraclitus, “the only constant in nature is change itself.”
Another flaw in determining what the “pristine wilderness” was like, is that there is little documentation of what species existed at a certain time and the state that the ecosystem was in.
In the second chapter, Marris conveys the conservationists as being stuck in the past “romantics” that are striving for a nature that is pristine and before human presence. This goal of achieving a “pristine wilderness” is proven flawed when ecologists are unable to come to a conclusion as to the baseline of an ecosystem. Some believe it was before the Europeans settled the Americas but this idea is also flawed because before the Europeans arrived, indigenous people have been cultivating, hunting, and changing nature for hundreds of years.
She presents the Yellow Stone model of conservation where millions of indigenous were relocated in order to protect the nature of the region. “The irony is that they were doing the least harm—after all, that is why their land had sufficient nature to interest conservationists in the first place.” She further explains that ecologists are only recently beginning to understand that protected areas do not have to be depopulated in order to work and a link between humans and nature can also result in positive reinforcement.
I agree with the points that Marris brings up in the first two chapters that nature is ever flowing, it is never static, and that human interaction with nature is something that we should not fight but embrace. I believe that removing humans from the equation of nature would mean that we should remove all species from nature because essentially plants and animals also rob resources from nature. Though it is definitely known that humans have done the most harm, I believe that this is just another adaptation that nature will make and as Aho stated, “You can’t become attached to one particular snapshot. Part of the beauty of ecology is its change.”
Assisted Migration
Human-caused climate change is greatly affecting the animals that inhabit the Earth. Carbon dioxide, methane and emission of other gases have gradually but definitely warmed the planet over the many years. Not only is the Earth getting hotter, it’s climate patterns are getting more unpredictable. “…a world in which some places get more rain, others less (74).” And the impact of this antropogenic climate change is huge for the majority of the animals that thrive better in certain temperatures.
The first example Marris gives is the American Pika. Pikas are very sensitive to the temperature of the environment in which they live. Experiments have proven that Pikas will die in 78 degree Fahrenheit heat in just a few hours (73). As the planet is getting warmer, they are moving higher up the mountain escaping from the climate changes in their usual habitats. But they can only move up higher for so much longer. Pikas will eventually reach the peak of the mountain and even the highest will become too warm for them to survive in. So to help the animals that are suffering because of humans’ dominance over nature, ecologists have come up with assisted migration. It is simply moving species from one place to another that is better and preferred by the species. Humans caused the climate change that may result in extinctions of many different animals and assisted migration is our hopeful attempt at saving the innocent ones who are suffering because of us.
There are, however, many concerns that arises from assisted migration. The process is definitely not natural. It is clearly human interference and disturbance on the Earth’s ecosystem. Marris makes the point that, “after a lifetime studying the infinitely complex workings of existing ecosystem, the idea of taking a species from one into the other willy-nilly sounds like a terrible idea (77).” Similar to rewilding, no one knows how the migrated species will adapt to their new environment. Whether they will not only survive but thrive or become invasive species or just die out. Our knowledge of the species and what they need to survive is very limited. They can easily be detrimentally affected by something as small as “some specific soil microbes or microclimatic condition” (77). Another problem is that not all troubled species can be moved and saved. As Marris mentions, species with more sentimental value as well as “well-loved species with rich and leisured supporters” will probably be migrated to a better home. But for the majority of the others, they will just remain to deal with the climate change themselves, move on their own and find their new habitat on their own, or eventually die out completely. After all, assisted migration is not going to be cheap to complete.
I think assisted migration is going to work and help save many animals from being extinct from this planet forever. I do believe that we’ve come to a sad place, that our dominance have been and continues to harm other living species that are equally as deserving as we are to live on Earth and to enjoy the fullness of nature. Humans do not own the planet but we act like we do and have caused great harm to others that inhabit it. It seems like the least we can do is move them to a better environment .
Rambunctious Garden Ch.5 Assisted Migration
Ecologist, conservationist, and the public in general have assumed that conservation means to keep things as natural and in place as possible. In Assisted Migration, chapter 5, of the Rambunctious Garden, Marris brings up an issue that changes the way we think of keeping species in their native areas: climate change. Anthropogenic carbon emissions have essentially changed Earth’s atmosphere, making the general climate hotter, and even changing regular precipitation patterns that some flora and fauna cannot survive in. Because of these changes, many species of animals begin to migrate to areas of more favorable conditions. However, there are some species that cannot migrate to another habitat on their own, and helplessly have to live in the environment.
In this chapter Marris begins with the dilemma conservationists face with saving the pika species in an environment that they cannot further survive in because of climate changes caused by humans. She initially sets a tone that persuades the reader that it is ethically necessary to save these “small flower-nibbling mammals” through assisted migration. This may seem like an easy fix; however there are many long-term issues that assisted migration will bring up. First of all, it would disrupt the environment that the species is taken from, and the environment that they are moved to. Species do move around; however the unnatural picking up and dropping off a species in a wild, unknown environment, even if it is similar to their own, is too abrupt for them to adapt to.
This problem creates a huge dilemma in the ecologist and conservationist community. Moving a species from one habitat to another can severely harm both of the environments. However, nobody wants to see a species die out in their own environment because of the mistakes and problems that we made. Looking at climatic changes through an evolutionary and natural selection stand point, it would be assumed that animals will learn to adapt to their changing environments. The pika’s that can are the “fittest” in a hotter climate will survive and become dominant in their species, thus we would have pika’s that are resistant to the heat. But the rate of climatic changes is probably too fast for an entire species to reproduce and have a mutation of pika that can resist heat. And so because of these reasons, I cannot say if assisted migration is a useful scientific tool or not because it has severe pros and cons to it.
Assisted Migration
Assisted migration is the process of relocating various species from an environment in which they are struggling to live to a more suitable habitat. This practice stems from the recent observations of different organisms finding it difficult to survive in their environments because of climate change. As global warming continues to raise temperatures across the globe, more and more species will be desperate to escape to cooler areas. For those who are not physically capable of doing so themselves, the act of assisted migration comes into play.
In the fifth chapter of Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World, Marris offers an example of a species that has fallen victim to climate change and cannot save itself: the American pika. These mammals cannot survive for more than a few hours in 78-degree-Fahrenheit weather, so they have been ascending mountains in search of cooler territory. That may solve the problem temporarily, but “on some mountains, they are already living at the peak [and there] is nowhere for them to go” (106). Even worse, migrating to another mountain on their own would be a futile and fatal journey. This predicament applies to a great deal of other species as well.
Upon hearing of this tragedy, our first instinct is to rescue these suffering species from a problem that humans caused in the first place. Although that sounds really nice and just, there are so many problems that arise from assisted migration. Much like the negative aspects of rewilding, there is no guarantee that the species that are moved will thrive in their new environments. There is always the possibility that they will fail to adapt and die out, which defeats the purpose entirely. On the other hand, they might adapt too well and become an invasive species, which solves one problem but brings forth a handful of other ones. Furthermore, it would be nearly impossible to cater to every species in need of rescue. These issues make assisted migration basically unachievable, for there would be no funding for a project with so many potential flaws.
Although the idea of practicing assisted migration is practically out the window, it would be incredibly useful for urban ecosystems. Despite the lack of species richness in the New York metropolitan region, as described by Linda M. Puth and Catherine E. Burns in “New York’s nature: a review of the status and trends and species richness across the metropolitan region,” these extra warm environments are probably among those areas whose inhabitants are suffering the most. For once, the prospect of saving nature may require removing it from its native environment. Usually, conservation involves returning species to their original ecosystems, but that is not the case when it comes to assisted migration and urban spaces. This time around, it would actually probably be better to relocate them.
Like many other conservation tactics, assisted migration sounds like a great plan. Humans caused these species’ demise in the first place, so we should be the ones to help them. Unfortunately, such actions are simply not plausible for the fear of too many possible mishaps. We will simply have to find another way to save these species, and soon.
Rambunctious Garden Chapter 5
In chapter 5 of Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World, Emma Marris discusses the idea of assisted migration. Assisted migration involves helping move a species that is struggling to survive in its current environment to a new location with more suitable conditions. Solutions such as this have become necessary due to the issue of climate change caused by humans. It has both advantages and disadvantages but, in my opinion, it is ultimately a useful tool that should be used in certain situations.
The advantage of assisted migration is that it can reverse many of the problems humans caused through climate change. Because climates have changed around the world due to the influence of mankind, for many species, the locations where they have historically existed are no longer suitable. Due to the changing climate, the conditions in these locations are no longer those that the species adapted to. However, because climate change is occurring everywhere, there may be locations that now have similar conditions to those the species adapted even though these locations were unsuitable for the species in the past. This means that we can move a species from its historic location that no longer supports it to a new location that can now support it, thus allowing the species to survive.
The disadvantages of assisted migration are that it requires a great amount of human influence and there are risks associated with it. Many conservationists are against the idea of so much human interaction because it is unnatural. Assisted migration can be very risky because it is impossible to know exactly how a species will react to a new environment. It may be detrimental to the species that already exist in the environment. This effect could be so great that the introduction of a species from a different environment may lead to the extinction of one or more species that are native to the region. This can happen because the native species and the introduced species did not evolve together. This can work in the opposite manner as well. The introduced species may not be able to compete with the native species and may not survive in its new environment, thus leading to the failure of the assisted migration attempt. In addition, although the new climate of a region may make it appear suitable for a species, there may be certain other resources or conditions the species needs that the region does not provide. This would also lead to the failure of the assisted migration attempt.
I believe that assisted migration is a useful scientific tool but should be used carefully and only as necessary. If a species is in extreme danger of becoming extinct in the near future and there is a very high chance that it will be able to survive in a different location, assisted migration is worth the risks as long as scientists do everything they can to minimize those risks.
In my opinion, assisted migration would be most useful in an urban setting. This is because urban settings have had greater human influences than almost any other areas. This means that these areas are much less likely to be suitable habitats for the species that originated there and there has been such a great impact by humans already that introducing a species wouldn’t seem as harmful simply because we have already caused so much more harm to the area. In addition, humans have far greater control of urban settings than rural settings, which would aid in minimizing the risks of assisted migration.
Assisted Migration
Assisted Migration is another concept related to conservation mentioned by Emma Marris in the Rambunctious Garden. Assisted Migration is a fairly new idea in response to the global climate change and increasing concentration of green house gases.
Assisted migration aims to provide a new habitat for species that are struggling to adapt or facing extinction due to human induced climate change. Its proponents argue that anthropogenic climate change is the reason why species are struggling to survive, therefore humans must intervene and help solve the problem. However, the opposition to the argument remains and there might be even more severe ecological consequences.
The support for assisted migration is primarily based on climate change and the negative consequences of human actions. Supporters argue that humans have made it difficult for these species to survice in their natural habitat, therefore assisting them in finding another suitable habitat should be an obligation for every individual. Marris points out that climate change is the biggest thumbprint humans have put on this planet. Ice caps are shrinking and the tundra-temperate zones are moving northward. Some species are naturally able to make the move north, while others are stuck and left to face extinction. Marris states that those who support the idea argue that assisted migration does not violate pristiness, the species who are assisted in migration would have survived if the climate did not face accelerated warming. According to the ICPP, the average species moves 3.8 miles towards the pole every decade. Those species that are unable to move, eventually die.
The idea of assisted migration usually gains a fair amount of sympathy from the audience, however its consequences must also be considered. It may appear that we do in fact have an obligation of helping sweating pikas survive climate change, but the impact of such migrations on the local population, habitat and the migrant specie itself must be assessed. The positives as of now do not seem apparent besides a possibility that the migrant population may survive, but the chances of it succeeding remain unknown. Several species have been unable to extract essential nutrients in the climate and have faced unseen predators which has wiped their populations in the new area.
If the new species are in fact able to adapt and thrive in the new habitat, it is still unclear whether or not they’ll turn into invasives and ruin the existing biodiversity. The idea still seems undeveloped and must be researched and experimented more, before implementing it at a larger scale. I believe that instead of trying to deal with the consequences of climate change, we should leave it up to natural selection to do its job. Our role should be more focused on lowering our impact on the climate and significantly changing our practices.
Human intervention in migration of species may just increase the problems.
Lending a Helping Hand to Trees in Need
Climate change is a real threat to current plant and animal species worldwide. Emma Marris emphasizes this in her book, Rambunctious Garden. An increase in global temperature worldwide forces animals to move closer to the poles to seek cooler temperatures. Plants, on the other hand, have a much tougher task migrating to more desirable regions. This is why the practice of “assisted migration” came about. Essentially, conservationists transport these plants safely to newer climates in hopes that the population will survive. The primary reason for these efforts is to save species. However, scientists warn that moving these species to new ecosystems could disrupt their balance of nutrients, which would do more harm than good. By the same token, a species could take so well to the environment that it could reproduce exponentially and become an invasive species.
Many scientists feel that assisted migration has the potential to be very useful for saving species. Big name scientists such as Camille Parmesan and Hugh Possingham have cited various benefits. If a specific population is highly endangered and easily able to transport then it should be done. This, however, seems obvious. The real question that many scientists have is, “How would assisted migration affect the current ecosystem in place?” This is the million-dollar question that cannot simply be answered with proxies. In order to really see the effects there has to be a series of trials. One such trial was in North Carolina where the torreya, a tree native to Florida, was migrated. Thirty-one seedlings were planted and the funding came from two private citizens. The plant is not expected to be invasive. Other scientists like Hellman worry about the safety of these transported species. She says maybe the other species that made it thrive, like beetles or microbes, would be absent from the new location therefore harming the survival rate of the migrated species. No one will ever transport those tiny critters.
Personally I do think assisted migration is a useful tool, especially if humans want to save plants that are beneficial in commercial and environmental ways. The torreya was often chopped down as a Christmas tree. Many other plants are used for ecological development of areas. Americans today are more exposed to threats of global warming. One way to help out species that are dying is to manually place them in more suitable regions.
The Puth and Burns study shows how ecological transformations in the NY Metropolitan area are impacting species richness and diversity. The study focuses heavily on urban areas because by the year 2030, 60% of earth’s population will be residing in cities. In 17 of 26 studies produced, the species richness was decreasing from 1984-2000. The highest rate of decrease has been in mixed ecosystems. This is a concern that the local governments will have to make. How will they divide the land so that humans, plants and animals can live together?
Overall, assisted migration presents an answer to both arguments. I think scientists should focus more on saving species, but this comes with many caveats.
-Chandrapaul Latchman
Chapter 5
I particularly enjoyed chapter 5 in Marris’ book because she takes a respite from her main point of promoting natures existence in the now human dominated ecosystem and urban settings. In chapter 5 Marris addresses that possibly some human intervention may be need to combat the changing ecosystems. Centered on the impact of climate change, Marris introduced the idea of assisted migration. She explains this idea as a means of helping save potentially extinct species in a last resort situation. Due to global warming, ecosystems have been shifting to more northern regions. Plants and animals that at one time could survive in a certain area are now being pushed further up to climates that are more suitable.
There has been much controversy surrounding this issue because physically moving animals from one habitat to another would be voluntarily increasing the population of invasive species which goes against many efforts that ecologists are making to try remove invasive species from such populated areas. Working to build back an area baseline would be done in vain with the introduction of new species. However, on the other hand of the argument, in order to increase biodiversity or rather maintain the existence of threatened species, assisted migration is promoted as a savior of sorts to cold climate species.
In my opinion, assisted migration can be a mutually beneficial effort if the necessary research is done on the species being moved, its natural habitat and the best possible ecosystem to move it into. If the migrating species is properly matched up with a compatible ecosystem, without the chance of it dying off or becoming invasive, then I would definitely approve of assisted migration because it would maintain and possibly increase the earth’s biodiversity as well as local biodiversity. However, the issue of what will become of the earths warming mountain peaks and the areas surrounding them is a potential point of contention. By moving species away from these areas, any hope there was of sustaining the mountain peaks may be considerably lessened. From a short-term perspective, I would agree with assisted migration. However, from a long- term point of view, where the eventualities are numerous, I would not be so quick to relocate a entire population of a species.
With regards to urban ecology, I again agree that maybe small-scale versions of assisted migration may enhance an ecosystem’s sustainability. At the same time, I feel that the chances of human caused disturbances affecting a species, even after being relocated pose a threat to the initiative. I would imagine that there would also be more opposition from city residents on the topic of introducing a large population of a foreign species in to the neighboring area. The major conflict with this action is that it relies upon actively moving invasive species unto areas where their affects will be unknown. Another argument that Marris presents in this chapter is that promoting assisted migration detracts from the main issue of global warming. Rather than seeking to lower emissions, ecologists suggest moving animals as a result. With the many issues surrounding this topic I am not sure how it will play out. Hopefully, we will be able to preserve land , lower emissions as well as maintain biodiversity.
Rambunctious Gardens-Chapter 5
Alternative solutions to maintaining the pristine wilderness have been proposed by Marris such as rewilding and the expansion of rambunctious gardens, and in this chapter she introduces this concept of assisted migration. This concept is ultimately the human movement of species to locations that are more suitable for their growth than their current location because of the increase in climate change. Many conservationists are taking this radical approach to save these organisms because otherwise these species would go extinct. However while this approach is meant to be proactive, it is far too radical, expensive, risky that may cause more harm than benefit.
It is safe to say that the global temperature is increasing, and Marris accounts that as Anthropogenic climate change. She believes that climate change is the “biggest single thumbprint humans have put on this planet,” because of the “anthropogenic emissions of gasses including carbon dioxide… hydrofluorocarbons” (74.) This change in temperature has resulted in the movement of species further north, and potentially this could resulting in entire ecosystems shifting upward to sustain themselves, however the issue is that many of these species won’t be able to make it upward in time and in the process will go extinct. Ecologists feel that we need to take proactive action and help move these species move to more suitable locations so they can continue to exist.
In chapter 5, Marris brings up this interesting paradox of “the pristine myth and the myth of a correct baseline for each area” (77.) This brings up the point that if we want to maintain a pristine wilderness than with this climate change, species must be shifted, however if we are using baseline conservation then no species can be moved. Going a long with this paradox, even though assisted migration might be an alternative to the two theories mentioned above it doesn’t makes sense to “intervene on [natures] behalf,” (81) simply because “the benefits of translocation outweigh the biological and socioeconomic costs” (82.) When Marris explains how ecologist Hellmann would go about to preserve the Gary Oaks Ecosystem in California the process itself shows both how much work, time, money is put into it without much certainty if the project will be a success. In order for this process to follow through it would take “years of logical management,” Hellmann has to get “grant money” if she has the persuasion ability to “beat out her rivals, ” after which “she has to set up a local headquarters, “recruit a team” and then after that do all this research through “satellite photos and a tour of the island” (86.) After she collects and analyzes her data, then she may receive fruits for her labor upon moving the trees, or it may swing in another direction and be a complete failure. On top of that there is also a likelihood the Gary Oaks Ecosystem may transform in an invasive species and cause more harm when moved.
Ultimately this concept of assisted migration doesn’t seem feasible for every species, but perhaps is a likely solution to trees that are in danger and are of socioeconomic advantage such as timber. This conservation technique may also be used in the Urban Forest, by migrating some species to urban areas where the ecological conditions are suitable. However it is wrong for humans to intervene in saving ecosystems by completely shifting them based on predictions and forecasts, just so that aesthetically speaking our nature remains the same.
Assisted Migration
In chapter 5 of Rambunctious Garden, Emma Marris discusses the idea of assisted migration—intentionally “guiding” certain species to new locations for a better chance of survival in their new environment. Because of the global climate change, many species are having, and will have, difficultly adjusting to their changing surroundings. This will surely cause some species to become endangered, or even extinct, since many species are unable to migrate to a safer environment because of certain barriers—like seas, cities, roads, and distance (75). One example of a species that has trouble migrating is the American Pika, which cannot move to another mountain peak to escape the warm climate. Therefore, humans guiding the transportation of specific species to more suitable and comfortable environments sound like an easy and amenable solution—sometimes even necessary.
However, with this possible solution, there are its own problems. Specific species may be unable to adapt to a new environment because of something small as the presence of “specific soil microbes” or the unobserved “microclimatic condition” (77). The species may pose as a threat to their new ecosystem as an invasive species. Transporting animals is also an expensive process. The relocated species may also die out in their new environment because of a lack of certain resources, rendering it extinct–a backfired result.
While assisted migration poses some solutions and problems, Marris points out that humankind has been involved with assisting migration for a very long time. Thus, it may be agreed that since humans have been interfering with ecosystems for thousands and thousands of years, it makes sense for people to help specific species that rely on assisted migration in order to survive. For some experts, assisting species sounds favorable in urban ecosystems like New York City because there is a gradual decline in “species richness”, especially of native species (Puth, Burns, 12). It sounds reasonable for humankind to try to restore depleting native species in an area with assisted migration, but the process must be advance with caution, for artificial help may produce undesirable results.
Personally, I feel like changes that occur in the environment should be natural and organic. However, humankind is the most unnatural and advanced species to exist, in terms of using resources and altering the environment. Since humans are a large part of the alteration of nature, it sounds reasonable for people wanting to help nurture back the environment with something like assisted migration.
Assisted Migration
Assisted migration is a fairly recent concept that attempts to relocate species that are struggling to survive by introducing them to ecosystems that are more conducive to their survival. However, while some scientists believe it is our responsibility to assist species that are on struggling to adapt, I believe the case against intervention is much more concrete. In chapter five of Rambunctious Garden, Emma Marris discusses the reasoning behind both arguments.
To begin, the arguments supporting assisted migration hinge on the fact that we are responsible for creating environmental conditions that make it difficult for certain species to survive in their natural habitat. Hence, some scientists believe it is our responsibility to intervene in order to prevent these species from going extinct. Marris points out that the amount of carbon dioxide, methane, and industrial gases that humans have pumped into the atmosphere has severely altered our climate (107). Our world has become hotter and more extreme; some areas get more rain, others get less. Consequently, some species can no longer survive in their original habitat and are forced to migrate to environments that do not exceed their threshold of tolerance. According to the ICPP (International Panel on Climate Change), the average species moves 3.8 miles towards the pole every decade (111). Those species that are unable to move, eventually die (and if they are the last of their kind, become extinct). As a result, some scientists view assisted migration as our obligation because humans are largely responsible for altering the atmospheric conditions to begin with.
Although it might feel like our responsibility to assist nature in its survival, it is not very clear that our assistance will have a positive impact. Marris makes the case that scientists have traditionally approached conservation from the standpoint of nonintervention. If they suddenly abandon this idea for the sake of their conscience, then scientists will start changing the very baselines they have fought so hard to preserve (117). In addition, there is not enough research to predict the type of effect that introducing a new species to a new environment will have. There is legitimate fear among scientists that some species will become invasive and ravage their new home. On the other hand, some may not survive at all. More importantly, it is not feasible to relocate every species on the verge of extinction. To do so would require financial resources far greater than any citizen or country is willing to spend. Hence, assisted migration comes with a hefty price tag, many educated guesses, and the prospective of unforeseen consequences.
Altogether, we are responsible for creating the climate change that makes it difficult for some species to survive in their natural habitat, but it is not our responsibility to assist them in migration. Our intervention is likely to disrupt other ecosystems, reverse our principles on conservation, and create financial burdens. Hence, it is more acceptable for us to refrain from assisted migration until our research can provide more definitive outcomes.
Assisted Migration, Chapter 5
As humans continue to urbanize, we further the negative consequences we are causing on our environment. As humans burn for agriculture and for other purposes, as well as deforestation, we are increasing the concentration of carbon dioxide, methane, and industrial chemicals in the atmosphere. As a result, we allow the Earth to retain more heat. In turn, we contributed to global warming, or the elevation of earth’s temperature. As a result of the elevation in temperature, some species cannot survive or successfully reproduce, and they would eventually extinct. As a result, species often migrate north or up in elevation. However, species that have less mobility might move too slow to outrun the climate change. Some might be too slow compared to their supplement species, species that they need help from in order to survive (like pollinators to many plants), and would therefore die before being able to migrate to an ideal location. Some might depend on species that are moving too slow, and they as a result die off before they could outrun the climate change. For example, butterflies can fly away faster than a lot of plants. However, they only like to lay their eggs on specific species of plants and would have to wait for those species of plants to migrate first (75). Some might even encounter migration barriers. It can be as simple as a crossing a road that makes it difficult for species to migrate. As a result, species on average move 3.8 miles toward the pole every decade, according to Camille Parmesan. She called it “poleward movement”. Therefore, assisted migration becomes a concept that emerged to move species to places where they can have a better future in response to climate changes and the difficulties they have when migrating on their own. Choosing the destination of migration cannot be a place where species will currently adapt to best at the moment or a place where they will adapt best when they harvest. It has to be in the middle of the two suggestions so that plants won’t just grow in the beginning and then die off, or not being able to make it to the harvest time initially.
The pros of assisted migration would be to save endangered species and other species of commercial importance by migrating them to an ideal location to sustain their population. The arguments for cons of assisted migration exist as well. First of all, it is almost impossible to accurately predict what kind of effects assisted migration can do to species. We don’t know what species need to have in order to survive, especially in terms of soil microbes or microclimatic condition (77). They might not be able to survive in the new location just because the temperature is more desired to them. They might also become invasive species in their new location, causing destructive problems to the ecosystem. They would also threaten baselines set up by conservation efforts in their new ecosystem because they do not exist in that ecosystem prior to the baseline. I think another possible problem of assisted migration is the need of constant management. As species are assisted to move north, climate would eventually catch up and species would have to move again. It is a constant process within decades, making such project unrealistic in the long term. As a result, assisted migration remains a heated debate for ecologists and environmentalists.
Assisted migration into urban forests is helpful for the urban areas, but might not be feasible. According to Puth in the article on species richness in New York metropolitan region, species richness is generally decreasing in the city. Migrating species into the urban forests can increase species richness. However, it is not feasible because there is not much space for species to migrate into with the concentration of human population and species in the urban ecosystem. It might cause problems of unfriendly competition for survival needs. The high price of real estate in urban areas might also increase the cost for assisted migration. Also, the migrated species might become invasive and hurt the urban ecosystem. Lastly, urban ecosystems should be warmer than other ecosystems surrounding it. As a result, it doesn’t make much sense to migrate animals into urban forests from ecosystems within the range of 200 kilometers.
Assisted migration from urban forests, is more feasible and is great for endangered species and species with commercial needs. They might be able to survive better in the new location and therefore sustain their population in the future. It would also be feasible because outside urban forests, there is more space and are cooler. However, the possibility of becoming invasive species and the possibility of not being able to adapt to the new environment has to be taken into consideration.