Before the arrival of Europeans to the Americas, streams did not flow as smoothly in a crisp line as they do today. They were instead branched out and usually created mud pools that prevented water from traveling further. The long flowing streams that we see today are the result of the dams and mills that forced fast flowing water to cut the land into deep channels.
Wanting to bring the landscape back to pre-European settlement times or the baseline would not be beneficial whatsoever. The “marshy, slow moving branched” streams may have been able to remove nitrogen however the cost is not worth it for the little nitrogen that would be removed. A better method that ecologist have found is to create man-made streams “that are a series of linked ponds separated by large boulders. Water can sit in each stepped pond and let nitrogen fall out before it flows on. The result looks more like a wetland than a stream.” However this restoration project will not look completely natural. They will be designed projects.
Most restorations create designer ecosystems that use shortcuts to get their landscape to work the way they like. Designer ecosystems are a direct form of anthropogenic change that can actually help existing species from going extinct. By drilling holes in rocks in the Galapagalos Islands, the penguins on the verge of extinction are able to thrive again by having more areas to lay their eggs.
Designer ecosystems seem like a good technique that will help ecosystems that are suffering due to human pollution to thrive. It is a much better idea to try manmade shortcuts to help and environment than bring it back to its baseline and hope it will regulate the way it did thousands of years ago.
I feel that designer ecosystems that are built from scratch would be beneficial and maybe even necessary. As we al have heard bombarding news that the wildlife on Earth is being polluted at such a high rate, we must act now to save it. However what happens if we cannot save it. Designer ecosystems may be an answer to bringing back the wild life. Designer ecosystems would also be beneficial to humans because we would design them “ to support humans and other species/” though they may not be real, they would be aesthetically pleasing, and perhaps the new fad in conservation of nature.
The plan to clean up the Duwamish River would be monumental because it would prove that it is possible to raise fish in mercury-free habitats. However the likelihood of this is very slim. I have to continue to disagree with many of Mariss’ points in this chapter. She commends the idea of the Duwamish River being nature that coexists with industries. Rivers should be serene areas to boat or kayak on, but with factories releasing toxins in the air near the river, this would be an area I would avoid and not want to leisure around. Industrial rivers do not need to be conserved; rather they need to be restored from the waste that factories dump into them. Marris also mentions the idea of using farmland to serve the function of a nature reserve and harvesting crops. This would be very convenient and economical, but not possible in America. America is filled with consumers and big businesses that will not succumb to the old fashioned farming ways of the English.
