The latest on the Survey Front

After attending class and learning that my survey was sub par with the assignment, I went ahead and made a new far superior survey. I have since gotten 25 responses and a few angry descriptions of nature in the short answer box. Since I posted this to facebook, this survey has been one of the most exciting events in my social media life. I found I have a very diverse group of friends which I attribute to living in an urban area that tends to be liberal, but the city is still located in the conservative South. There probably is somewhat of a bias because my close friends all took the survey and we all love nature a pretty good amount.
I found that most people think nature is very important to them personally and to help us survive. Although, most people think nature is important there seems to be less who are willing to actually change their and societies ways to better suit the environment. Actions speak louder than words, but words are easier and more comfortable. Also, while most still think that nature is important, they give human society a higher value than nature.
Here is the link to my survey so you can see the questions and fill it out yourself!
Value of Nature Suvey

Survey Results

For my survey, I asked some friends who are all in college the questions relating to how willing they are to change their lives to better suit the environment. The questions I asked where would you be willing to only eat food that comes from a 100 mile wide area, would you be willing to spend more on quality goods that will last longer and drastically cut back on items frequently disposed, and would you be be willing to devote time to recycle and compost?

The results that same back where pretty equal for all question with 7 out of the 10 people answering yes on the first two questions and 5 answering yes on the last one. I believe this correlation has to do with the first two questions regarding ways where ones life would stay relatively similar and they would still be able to continue a consumer lifestyle. The last question actually asks or work to be put into it so that is why it was less favorable with the people. 

Food and Sustainability in the Appalachian

Like much of the modern United States, The Appalachian region practices an unsustainable way of food production. Most of the food is imported into the stores and restaurants from across the country. The way the farms are set up also are a nuisance to the environment. The short film, "The Meatrix", addressed problems like animal conditions and poor quality of food, but they also talked of the pollution of these factory farms. The run off from the feces and chemicals in these farms are actually a great harm to water ways in the area. This is a byproduct of the system that is often overlooked by the general public and I was quite surprised to find it out myself, but it is an issue that needs more exposure to show the seriousness of it.

Ethics in Environmental History

        This piece of tapestry depicts a Florentine wolf hunt that was common in the time. This is an example of man exerting his dominance over nature. Wolves were considered to be an "evil" part of nature and they would eat livestock. This was a problem so bounties were put up for wolves as if they were  criminals and the wolf hunter became a celebrated part of the culture. Man was not able to find peaceful cohabitation with these creatures so he removed them from the environment. Today the wolf population is completely wiped out in some areas and they are confined to less populated areas in northern Europe and Canada. Wolf hunting became a practice that led to the extinction of a species for the ease of mind of mankind.

Environmental Ethics: The History

     In an excerpt from an essay by Ross Wolfe, he give's a brief overview of humanity's relationship with nature. The history can be divided into 4 parts: Mysticism, Fear, Knowledge, and Exploitation. As our relationship progressed, it never seemed like the relationship was bettering. The rise of romanticism brought a renewed respect for nature. Although, this was only found in the artists, poets and philosophers of the period and had little affect when put next to the ecstasy of valuable natural resources and the continued industrial revolution. This makes it seem especially difficult for a shift in the consciousness of society to live a more nature oriented lifestyle; To go against "progress". This shift would truly be a radical change in history.

http://p2pfoundation.net/History_of_Humanity%27s_Relationship_with_Nature

Fracking Fraud

            Scientific American reported what is the first case to be proven by a government agency, the EPA, of water contamination being linked to hydraulic fracturing. This was a mass study, but the positive correlation came from Pavillion, Wyoming.The contaminated water source contained 10 compounds that are known to be used in the fracking process, indicating that the fluids from the fracking most likely leaked into this underground water source. This had long been suspected, but never had there been a study conducted by a government agency that linked the two together. The report from the EPA contradicts statements put out by the drilling industry of why fracking is safe. This seems to me like that they knew the problems all along, but were more determined to make a profit than worry about the safety of citizens and the environment. The contaminated water is used for bathing and drinking in Pavillion. A study on water samples from Pavillion in 2008 showed contaminants in the water. Another study in 2010 resulted in the EPA and federal health officials telling citizens to not drink the water and ventilate during bathing to prevent explosions from built up methane. The companies drilling combated these studies by claiming that the contamination was naturally caused and has no relation to their fracking operation. Some politicians are even siding with the fracking companies going as far as Senator James Inhofe calling the studies “offensive”. It seems hard to believe that someone would call a study that is to benefit the health of the public offensive. A situation like this will really start to go downhill when it becomes up for debate. This study will hopefully convince the public that fracking does cause harm to the land and people and that this is not an opinion. The real difficult part will be to try to convince a public that fracking is not worth the damage in the long run.

Common Theme in Turtle Island

In Gary Snyder's Turtle Island you begin to get a picture of the man who is writing these poems. When reading Snyder's poems, one starts to realize how distant from modern American society he is. In "I Went into the Maverick Bar" Snyder mentions he "left the earring in the car" and thus making him fit in more in the bar. He is an alien to this social setting and probably feels uncomfortable. It is not just his looks, but the perspective he views things that set him apart. In "Steak", he describes how he sees a sign with a "smiling Disney cow" and dissects the artificiality of it. While this sign was intended to attract people and make them crave the meat, it does quite the opposite to Snyder. He is in a different realm with opposing values, beliefs, and desires than most Americans. When in a conversation with two men in "Two Immortals", he seems to be more introverted than the men. The way the conversation goes seems to make them loom over Snyder as some sort of example of what American men should be while he is a foreigner. This is why Snyder started to identify himself more with Eastern mentalities than the Western ones he was born into.

McKibben and the Quiz

The quiz that the English 101 class took is a quiz that can take everything one knows and make it seem truly useless. All the information on the quiz was probably know by most people 100 years ago. Now this data is not necessary to survive in today's world. The knowledge most people use today is of very little use outside of society and sometimes even a single culture. This quiz can make one want to forget all of the knowledge learned in school and replace it instead with knowledge on our local environment. 

The talk McKibben delivered spoke of how humans have a new reality created by humans. The fact that Americans are more worried about the economy than the environment shows how out of touch the culture is from the land. The economy is an invention of man and the economy seems to be the biggest force in people's lives today. The problems arising in the environment are not going away and could soon be getting the attention of people in a few years. Humankind must stop consumption of the earth and instead start living in the earth.

Bill McKibben's Eaarth

Last night I listened to an interview (but was really more of a conversation) with Bill McKibben for Scientific American on their podcast. I went through a bowl of popcorn and pot of tea through the course of it, but aside from my indulgence, the interview had a lot of points that I could resonate with. 

One that stood out to me is when McKibben stated that the economy is "more real" to politicians, than our physical world. He went on to say how the economy is such a factor in our lives today, that we often forget that it is just a man made system. I believe that we should take care of the environmental problems at hand right now. We do not know how much time we have to solve them and they are the problems that will take hundreds of years to reverse. It is sad how we have betrayed the land which we came from for our own creation. 

McKibben also spoke of the need to stop the mentality of "Growth" being the answer. America has long been a country of progress and this is a lot of people's answer to solve environmental problems. He speaks of the need for a halt of this growth. I came up with an idea a few months ago for a "Big Pause". This pause wouldn't just be sitting back and relaxing, but looking at what we have, what we are up against, and how to deal with it. 

Overfishing Our Oceans

       In today's waters, out of check fishing has put some species in great danger. The problem with overfishing is that it not only kills off a single species, but disrupts an ecosystem. For example the Indian ocean has seen a huge population growth in jellyfish, due to a lack of fish predators. The methods used for mass fishing today are rather questionable too. Huge nets are used to catch the fish and this often will trap other species such a turtles and sharks. Even though the stock of fish is in peril, a market still exists so people will still supply.

       The main force that is driving the fishing frenzy is greed. The fisherman know that populations are being depleted, but every company only thinks about the coming years haul and the fact that there are still enough fish to make a profit. This is a greed of the present, with no regard to the future. The fisheries just plan to move to a new fish once one is depleted. This business model is profitable, even if it a boom and bust for local fisheries. There is always going to be demand and then there will be those willing to meet it, no matter what the cost. A man can get rich off of a few good fishing seasons and then walk away from the business and leave the fishermen with out a job or fish to catch.

       The reason this can keep happening is the lack of regulation on the oceans. Past the coastline, the ocean is no one's territory and the only laws that can be put into effect are international laws which can be hard for every country to reach a settlement on. Even with laws in place, it is still hard to actually patrol an ocean for illegal fishing. An Island Civilization would stop the harvest of these fish because they would not be allowed to tamper with it at all. Bluefin Tuna was in serious danger of being depleted, with the population only 15% of what it was historically. There was a vote to determine a severe cut on the fishing of Bluefin in the Mediterranean. The cut was not enacted as most votes were against and a choice was made. The choice that was made was economy over environment. In an Island Civilization world, Nature would have rights over a situation like this. The selfishness here is putting human desires above planetary needs. Until the Earth is given respect for what it produces, selfish slaughter will continue till the point of no return. 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=bluefin-tuna-stocks-threatened-cites-japan-monaco&page=2

   

Summary and Reflection on Island Civilization

In Roderick Frazier Nash’s, Island Civilization, he addresses the problem of our planet in peril of environmental devastation. He presents us with a solution that is not so human centered and instead takes into effect the rights of our the earth itself.

Nash reminds us of something that many of us forgot our never actually realized; That we created the boundary between civilization and wilderness. The earth has no sanctioned land for development. It is only humans, who in our quest for organization and control deemed some places conquered. It was only when we became so powerful that we were now in control of the wilderness, did we realize the value of it. Nash says that Americans were generally surprised to find out that the frontier was closed. It seemed to be an unlimited resource, an abundance of wild fire that would never really go out. But in less than a century, it had been mapped, settled, and even had a railroad built across it. When the industrial revolution had set in, the wilderness changed from something to be feared and conquered, to a recreational destination.
It wasn’t until people perceived the wilderness to be valuable, did they attempt to preserve it. When people started to appreciate nature, environmentalism was started. Yet, even though laws and actions were being made to protect the Earth, it was only for the benefit and enjoyment of humans that we started too. We thought about our future and how the Earth wouldn’t be able to properly provide for us .
Nash introduces a plan that calls for priority to be given to the planet instead of humans. His solution of “Island Civilization” calls for all human development to be confined to closed off sectors from nature or “islands”. Natures process would not be interfered with except in the deemed areas of these islands. People and nature would be completely cut off for the good of the planet and the only contact would be someone choosing to venture out into the wilderness by choice. Even then, Nash goes as far to say that no permanent shelter or even small agriculture would be allowed outside the walls of civilization. Never has man put himself behind something. The value of the life of a single human being today is arguably at its highest in history with the medical technology available to sustain life longer and much money invest in life insurance. Death is a major inconvenience in the world these days. The question this raises is how much is a man worth compared to nature. Is a man worth a forest? How about a mountain range or river? Or is it just a single tree? All of these things will certainly be around longer than a man.
For the “Island Civilization” plan to actually work, man must first re-appropriate his value with the Earth’s. This will require a lot of new restrictions and boundaries that people are just not use to. For so long we have expected the Earth to provide for us and give nothing back in return. Now to be “good neighbors” to the planet, we must pull our weight in the global ecosystem. Will man’s inherent greed hold us back from realizing such a plan? Maybe we will never look far enough into the future to solve long term problems that span even longer than one hundred years. Either way, a solution needs to be agreed on soon, by the whole population and I believe the Earth will need to be granted certain rights of humans for it to be effective.