“We seek the purity of our absence, but everywhere we find our own fingerprints. It is ultimately our own bodies and our labor that blur the boundaries between the artificial and the natural. Even now we can tamper with the genetic stuff of our own and other creatures’ bodies, altering the design of species. We cannot come to terms with nature without coming to terms with our own work, our own bodies, our own bodily labor.” (173)

“What most deeply engaged these first white men with nature, what they wrote about most vividly, was work: backbreaking, enervating, heavy work. The Labor of the body revealed that nature was cold, muddy, sharp, tenacious, slippery. Many more of their adjectives also described immediate, tangible contact between the body and the nonhuman world.” (177)

“It is precisely this recognition of how work provides a knowledge of, and a connection to, nature that separates a minority of environmentalists, particularly  those sympathetic to Wendell Berry, from the dominant environmentalist denigration of work.” (178)

I though Kareivas idea of the necessity of humans in nature conservancy is an interesting idea and not one that is mentioned. Often it seems like the conservationists and preservationists point most of the blame at humans. Instead the author argues that by balancing the basic human needs of water, food, livlihoods, security and health. But for The Nature Conservany, this is the endgame, but argues that there will be room for wilderness after this is met.

To me, it seemed like the article made a lot of heavy assumptions that might not be true or possible without serious changes to our behavior. They offered some small scale examples of successful ecological conservation efforts but seem to only get more difficult if the population continues to increase.

Concentrate on protecting those essential things that the natural world provides us-like clean water-and we’ll wind up better stewards of nature in the long run. Make nature relevant to everyday lives and you can produce billions of grass-roots conservationists, each with a vested interest in seeing a workable balance struck between human beings and the environment. (37)

What we must have is a vision of the future in which the needs of people and nature are balanced, based on the hard facts of growing population, huge climate impacts, and expanding agriculture and energy exploration. The conservation of the future will be less and less about protected areas and increasingly about working landscapes, in which the most intrusive human activities are planned for and managed to generate the least damage and to avoid irreplaceable natural systems that cannot tolerate heavy impacts. The key is to take each of the major needs of people, water, food, livelihoods, security and health-and find the future that meets these needs and protects nature. (38)

On my way back to school yesterday, I was thrilled to see people with banners on the overpasses in Massachusetts on I90 calling for talk about climate change! The first one said “Talk About” with waves painted under it, and the second said “Climate Change” and I believe it had trees around it. There were a few cyclists at each spot smiling and standing by the banners. I was excited to see this so close to home and on a route that sees a TON of traffic from people coming or coming from New England for the holiday.

I also saw that in Paris, climate activists were going to have a march calling for strong climate action but were asked not to march because it was deemed unsafe by city officials. So instead of physically marching, they symbolically laid out a pair of shoes for each person who was supposed to participate in order to demonstrate the magnitude of the interested persons.

I look forward to seeing more of this and what will come at the closing of COP21.

I recently listened to a podcast (RadioLab) that discussed the mystery of one of our human ancestors. A skull found in South Africa in the 1920s has a remarkable resemblance to humans, in that it has a relatively flat face and a hole at the base of the skull, suggesting it stood upright. The skull was very small and the reason we know it was not human is the brain cavity is too small. What I found to be fascinating about this piece is that it narrated the journey of finding what killed this specific creature. Ultimately, scientists recognized that it was most like a large bird of prey that killed the specimen (which was about the size of a chimpanzee). I find it to be so interesting how we view humans as being at the top of the food chain, the scariest predators out there, but not so long ago, our ancestors were hunted by birds. It’s a concept I never considered, sure it would make sense to be scared of a lion or bear should I stumble across it in the wild, but a large bird? It puts a whole new feeling to the eeriness that accompanies the a swooping shadow from above.

As I stated in my last blog post about our lab trip to the Lehigh Valley Zoo, I am not a very big fan of them, and don’t get much enjoyment out of them. Yet, my little cousins were in town and they really wanted to go to the San Francisco Zoo, so I was dragged there by my mom. Once again, I was pleasantly surprised by my experience at the zoo. While I had thought the Lehigh valley zoo was kind of nice, the san Francisco zoo blew it out of the water. All of the animals seem to have nice areas in which to live, with plenty of space. They seemed happy, healthy and content. While it still did not compare to seeing animals in the wild, it was one of the first time

Visiting two really unique zoos reminded me of why I have such a dislike for zoos in the first place: the Vietnam Zoo. My junior year of high school I studied abroad in Hanoi, Vietnam. While there I lived with a host family. One day they got really excited and told me that we were going on a family trip to the local zoo. They kept talking about how amazing the animals were, and I could tell it was a huge treat for the whole family to be able to go there. I was excited to go with them, yet immediately upon arriving I felt incredibly uncomfortable. All of the animals were in cages that looked like jail cells. I have a very distinct memory of an incredibly underweight tiger in its pen. The floor was cement and the cell was only 8×8. People were throwing popcorn and food at it, hoping to get a reaction. I had to pretend to like the zoo all day out of respect for my host family, but my stomach was turning the entire time

After thinking about these three zoos I have realized that it is important to consider the merits of each individual zoo, not all zoos. Some zoos have huge spaces for animals to roam and do incredibly important conservation work, while others abuse the animals for human enjoyment.

For the next two weeks, political leaders from around the world will gather in Paris for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In recent years, the legitimate issue of climate change has become a more pervasive topic in international politics. With the 2015 convention, world leaders are expected to sign off on commitments that will help reduce carbon emissions in each of the participating countries.

While such a commitment is a step in the right direction, there is still concern that not enough is being done to address the overwhelming problem of carbon emissions. Even in the best case scenario, the countries that agree to reductions will put emissions cuts on a track that will ultimately lead to an mean global temperature increase that is greater than 2 degrees Celsius. Climate scientists have predicted that such warming will have drastic consequences on the future of the human race. Over time, sea-levels will rise by more than 20ft, and climate and weather patterns will change dramatically, putting stress on our ability to produce food and water for growing global populations.

These concerns might lead environmentalists to question the effectiveness of these climate conventions. Are the commitments from the world’s political leaders really making a difference or are the nothing more than savvy PR showings? In his second term, President Obama has increased his focus on climate issues, yet his emissions plans have been met by severe opposition from the conservative party. From a political standpoint, their opposition to the issue is understandable. The conservative politicians don’t agree with the spending required and the limitations that these reduction requirements would put on various industries. However, putting politics aside, it is very upsetting for me to see so much pushback against legitimate climate issues. More and more it seems as if we will continue to argue about these problems until it is too late.

Going back to this week’s conference, the future emissions cuts will put the world on the right track. However, we need to go a step further. A well defined carbon budget with emissions allocations for each country would help us do even better. Undoubtedly, such a budget would create countless challenges for industrialized and developing countries alike. This idea couldn’t be accomplished over night, but with increased recognition of the issue along with more widespread political cooperation, the world could begin to move towards emissions responsibility that would ensure the protection of this planet for future generations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/science/earth/paris-climate-talks-avoid-scientists-goal-of-carbon-budget.html?ref=earth

***Disclaimer: The first half of this response paper may be unfulfilled because I was unable to attend Hawk Mountain myself.

Although I was not able to see the Hawk Mountain Visitor Store in person, I did visit their online website (https://www.hawkmountain.org/store/categories.asp ). It appears as though the main products in the store and those that information and education based. The books on sale all have conservation themes and give information on raptors and their importance. There are also accessories that are branded with “Hawk Mountain Sanctuary” which is an important form of advertisement for the sanctuary (I assume it is non-profit and survives on donations). Even these accessories are quaint and subtle, which markets to the stereotypical visitor of a place like this, the younger and older generations who are looking to see an incredible part of nature. To the HMS, nature appears to be something majestic, that’s needs to be coveted and protect but can also be admired from a distance and without disruption.

Rachel Carson was an important voice in bringing the subject of DDT and its effect on wildlife, especially birds, to life. Her work helped eventually ban the spraying of DDT. Hawk Mountain is now a sanctuary because it serves as a passage for migrating birds. As DDT lowered the reproduction rate of birds, less birds of prey were seen migrating through Hawk Mountain which was yet another sign that negative effects were happening because of the spraying of the chemicals.

Since I was not was Hawk Mountain, I cannot attest to the interactions between the people who were there. However, I have been to several wildlife sanctuaries in my life around the Boston area and I can speak some to that. I was often dragged along on these trips when I was younger, my mother being a bird enthusiast. For many locations, the story was the same: the older volunteers who would kindly greet us and overload us with the amazing information about the sanctuary before sending us on our way. Most of the people who I remember visiting these places tended to either be of the retired generation or parents with kids who were among my age. I never remembered seeing the middle generation, and if I did stumble across them, it was either a romantic couple or more of the “crunchy” type people. No matter the age, I do remember people being incredibly friendly and often pointing us in the direction of something fantastic they had seen, always so willing to share the nature with us.

Raptors have an interesting dynamic with the human population. Many years ago, they were often demonized as vermin or rodents of the air, and were quickly shot upon sight. Now, they are much more revered as regal and majestic beasts. Birds of prey are important indicators of the health of an ecosystem because they are typically the top of the food chain. At the top of the food chain, it is difficult to survive if one part of the chain is missing or unhealthy, as it upwardly affects the rest of the chain.

Now visiting Cabela’s was a very interesting experience. I had heard the class discuss their visit, and I had read many of the posts on the subject matter. However, even with that preparation, I was still overwhelmed when I stepped in to the store. Upon entering the store, I was immediately met with a plethora of taxidermy, both at eye level and poised above me on shelves. Not only was there an overwhelming number of carcasses in the store, it was the shear amount of stuff that assaulted my eyes. As I adjusted, my sister and I began exploring the store. We immediately headed to the mountain at the back of the store. As we walked back there, I noticed the clearly gendered clothing, normal camouflage and neon orange, and then the pink versions for the women. As I toured through the store, I noticed that while the pink camou was not in excess, it was definitely an option for most every item of clothing, even for camping chairs. I was surprised by the brands. Most items were Cabela’s brand, but Under Armour also had a significant chunk of brand name items throughout the store.

My impression of the mountain was neutral; I have seen my fair share of taxidermy and it doesn’t bother me, however it was more of the quantity of taxidermy in such a small space that set me on edge. However, I did not notice any plaques noting the hunter who shot the animal or any other information other than American name of the animal, which I thought was interesting.

Next, we ventured over the gun section. Neither my sister nor I had ever actually seen a gun in person, so it was unnerving to literally see walls covered in them. From guns we moved to knives to crossbows – I had never seen a crossbow before and was shocked by how common they seemed. Even more unnerving was the young boy who was running up and down the aisles with a small crossbow that his father was buying for him. My sister and I took a quiz on “what safe should we buy” for our guns. Some of the questions included “how long does it take for your fire department to respond?” (to determine how heat tolerant it should be) and what cost would we be willing to pay? (an option was $10,000+). It was a very odd concept to the both of us that there should be a need to a safe of those sizes and costs.

We visited Cabela’s on Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving and before Black Friday. It was pretty empty of shoppers, and I definitely felt that I stood out from the few clients, wearing my sorority sweatshirt. It was funny to see the marketing of products for Christmas, a very ironic juxtaposition I thought. Upon leaving the store, my sister and I quickly headed to the Pet Smart just a few stores over to see some living animals to help cleanse ourselves.

As I was driving back to Laf after a too-short Thanksgiving break, I saw a shocking scene. Driving through Connecticut, a bird of prey swooped down across the highway, into the traffic, hit a car and then flew off and tumbled to the side of the road. I was horrified by what I saw. I was all the way in the left lane and immediately thought to pull off the side of the road to try to save the bird in some way. However, by the time I would have been able to get through the cars, the bird would be very far behind me. As I drove on, I was overcome with an intense sense of guilt. I wish I had been able to stop, but what would I have been able to do? Try to usher it further from the road if it wasn’t already dead? I certainly wouldn’t have tried to pick it up. Although the bird had not flown into my car, I still felt a large sense of responsibility for the life and wellbeing of the creature. After that experience, I can only hope I never hit an animal because I am sure I will be mortified by the experience.