Being that I grew up in a house not 20 yards away from a thick forest, I have had many small encounters with wildlife in my life. We have deer, turkeys, and rabbits running through our backyard frequently, and I even find the occasional garden snake in the woodpile or under the heap of old cement blocks leftover from when we redid our landscaping. These encounters help to remind me how simple life can be, or should be. However, advancement in our society results in a growing population, and a growing population calls for more houses, more businesses, and more landfills for all their trash. Unfortunately, the habitat for these animals continues to disappear by our own hand. We continue to tear down the habitat of these simple creatures for our own use with no regard for the preservation of our earth, and someone needs to put a stop to it.
Of course we benefit from the growing development of our society, which is great, but at what cost is that benefit coming? Is it worth destroying the earth and all of its other inhabitants? People have lost sight of the value of these more simple creatures that we live with on our wondrous planet. Deer, elk, turkey and many other wild game animals can be hunted as a source of food, as well as the fish in the rivers, lakes, and seas. Predators such as bears and mountain lions help keep these animals populations in check, so they don’t overrun the forest. When all these animals die, their bodies decompose and replenish the nutrients of the soil to help plants grow. The vast and complex ecology of our planet keeps our environment balanced the way to should be. The more we desecrate the habitat that these animals call home, the further we damage the ecology that keeps the environment in shape.
Besides the scientific reasons for needing to preserve the habitat for wild animals, we also get a sense of perspective on life from these creatures that goes greatly underappreciated. As hectic as our lives tend to be these days, it can do the soul a great deal of good to just relax under a tree watching a deer waltz through the woods. They don’t have anywhere near the same worries or stress that we do. They just walk peacefully from one bush of berries to the next, getting a snack, not a care in the world. The only time they aren’t at complete ease is if they sense danger, perhaps in the form of a natural predator or a hunter. Although, even in these brief moments of peril, the deer can simply run away to where it feels safe. Such events are relatively rare anyways. Taking in that kind of serenity from another living creature can change the way you feel in a heartbeat. An instant calm comes over you in the realization that life simply does not have to be complicated. Yet we continue to destroy this gentle deer’s home.
What a shame it is that we continue to rip down forests for new housing developments and strip malls, when there are clear alternatives to this destructive pattern. We have the technology and intelligence to build skyscrapers nowadays, so why build out, over the forests, when we can build up where we aren’t hurting anyone. I’m not saying we should build skyscrapers everywhere, but even multi-floor apartment buildings that house multiple families can do a great deal to save the forest. Why build eight new homes on their own lots when you could build a four floor apartment building that will house all eight families on only two of the lots? Sure, saving six lots worth of land doesn’t seem like much, but when you multiply that to consider the thousands of new homes that are built each year, it could save acres upon acres of natural wildlife habitat. The solutions prove to be very feasible, so why not see them through?
After housing developments, the other major contributor to the destruction of wildlife habitats is the growing need for landfills. With our growing society comes a lot of garbage, and we are running out of places to put it. My freshman seminar class recently took a field trip to the Arden Landfill in Washington County, run by Waste Management. I had never seen a landfill before, and I was amazed by the size of the fill as well as the entire process. Federal regulations are a lot stricter for landfills today than a decade ago, and this particular fill was a shining example of that. The fill must first be approved by the government before anything can be done. The fill is first dug out then covered in six, 12 inch thick, plastic liners in order to prevent any waste from reaching the soil. Then, they begin loading in the trash. It can take nearly twenty years to for a fill to reach capacity, and over the course of those twenty years, a lot of methane gas is released from the degrading garbage. In the past, they had just put pipes in the fill to let the gas out into the air, but the air pollution resulting form this is awful. So in recent years, Waste Management has developed a system where they pump the methane out of the fills and into electric energy that is sold the surrounding homes and businesses. Basically, they have created a mini power plant at the landfill that helps stop air pollution while turning a profit for the company. Also, once the landfill is capped, they cover it in another set of plastic liners and topsoil, then replant grass. Many of Waste Management’s retired fills are now parks where animals live or golf courses which would have otherwise been built on natural habitats. The steps they have taken to preserve the environment and habitat are great, but not all landfills across the country do the same. If Waste management can do it, then everyone can do it, and we need to hold other landfill companies to these same standards.
The creatures that live in the world around us have just as much a right to this planet as we do, and we need to recognize that before it is too late. There are plenty of ways to change our destructive ways, and many are trying, just like Waste Management, to do so. Unfortunately those many are still not the majority. People need to realize what they are doing to their fellow inhabitants of earth and take stand to stop the disappearing act.
Showing posts with label nature. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nature. Show all posts
Monday, May 17, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
To Explain Sustain
The term “sustainability” might seem a bit long and intimidating for some people, but its meaning in itself is not all that complicated. Of course it has some connotational and ideological baggage to carry around, that may be lost or mixed up when checked, but it can all be sorted out with some patience and diligence. By simply looking it up in a dictionary, one would find that to sustain simply means to support, hold up, and/or provide for. Sustainability then refers to one thing’s ability to sustain another thing, but the problem with sustainability is that in its modern definition it is an impossible goal.
The word sustain originates from the period between 1250 and 1300 A.D. from the Archaic French word “sustenir” and the Latin word “sustinēre”, both of which mean to uphold or endure. This is still, more or less, the accepted basic definition of the word. However, in the midst of our environmental crisis the word sustainable has come to hold a much larger, grimmer meaning. In the light of our issues with fossil fuels, renewable resources and greenhouse gases, the term sustainability has arrived at its modern definition, which is a way of living that will preserve the ability of our future generations to live like we do. It is the sustaining, or upholding or enduring, of Earth and our environment in its present, fruitful state. It refers to our human society’s ability to sustain a safe way of living that will preserve the earth.
Although the environmental crisis at hand is certainly important, the word sustainability should not lose its identity to the cause. The word itself still means simply to uphold, endure, support, or provide for. When used in correlation to the environmental crisis, rather than saying just sustainability, we need to be more precise and rather specifically say environmental sustainability. Sure, it’s much longer, but it needs to be done to achieve the necessary clarity. Many times it is simple laziness that corrupts the true meaning of words. On the EPA’s website, this is how they describe sustainability: “The traditional definition of sustainability calls for polices and strategies that meet society’s present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” It should be obvious to anyone that that is in no way a “traditional” definition for sustainability. That is indeed a definition of environmental sustainability.
Unfortunately, the continued ambiguous association of the word with the environmental crisis has even given it a bad rap. Due of its close relation to the ideas of environmental damage and some other reasons I haven’t discussed yet, the concept has a rather ominous aura about it. However, one must realize that it should be exactly the opposite. Environmental sustainability is a solution, a positive stance on the environmental crisis. It is a way of living that ensures the safety of our beautiful planet, with its fully functioning, all nurturing ecosystems and natural resources. Here’s the catch. In order to completely sustain our earth in its pristine state, humans would have to live with the bare necessities our earth provides us. We would have to take only what we need and nothing more; there is no place for want and greed.
Herein lies the problem, because humans suck, and no matter what we do we will never be able to prevent people from behaving in such greedy, wasteful manners, no matter how big or small, that will eventually lead to the destruction of our environment. This simple fact is what leads to the impossible nature of perfect sustainability and in turn the negative feelings associated with it that I mentioned earlier. However, the realization that it is an ultimately unachievable goal is no reason to be so negative about it. It remains the only way to preserve our earth for as long as we can, so we need to make it a positive idea that people will support.
Fortunately, the effort to make people more aware of environmental sustainability and its benefits is being made daily by American government agencies like the EPA and other environmental groups. They actively work to educate people about the idea of environmental sustainability and work with scientists towards more efficient ways to use earth’s resources. According to the EPA, “The 1970 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) formally established as a national goal the creation and maintenance of conditions under which humans and nature ‘can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans’.”So the EPA has been working for 30 years now to spread the message of environmental sustainability to the American people in order to help us live less wastefully and help to preserve our environment.
The term sustainability has been turned into more than one concept by its close relationship with the global environmental crisis. It has become two different concepts, sustainability and environmental sustainability, which each require their own definition. Quite simply, sustainability is, and always has been, the ability of something to sustain, or uphold, endure, or support, something else. On the other hand, environmental sustainability is a strategy, policy, or way of living that is meant to preserve our ability to meet our needs, as well as future generation’s abilities to meet their needs through planet earth. It is a solution for our environmental crisis that, while ultimately imperfect, presents our best chance to preserve our earth for as long as we possibly can. As such it should carry a positive connotation, rather than the dismal undertone it carries now. Of course people associate it with environmental destruction and the end of world, but it is a way of preventing those things, or at least delaying them for a very, very long time. Environmental sustainability is our key to life.
The word sustain originates from the period between 1250 and 1300 A.D. from the Archaic French word “sustenir” and the Latin word “sustinēre”, both of which mean to uphold or endure. This is still, more or less, the accepted basic definition of the word. However, in the midst of our environmental crisis the word sustainable has come to hold a much larger, grimmer meaning. In the light of our issues with fossil fuels, renewable resources and greenhouse gases, the term sustainability has arrived at its modern definition, which is a way of living that will preserve the ability of our future generations to live like we do. It is the sustaining, or upholding or enduring, of Earth and our environment in its present, fruitful state. It refers to our human society’s ability to sustain a safe way of living that will preserve the earth.
Although the environmental crisis at hand is certainly important, the word sustainability should not lose its identity to the cause. The word itself still means simply to uphold, endure, support, or provide for. When used in correlation to the environmental crisis, rather than saying just sustainability, we need to be more precise and rather specifically say environmental sustainability. Sure, it’s much longer, but it needs to be done to achieve the necessary clarity. Many times it is simple laziness that corrupts the true meaning of words. On the EPA’s website, this is how they describe sustainability: “The traditional definition of sustainability calls for polices and strategies that meet society’s present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” It should be obvious to anyone that that is in no way a “traditional” definition for sustainability. That is indeed a definition of environmental sustainability.
Unfortunately, the continued ambiguous association of the word with the environmental crisis has even given it a bad rap. Due of its close relation to the ideas of environmental damage and some other reasons I haven’t discussed yet, the concept has a rather ominous aura about it. However, one must realize that it should be exactly the opposite. Environmental sustainability is a solution, a positive stance on the environmental crisis. It is a way of living that ensures the safety of our beautiful planet, with its fully functioning, all nurturing ecosystems and natural resources. Here’s the catch. In order to completely sustain our earth in its pristine state, humans would have to live with the bare necessities our earth provides us. We would have to take only what we need and nothing more; there is no place for want and greed.
Herein lies the problem, because humans suck, and no matter what we do we will never be able to prevent people from behaving in such greedy, wasteful manners, no matter how big or small, that will eventually lead to the destruction of our environment. This simple fact is what leads to the impossible nature of perfect sustainability and in turn the negative feelings associated with it that I mentioned earlier. However, the realization that it is an ultimately unachievable goal is no reason to be so negative about it. It remains the only way to preserve our earth for as long as we can, so we need to make it a positive idea that people will support.
Fortunately, the effort to make people more aware of environmental sustainability and its benefits is being made daily by American government agencies like the EPA and other environmental groups. They actively work to educate people about the idea of environmental sustainability and work with scientists towards more efficient ways to use earth’s resources. According to the EPA, “The 1970 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) formally established as a national goal the creation and maintenance of conditions under which humans and nature ‘can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans’.”So the EPA has been working for 30 years now to spread the message of environmental sustainability to the American people in order to help us live less wastefully and help to preserve our environment.
The term sustainability has been turned into more than one concept by its close relationship with the global environmental crisis. It has become two different concepts, sustainability and environmental sustainability, which each require their own definition. Quite simply, sustainability is, and always has been, the ability of something to sustain, or uphold, endure, or support, something else. On the other hand, environmental sustainability is a strategy, policy, or way of living that is meant to preserve our ability to meet our needs, as well as future generation’s abilities to meet their needs through planet earth. It is a solution for our environmental crisis that, while ultimately imperfect, presents our best chance to preserve our earth for as long as we possibly can. As such it should carry a positive connotation, rather than the dismal undertone it carries now. Of course people associate it with environmental destruction and the end of world, but it is a way of preventing those things, or at least delaying them for a very, very long time. Environmental sustainability is our key to life.
O Beautiful for Spacious Skies…
America is beautiful, from the widespread, grassy plains of the Midwest, to the thick woodlands of the Northeast, and the vast canyons of the Southwest. There is so much natural wonder in our lands, yet most people don’t know that in our current times we are struggling to take care of it. Luckily, there are thousands of environmental groups across the nation helping to raise awareness about our environment. One of them is a locally based group, the Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds. This group works to help ensure the protection of healthy, natural water sources across the state, as well as nurse polluted waterways back to health.
The Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds (FPW) is a grant-making foundation that invests in environmental projects conducted by small and large environmental groups across the commonwealth. They currently service all projects from the Ohio border to the Susquehanna River in Eastern Pennsylvania. Essentially, they are given proposals for environmental projects by numerous organizations and then select a number of them to provide funding for. The organization has granted upwards of five million dollars directly to projects and leveraged another eighty million dollars indirectly for over 150 environmental groups working on nature conservation and pollution control projects all over Pennsylvania.
The task of keeping Pennsylvania’s watershed safe is certainly no walk in the park, considering Pennsylvania has the most miles of rivers and streams of any of the forty eight contiguous states. These environmental groups have to fight against pollution from numerous sources, including runoffs from numerous factories, refineries, waste treatment plants that produce fluids with varying levels of risk directly into natural water sources. In the United States as well as most other developed countries, these practices are regulated by the government; however, this doesn't entirely prevent pollutants from making their way into these waters. Other indirect sources of water pollution include toxins that penetrate the water supply from soil and groundwater systems that hold the remains of agriculturally used chemicals such as fertilizers and pesticides, as well as improperly disposed of industrial waste. Contaminants from the atmosphere, such as carbon emissions from vehicles, factories and even bakeries, all of which are created by human practices, enter the water sources by way of rain water.
With all these dangers that are presented to the health of the water sources in our state, we need more organizations like the FPW to step up and take action to care for our environment. No matter how big or small the effort, everyone can make a difference and help to protect the earth as we know it.
The Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds (FPW) is a grant-making foundation that invests in environmental projects conducted by small and large environmental groups across the commonwealth. They currently service all projects from the Ohio border to the Susquehanna River in Eastern Pennsylvania. Essentially, they are given proposals for environmental projects by numerous organizations and then select a number of them to provide funding for. The organization has granted upwards of five million dollars directly to projects and leveraged another eighty million dollars indirectly for over 150 environmental groups working on nature conservation and pollution control projects all over Pennsylvania.
The task of keeping Pennsylvania’s watershed safe is certainly no walk in the park, considering Pennsylvania has the most miles of rivers and streams of any of the forty eight contiguous states. These environmental groups have to fight against pollution from numerous sources, including runoffs from numerous factories, refineries, waste treatment plants that produce fluids with varying levels of risk directly into natural water sources. In the United States as well as most other developed countries, these practices are regulated by the government; however, this doesn't entirely prevent pollutants from making their way into these waters. Other indirect sources of water pollution include toxins that penetrate the water supply from soil and groundwater systems that hold the remains of agriculturally used chemicals such as fertilizers and pesticides, as well as improperly disposed of industrial waste. Contaminants from the atmosphere, such as carbon emissions from vehicles, factories and even bakeries, all of which are created by human practices, enter the water sources by way of rain water.
With all these dangers that are presented to the health of the water sources in our state, we need more organizations like the FPW to step up and take action to care for our environment. No matter how big or small the effort, everyone can make a difference and help to protect the earth as we know it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
