Reading Comments for Science of Sustainability Week 3

"What to Let Go," by Emma Marris, in Nature builds on the idea that some species are able to be prioritized more for savior than others and examines how to decide the best method for this action. She seems to take the stance that its a given that prioritization is a fact of necessity and focuses more on how to go about making those priorities a realistic impact. Especially in reference with very recent current events on the economic front, I was disturbed that only $2 billion dollars a year is allocated to worldwide conservation efforts (both governmental and non-governmental). This figure seems paltry at best, however, I am not overly surprised. I also feel that the triage of species has its merits, but it seems very counterproductive to have scientists more entrenched in coming up with a system, adopting that system, then publishing a paper about said system or species in lieu of a more impact-driven path.

I would like to see some of the maps that are discussed showing the hot spots and triaging in class. I would like to know why when discussing global biodiversity, flora are seemingly much more on the lower rungs of the ladder than fauna, or is this only particular to this article. I would like to hear something positive for once about conservation efforts in the United States as this article and not a single one of my classes seems to cover it more than a passing mention every once in a while. There has to be some progress being made somewhere about something.

"In Sustaining the Variety of Life," by Stuart L . Pimm and Clinton Jenkins, the Brazilian coastal forests are examined as an example of land being used for industry and agriculture in lieu of leaving it as forest. They authors suggest that this land could be easily bought up for roughly $5 billion and then dedicated to conservation purposes. However, they also state that "like politics, conservation is local" (72), asking who developed nations would consider themselves to come in and take over/buy the land rights of developing "poorer" nations? The most interesting part of this articles were the Laws of Biogeography maps and the species listed there. In class I would like to discuss more about the manifest destiny idea of a corporate type of entity buying these lands to hold them as national (or global) forests.

"Brave New Ecology," by Peter Del Tredici, argues the merits of keeping invasive plants form the native landscape. He notes that even once an invasive species has been eradicated due to a "restoration process" it does not always mean that the return of native species is is eminent, guaranteed, or that if restored, these species will offer the same functionality that they once did. H e notes the phytoremediation benefits of plants which are not necessarily native, exemplified in the reed. It seems to be a symptom of environmental degradation, not the cause of it. And he also points out that the designation of invasive species is often a relative concept depending on what the species is doing to whom, when, and where and notes that in landscape planning there should be a charge to note the future adaptability of the species, not just the current state. I am interested to know about more species of phytoremediation plants which can be incorporated into landscape design.