Essay on Living Things

Introduction

Living things encompass the vast array of organisms that populate our planet, ranging from microscopic bacteria to majestic forests and complex human beings. This informative essay explores the characteristics and diversity of living things, highlighting their remarkable adaptations, the interconnectedness of ecosystems, and the essential role they play in sustaining life on Earth. By delving into the fascinating world of living things, we gain a deeper appreciation for the complexity, beauty, and resilience of the natural world.

Characteristics of Living Things

Living things possess several key characteristics that distinguish them from non-living entities. They are composed of cells, which are the building blocks of life. They exhibit growth and development, often through stages of maturation and reproduction. Living organisms also have the ability to respond to stimuli from their environment, allowing them to adapt and survive. Furthermore, they require energy to carry out their metabolic processes, such as obtaining nutrients and eliminating waste. These fundamental characteristics, along with others, form the foundation of life and enable living things to thrive in diverse habitats.

Diversity of Living Things

The diversity of living things is awe-inspiring. From the rich variety of plants and animals found in ecosystems around the world to the microscopic organisms inhabiting even the most extreme environments, every corner of the planet teems with life. Biodiversity encompasses the incredible range of species, genetic variation, and ecosystems present on Earth. It contributes to the resilience and stability of ecosystems, providing crucial ecological services such as pollination, nutrient cycling, and climate regulation.

Adaptations and Survival Strategies

Living things have evolved remarkable adaptations to thrive in their respective environments. These adaptations enable organisms to obtain food, escape predators, reproduce successfully, and withstand environmental challenges. Physical adaptations, such as camouflage, protective structures, or specialized appendages, help organisms survive in their specific habitats. Behavioral adaptations, such as migration, hibernation, or cooperative social structures, enhance an organism’s chances of survival. The process of natural selection drives these adaptations, with individuals possessing advantageous traits more likely to survive and pass on their genes to future generations.

Interconnectedness of Living Things

Living things are intricately connected in complex ecosystems. Each organism, from the smallest microbe to the largest predator, plays a role in the web of life. Every action and interaction has consequences, creating a delicate balance within ecosystems. For example, plants convert sunlight into energy through photosynthesis, sustaining the entire food chain. Predators help regulate populations of prey species, ensuring the health of the ecosystem. When one species is affected by environmental changes or human activities, the ripple effects can be felt throughout the ecosystem. Recognizing the interconnectedness of living things emphasizes the importance of conservation and sustainable practices to preserve biodiversity and the health of our planet.

Conclusion

Living things encompass a remarkable array of organisms, displaying incredible adaptations, diversity, and interconnectedness. Understanding the characteristics and significance of living things deepens our appreciation for the wonders of the natural world and underscores the need for conservation and responsible stewardship to ensure the continued existence of life on Earth.

Pros and Cons of Biodiversity

rotecting forests and restoring wetlands are some of the actions companies and governments are taking to make up for biodiversity lost as a result of their development activities. These measurable conservation actions – designed to compensate for unavoidable impacts, on top of prevention and mitigation measures already implemented – are known as biodiversity offsets. The goal of offsets is to achieve no net loss and preferably a net gain of biodiversity on the ground in relation to species’ numbers, habitat and ecosystem function.

Some of IUCN’s member organisations have been involved in advising government and industry on offsets for several years. But with the rapid emergence of offsets, both voluntary and regulatory, there is lack of clarity on what they mean, how to design and implement them, and what mechanisms can be put in place to ensure they are used properly, and even more importantly, when offsets cannot or should not be used.

In response, IUCN has developed a draft policy on biodiversity offsets and is conducting a global consultation process seeking input. The deadline is 15 September.

Ariel Brunner, head of European Union Policy for BirdLife Europe, serves on the IUCN Biodiversity Offsets policy drafting committee. He shares his organisation’s views on the issue.

BirdLife is dedicated to the conservation of biodiversity, and offsets have become a very contentious and popular aspect of biodiversity conservation in many parts of the world. If done right, offsets can play a useful role in conservation, but if done wrong, they can undermine conservation efforts.

Are BirdLife’s programmes affected by biodiversity offsets in countries where it works?

Yes, of course. For example, in recent years, there has been a lively debate around the EU No Net Loss Initiative and offsets are part of that discussion. In the EU, legislation around the Natura 2000 sites – which are often important bird areas – includes offsets, or rather compensation of any damage remaining when development projects are authorised for reasons of overriding public interest. In other areas of the world, countries and companies are already implementing offsets, so this impacts a lot of places where we work.

What is the relationship between biodiversity offsets and the mitigation hierarchy in important bird areas?

It is really important to understand that a stand-alone discussion about biodiversity offsets does not make any sense. If you are trying to undertake a new development project, and there is strict legislation that says you cannot destroy certain habitats, you might be stopped right there. Or under certain circumstances and conditions, you might be allowed to compensate for any damage caused by using offsets, in other words, restoring and/or conserving biodiversity elsewhere.

But it makes no sense to approach biodiversity offsets from outside the mitigation hierarchy. The mitigation hierarchy is a sound framework to any form of planning that says, first of all, you should try to avoid any damage. Then, if you can’t avoid, you should at least mitigate the damage and build the project in a way that creates the minimal amount of disruption.

For example, if you are trying to build a railway though a biologically important area that could prevent animals from migrating, then you might need to build an overpass so the animals can still use the land with minimal disruption.

After thoroughly applying all the steps of the mitigation hierarchy – which is an established tool used to help manage biodiversity risk – there may still be a decision to develop based on public interest or the needs of society. Then, even if the development is in the best place and built in the best way, but will still cause damage, you need to reduce the overall damage by taking conservation action and ensuring the development will improve similar habitats and species and maintain ecological functionality.

What is the general feeling across the BirdLife network about offsets?

BirdLife is quite wary of offsets in general. We recognise that offsets can play a role within the mitigation hierarchy, in some cases. But I think there is widespread worry in the biodiversity family about this current ‘fashion’ for offsets, which tries to present offsets as a stand-alone solution and this takes away the emphasis on avoidance. This is dangerous because it risks facilitating inappropriate development that should not happen in certain places. So, many BirdLife partners are engaging in offsets schemes, but only when they believe it can play a positive role and only when they are an integral part of a sound avoidance framework.

Given your experience working on policy issues across Europe, what are some of the current discussions on biodiversity offsets and a ‘no net loss’ approach?

The biodiversity offsets discussion is controversial because some governments are pushing for offsets as a way to “speed up development”, so basically as a way to undermine overall land planning and allow harmful development on protected land. This has generated a lot of opposition.

On the other hand, certain forms of offsets, such as compensation enshrined in the EU Habitats Directive, are clearly framed in a solid mitigation hierarchy process, which means certain species and sites of concern cannot be damaged. There are also very variable experiences with offsets as part of national legislation.

Some European countries have biodiversity offsets written into their legislation. One thing that is clearly important in the European context is the level of governance in a country or region. Where you have strong land planning and regional authorities, who can assess plans, monitor and refuse applications if necessary, offsets can play a positive role because this type of oversight can ensure residual damage is compensated.

Where governance is weak and dubious, and development projects get approved because of corruption or incompetence, offsets might be environmentally damaging.

What could IUCN learn from biodiversity offset experiences to date and what pitfalls should it try to avoid in regards to this policy?

The most important thing from my point of view is for IUCN to take away the specific focus on biodiversity offsets and put it on avoidance and mitigation. As long as we consider offsets as a stand-alone policy, we risk being misunderstood or even manipulated.

As a world authority on conservation, IUCN needs to promote sound land planning and licensing procedures that are based on the mitigation hierarchy. This would be a service to the conservation community. Then, all of the technical advice on how to handle offsets would be useful because it would sit within a sound framework.

One of the sensitivities around the offsets debate, which is less of an issue in Europe than in other parts of the world, concerns the potential social implications. One of the fears is that offsets could trample over the rights of local communities and be used to remove people from their land. The IUCN Biodiversity Offsets policy needs to recommend that offsets are developed following a Rights-based Approach.

If and when this policy is approved, what should IUCN do with it?

It will be important to share the new policy with both governments and investors, and ask them to bring their legislation, policies and codes of conduct into line with the policy. This means they should adhere to sound land planning and the mitigation hierarchy in the development and licensing of large-scale projects that are damaging to biodiversity. Decision makers will take notice of an IUCN global standard and this is why IUCN has a big responsibility.

Environmental Issues: Biodiversity Loss

Biodiversity is important for many reasons, including ecological services, such as pollution breakdown and absorption, soil formation, and social services, for example, recreation and tourism. According to Roe (2019), the loss of biodiversity is an environmental problem that needs urgent intervention since it threatens livelihoods. The article “Biodiversity Loss—More Than An Environmental Emergency” provides a comprehensive analysis to illustrate why this issue is an ecological emergency. The United Nations declared the year 2010 as the International Biodiversity Year (Roe, 2019). However, around this time, people did not understand the significance of ensuring environmental continuity. Roe (2019) defines biodiversity as “the variability among living organisms from all sources including, among other things, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems” (p. 287). Whenever biodiversity is reported in media outlets, the coverage always contains disturbing news as the poaching of such rare species like elephants, polar bears, rhinos, and tigers.

Different environmental issues have varying significance, but biodiversity loss deserves further discussion and research for many reasons. The first one is that it notably affects the stability and productivity of natural ecosystems. Thus, this issue undermines the effective functioning of the ecological systems. This way, it deters nature’s ability to support a healthy environmental system (Roe, 2019). Furthermore, communities, especially those from low socioeconomic backgrounds, benefit much from the abundance of animal and plant species. For example, the ecosystem helps people in many ways, including the absorption of air pollution, providing food, and being a natural barrier against adverse weather, such as storm surges.

Moreover, biodiversity loss ruins the resilience of nature to climate change and threatens livelihoods. Poverty-stricken people depend on balanced biodiversity to cushion themselves from the obvious adverse consequences of global warming. Besides, the destruction of the natural environment impedes food security and health. For example, crop yields significantly reduce when genetic multiplicity is lost, thereby causing famine. Additionally, since food production and wellbeing are directly related, the overreliance on agrochemicals in farming, due to climate change, exposes people to pollutants, leading to adverse health outcomes. Therefore, biodiversity loss needs to be treated as an environmental emergency and should be prioritized for further discussion and research.

Climate Change Impacts Florida’s Biodiversity

Introduction

The ecological system of Florida contains several distinct life forms with rarest species as compared to other ecosystems. Florida’s geographical location and longitudinal range makes it situated in a manner that almost all parts of South Florida have a tropical climate and the central and northern parts of Florida’s State is humid subtropical containing the Florida’s species with varying genetics in that ecosystem. Florida contains the highest amount of plant species as it is considered top six rich of the native plants families. The ecosystem contains large number of fern families in the United States with large number of orchid flora that are in varieties as well as the species of carnivorous plants that are densely populated in all of America northern part (Stys et al. 342-350).

The native invertebrates, fish and wildlife species in Florida exceed 16,000 with 147 species of endemic vertebrate and around 400 freshwater and terrestrial endemic invertebrates. The endangered species are currently 82 as per threatening or federal sectors in Florida. In addition, the state listed 59 species as threatening or endangering including four invertebrates, nine fish species, four amphibians, 21 birds, 13 reptiles and eight mammals.

Florida has distinct scrub ecosystems of sandy, dry ridges containing the ultimate rank of endemism for terrestrial habitats in the United States’ South eastern part, with above 95 families of vertebrates, arthropods, lichens, plants, in addition to the Florida iconic scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) (Stys et al. 342-350).

Coastal regions of Florida have vital habitat for several endangered species that include, each nesting birds, sea turtles, beach mice, seaside sparrows and several endemic plant families. Multiple of Florida’s most rare and variety of communities appear as small separated regions, for instance, springs, cutthroat seeps, seepage slopes, upland glades, Rockland hammocks and pine rock lands. Florida contains a highly diverse marine and estuarine habitat.

Florida is the only state in the U.S continent having the reef areas that are extremely shallow. The Florida Keys’ mild climate of tropical-maritime offers habitats for certain amount of marine and terrestrial animal and plant species that are globally unique (Petuch 1-5). The Florida Everglades supports 68 endangered and the threating species. In North America, the unique Okeechobee Lake ecosystem owing its shallowness and large and habitat diversity.

The climate change has significant effects on biodiversity. The rate at which the climate changes has numerous repercussions on biodiversity such that it may result to increased widespread reorganizations or extinctions in the ecosystem. Rapidly changing environmental climate is adversely known for overwhelming adaptation in the habitat. The populations and species that cannot adapt to such environment are mostly affected (Bellard et al. 365–377). The species distribution is already impacted by climate change and future changes in climate will even increase the effect.

The association amongst traits of individual species and their environment, the individual species functionality in the ecosystems, the function and structure of the environment, and the occurrence related evolution are significant for dealing with risks of the climate change to ecosystems (Steffen et al. 2009). These ecosystems are affected in such a way that the impacts on species may include distinction, distribution, food web disruptions, threshold and buffer effects as well as parasites, pathogens and diseases. The Florida climate change impacts are as discussed below.

Threshold and buffer effects

The ecosystem can be a buffer to extensive scenarios like drought, flood and wildfires. Human modification and the change in climate influence the habitat’s capability to temper the effects of high conditions, therefore, increasing the vulnerability to damage. For instance, Florida’s barrier islands and reefs that safeguard coastal habitat from wetland habitats that absorb floods, storm surges, and seasonal wildfires that burns additional forest debris and minimize the disadvantages of threatening large fires. A recent research study of Florida’s 300 species shows some chances for generalizing the distinct and synergistic dangers within a diversity of taxonomic classifications from within the Florida (Reece et al.).

Around 1,200 species surveyed by the Florida Natural regions have been exposed to possess about 50% of their lost to increased change in sea level of 1 metre. The huge dangers to species is fragmentation of anthropogenic habitat, although synergisms with dangers from change in climate are specifically risky for many species.

Distribution Changes in geographical range

In this sector Species distribution is highly spread through specific range of temperature and humidity levels, as these levels are crossed so will the necessity to change their migratory ways as well as how far they are forced to migrate from uninhabitable locations and unfavorable conditions. However, certain species may be unable to migrate as a result of having found no conducive habitats or having anthropogenic barriers hindering their movement.

Noss et al. (2014) discovered that almost three fourths of the 236 species at risk due to increase of sea level would be unable to migrate further inland, this is to say will increase in sea level as a result of drastic climate change may lead to an increase in ‘real estate’ to some species, the same will also limit the natural habitat of some species. Built in natural ecosystems that help in the migratory species such as moving air or water in the seas or oceans may result in the good and bad in terms of consequences as to whether there would be an increase in more energy spent or less energy spent per migration season.

Also, suppose there is a changing of such ecosystems like currents or winds, then this will hamper some species ability to relocate as they may end up in a wrong habitat. Nevertheless, those species that can adapt at multiple habitats may be less affected. Fish species are more vulnerable to changes in their ecosystems like reduction and or change of currents as it may limit their capacity to migrate to new waterways and or eradication of entire species as some species are unable to thrive on certain water temperatures. In addition to fish species being vulnerable, mud filters and feeders such as clams, oysters and mussels distribution may be affected when freshwater enter into the sea/oceans which eventually affects the seawater.

Changes in Species Composition

The change in climate can lead to several non- native and native species to rise in sufficient to an extent where they transform and negatively affect other existing habitat and ecosystems. The response of the species to changing ecosystem circumstances may lead to shifts in composition which often affects the food chain in a habitat such as altering significant competitive and predator–prey associations that can minimize regional or local biodiversity.

Aquatic systems’ factors, like changes in thermal conditions, salinity or flow regimes can change the competitive associations or predator–prey interaction within species in manners which are detrimental to families of transformation issue. The function and structure of coastal ecosystems may transform as species with a higher adaptation of raised salinity outcompete the ones with limited tolerance; these effective changes in the family structure may be episodic, greatly resulting to eradication of certain habitat if thresholds are passed.

The marine ecosystems, induced change in climate in habitat composition and food web structure may be caused by shifts in ecological niches for single species which is important (Harley et al. 2006). Temperature change can affect key species associations whereby tinny changes in climate can produce huge transformation in natural habitat.

For instance, a reduced in key predator size. In freshwater inflow, seasonal changes can be a simulative factor that may cause changes in habitat composition of mangrove fishes in gradients of estuarine.

Looming Risk of Extinction

Reece et al. said that there is sufficient data showing species possibly of extinction but very little information as to how to develop conservation help. The survival ability of most species is subjective to human interference to the natural landscape and their perceptions for climate change risks should be important.

Reece et al. filed a wholesome list of records of possible response to change in climate or increase in sea level in about 90% of the 300 species. Of those surveyed 30% showed higher anthropogenic geographic hindrances that would limit their ability to move habitat in response to climate change. The results of climate change on species is highly likely to lead in changes in geographic range, the composition of species and species.

Those species with in effective dispersal ability as well as long time for regeneration or long time to mature as well as poor genetic variability with low tolerance to change in their habitual environment are most likely to be affected by climate change and are most vulnerable to climate change.

Several general families like (Odocoileus virginianus) white-tailed deer or (Sus scrofa) feral hogs; may continuously thrive in a climate change. Species, both exotic and the native having characters that help in colonizing or invading disturbed region may survive in a rapid climate change. Species mechanism for adaptation such as changing their climatic niche by adapting to their range physiology and phenology (Bellard et al 2012). Various models have been used to predict the upcoming biodiversity and realized that most model showed important repercussions for biodiversity. The worst scenarios showed results of rates of extinction that could cover sixth mass extinction on Earth (Bellard et al. 2012).

Conclusion

The climate change has been diversely affecting the species and their ecosystems. In Florida, most of the locations’ climate is humid subtropical. The most common influenced environmental conditions lead to species migration to other places, interchanged distribution, the food chain interruptions and even extreme impacts such as species extinction. These impacts are often predicted by the models that are mostly controlled by the analyst employed by federal government. This is to know the climate change and upcoming impacts that may lead to loss species or environmental composition change. The predictions are always used by federal to prevent natural climatic disasters which may cause damage to the habitat.

Forest Biodiversity and Climate Effects on Ecosystem Carbon Flux

One of the most important issues at the border involving existence and ecological sciences is how ecological unit will react to worldwide alteration in the face of ongoing decrease of biodiversity. Owing to their possibility to stock up huge amount of carbon in biomass and to avoid soil decomposition, forests are of particular significance but not easy to control experimentally. Global warming has caused an increase in concern over how carbon moves though specific natural ecosystems.

In this study I described forest structure for two upland Florida ecosystems, sandhill and a mixed hardwood hammock forest, through means of quantifying tree diversity, basal area, frequency, and heights. Than to quantify the function of these systems I determined the carbon flux of a well established mixed hardwood hammock, lawn, and agricultural sites in order to note how human influence is changing the rate at which carbon is cycling though an ecosystem. In both of these studies used I used a belt transect to survey and collect data on tree diversity and characteristics.

Other tools that were used were clinometers, to determine tree height, DBH tape to determine tree diameter, and a Infrared Gas Analysis Chamber which was used to quantify the amount of carbon dioxide respired by plants and soil microorganisms. My results found that sandhill forest communities are less diverse than hardwood hammock communities and that forest were better carbon pools than lawns. I also discovered that the highest flux rate of carbon out of a system came from the area which was tilled every 40 years. In conclusion I found that forest store carbon very efficiently and that tillage is a good mechanism to speed up carbon flux out of a system.

The objective to put together the consequences from the two scheme part to achieve an improved mechanistic kind of how medium-term results of biodiversity loss on ecosystem performance may be connected to degree of difference of short-term reaction to environmental measures of forests with high vs. low tree diversity. This information outlines a base for management to increase forest steadiness and environmental maintenance, together with timber production and soil protection.

Introduction

The importance about the outlook of forests has mainly concentrate on the pressure to the continued existence of the strange biological diversity that set apart these ecosystems. An additional viewpoint highlights the responsibility that forests take part in the global carbon cycle. In spite of covering only about 8% of the ground level, forests are considered to control about 40% of the earthly biomass and allow for over 50% of the yearly net primary output of the biosphere (Williams et al., 1998).

In addition, current facts proposed that unlogged forests proceed as a sink of anthropogenic carbon discharge (Grace et al., 1995). On the other hand, the devastation of forests by land permission and forest fires is an important source of CO2, a point noticeably highlighted by the current huge fires that take place in forests internationally (Brown, 1998). The point of this review is to detail existing research relating to the issue that manipulates carbon dynamics in the forests.

Global warming has caused a heighten interest in the flux of carbon in and out of ecosystems in recent years. This spring of interest has been caused by the solidified statement that increasing carbon levels are directly related to anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. In this series of observational studies I will consider ecosystem function and structure and connect them to ecosystem carbon flux through means of biomass and respiration studies.

The objective for this research was to quantify tree diversity, basal area, frequency, and heights in sandhill and mixed hardwood forest ecosystems in attempts to describe their structure and secondly, to determine carbon flux though means of soil respiration in multiple Florida ecosystems and evaluate how changes in land use/cover could affect ecosystem cycling of the carbon.

Sandhill forests are arid fire climax communities that occur on elevated sloping ground composed of deep, marine deposited, yellowish sands that are well drained and relatively sterile. (Myers 1985) The vegetation consists mainly of longleaf pine (pinus palustris) deciduous oaks and with a typical ground cover of wiregrass (Aristida stricta) (Myers et al. 1987). Since sandills are a fire climax community they are dependent on low-intensity quick burns in order to reduce hardwood competition.

The larger pines and oaks over time developed thick insulating bark and developmental modifications that allow seedlings and seeds to be fire tolerant such as the grass like seedling stage of most pines (Myers, 1985). In Florida, this community has been extensively reduced and altered due to agriculture and development over the past 100 years. (Myers et al. 1987)

The second community I evaluated was a Florida mixed hardwood forest. These plant communities are found in areas where fire has been suppressed long enough to allow succession to move pass the pine stage and where limestone and phosphate deposits are outcropping ( Myers, 1985). Hardwood mixed forest varies highly in species composition since they are dependent on soil moisture and fertility. Therefore the most species diversity should be located in the mixed hardwood hammock rather than the sandhill environment because it is a more variable ecosystem that has more diverse soils and is less prone to selection by fires.

The main ecosystem function I focused on in this study was the flux of carbon dioxide from a Florida hardwood forest, lawn, an area that had been tilled every 10 years, and an area that had been tilled every 40 years. When plants photosynthesize they decrease levels of carbon in the atmosphere by collecting it via carbon dioxide and storing it in their biomass. Almost 50% of all living tissue accumulated in plants is comprised essentially of carbon so plant growth and photosynthesis are two direct causes of decreased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

The process of respiration is another important mechanism which influences carbon flux by releasing carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere through processes of plant dark reactions and microbial and animal metabolic activates. Soil respiration, which is made up of organic matter decomposition and mineralization, root respiration and atmosphere respiration, is strongly influenced by temperature and moisture levels (Jabro et al. 2008) When soils are warm and moist microbial metabolic rates can increase allowing more respiration to occur than if they were dry and lower than ideal temperatures.

So the hardwood forest should have the highest amount of carbon storage because it contains the most plant biomass, while the plot of land that is plowed every 40 years should have the highest carbon flux rate because of the constantly aerated soils which allow high levels of microbial activity to occur to digest the grasses and shrubs with annual life cycles.

There is an obvious need of essential data on carbon storage in the woods and the amount of carbon released next to logging and burning. Carvalho et al. (1995; 1998) establish that a 1-ha area of forest hold about 200 tonnes of carbon in the above-ground biomass. A late dry period fire in wreckage three months following the forest had been vacant was set up to go through about 20% of the entire above-ground biomass and released 37.7, 121, and 8.6 tonnes per hectare of carbon, CO2 and CO, correspondingly. Kauffman et al. (1998) establish that the entire above-ground biomass of the main forest was between 290 and 435 tonnes per hectare and as soon as this biomass was cut and burned it dismissed, relying on restricted site conditions, between 58 and 112 tonnes of carbon per hectare.

The quantity of carbon stocked in forest soils in contrast to that stocked in forests transformed to cattle pasture remains uncertain. Assessment of accessible data led Fearnside and Barbosa (1998) to bring to a close that pasture adaptation naturally discharge about 12 tonnes of carbon per hectare in the forest, even though they note that the quantity of carbon stored or lost from the soil is predisposed by the method of pasture management.

The length of studies of transformed forest sites is necessary to give way to vigorous guess of soil carbon storage (Fearnside and Barbosa, 1998). There is also substantial indecision as to how forest soils will react to augmented CO2 and related climate change (Silver, 1998).

Evaluation of present facts led Silver to reason out that warmer climates features of a CO2-rich atmosphere will have an effect in increased soil respiration but it is indefinite how this will be counterbalance by increased carbon absorption by plants that will as a result return more organic matter to the soil. Silver (1998) comments that refusal in soil organic matter linked with increased respiration may affect the reduced ease of use of soil nutrients, therefore preventing the ability of forests to take the benefits of increased CO2– the so-called fertilizer consequence.

Methods

This investigation was conducted in the San Felasco Hammock State Preserve, where sandhill and a mixed hardwood forest arrange side by side. I used the belt transect to measure up the arrangement of sandhill and mixed hardwood forests. At every sample location, I’d put up a belt transect that was 100 meters long by 10 meters wide (Schuur et al, 2008). Then I divided the 100 meter by 10 meter area behind the center of its extended axis with numeral pin flags at 10 meter interval.

The external limitations of the transect were then marked at 10 meter interval in order to form pin flag grid where every “box”, consisting of 4 flags, created a 10 meter by 5 meter plot. These plots where then given a consistent numerical scheme in order to keep path of sampling site information. Once the two divided transects were recognized in every place, I began to bring together tree height and inventory information for the individual 10 meter by 5 meter scheme within each transect.

While determining tree height, first I recognized the tree species and then stand in an identified distance away from the tree. Then by means of a clinometer I documented the point of view from eye level to the top of the tree. By using this data in addition to my own height information I used plain trigonometry to generalize each individual tree height. When taking tree record I collected data relating to plant species and its DBH or diameter at breast height in every individual plot of the belt transect for species of tree that were active and had a width at least 2 inches wide. (Breast height is believed to be located at just about 1.37 meters.)

To compute CO2 flux, I set up a single 50m transect in a mixed hardwood forest, grass, 10 year old field, and 40 year old field all located at the University of Florida outside training laboratory. Next to each transect, I obtained six 15 second measurements at 10m intervals using an infrare gas examination soil respiration chamber. These measurements were used to duplicate the soil respiration from each site.

With the intend of evaluating the above earth biomass in a hectare of lawn to a hectare of woodland, formerly I used to established allometric equilibrium to estimate above ground biomass of trees with pliable or firm wood foundation only on their stem diameter. This process was used given that it is less time consuming and did not necessitate the devastation of the area in query. B= a DBHb Where B= biomass in tons, and a and b are constants values, and DBH= diameter at breast height (cm). Here are the constant values for the forest I used: Softwoods: (a=0.006, b=2.172), Hardwoods: (a=0.113, b=1.164). (Lab manual)

After that I measured every individual tree >2.5 cm DBH within 2m on either side of the transect, in 10m increment (Schuur et al, 2008). For the lawn and tilled plots I clipped and collected a 25 cm x 25 cm square sampling from the middle of every plot and multiplied this biomass number by 0.5 to get the quantity of carbon since biomass is just about 50% carbon. After computing the quantity of carbon at each plot I level this carbon into a 1 hectare area.

Results

The degree to verify the arrangement of every ecosystem I come across at I used a species-area curve. As the vicinity is reviewed in the mixed hardwood hammock increased, more species were noticed. Whereas in the sandhill species, the diversity is plateau at around 300 sq meters. The sandhill and hammock ecosystems together had declining basal area with an increase in tree number of trees (Fig. 2). In the mixed hardwood hammock ecosystem Laurel Oak (Quercus hemisphaerica) was the majority of influential species, with utmost relative significant value, relative supremacy, frequency and abundance (Fig. 3).

While in the sandhill ecosystem there was a relatively equal spread of importance between Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda), Longleaf Pine (Pinus palustris), Slash Pine (Pinus elliottii) and Turkey Oak (Quercus laevis) while Laurel Oaks (Quercus hemisphaerica) though present were relatively non abundant (Fig. 4). When comparing tree height between the two ecosystems it was found that the hammock ecosystem (mean=17.977 meters/tree, variance 46.095) and the sandhill ecosystem (mean=18.715 meters/tree, variance 33.123) were on average very similar in height (paired t-test for means=1.833, p value one tailed =0.411).

When looking at ecosystem purpose in respect to carbon dioxide levels I found that forest had the largest carbon pools, while lawns had the smallest (Figure 5). Surprisingly, I found that the area that receives tillage every 40 years had the largest mean carbon loss at 39.48 Tons C/ha/yr with a St Dev. of 10.57. The lawn had the lowest mean carbon loss at 21.78 Tons C/ha/yr with a St. Dev. of 15.35 (Figure 5).

The longest turnover rate was found to be in the forest with it taking 65.31 years for carbon to return to the atmosphere. The shortest turnover time was held by the 40 year tillage patch with a turnover rate of 0.25 years. The largest biomass amount was found to be located in forests which had an average of 2329.797 Ton C/ha (St. Dev 2103.05). The lowest amount of biomass was located on the lawn with an average of 1.407 Ton C/ha (St Dev. 0.781).

Discussion

It has been discussed whether worldwide climate change and associated increased in CO2 height will have effect in considerable adjustment in the arrangement and group mixture of forests (Phillips, 1995). Roden et al. (1997) used a growth hall to replicate the outcome of a tree-fall hole on the growth of a pioneer species and a late sequences species from the subtropics in a CO2 rich environment. They discover that increased CO2 considerably deferred the capability of the shade-tolerant species to adapt to high light levels whilst the pioneer species was not so deprived. Such outcome flags the likelihood that under a CO2-rich atmosphere, pioneer species may proceed as a negative reaction system in the global carbon series since their ability swiftly to collect carbon in plant biomass and soil (Bazzaz, 1998).

Though, beneath a very deep shadow situation it has been revealed that one species of neotropical forest bush had larger growth and absorption rates in growth chamber with twice the present atmospheric property of CO2 in contrast to growth chambers with the surrounding atmosphere (Winter and Virgo, 1998). The dimensions of gas exchange of forest in the ‘Biosphere 2’ mesocosm have also made known to elevate carbon absorption under increased CO2 (Rosenthal, 1998), a outcome that proposed that forests may be a vital sinks of anthropogenic CO2.

On the other hand, countryside testing has shown that the reaction of plants to improved CO2 is more complex than many growth chamber trials suggest. For example, Lovelock et al. (1998) found that eminent CO2 resulted in no increase in plant biomass of ten neotropical forest tree seedlings from three sequence phase developed in open-top chambers generated in the ground. These authors perceived considerable modification in leaf chemistry in reaction to elevated CO2 and mainly where late rotational species had better leaf carbon to nitrogen proportion. This directs them to reason out that the outcome of high CO2 on forest may perhaps be indirect by means of change in nutrient interval and therefore soil nutrient accessibility.

Modelling is crucial to the knowledge of forest carbon financial plan, chiefly at local and worldwide balance. Though the forecast of representation are of basic necessity, given the difficulty of the connections and poor geographical extent of field statistics, they are practical in putting together suggestions and elucidating field measurements (Potter et al., 1998). For instance, a form of the soil–plant–atmosphere range was matched over ground measurements of CO2 and H2O found on eddy-covariance techniques in a virgin forest.

This model led Williams et al. (1998) to terminate that lesser carbon uptake in the dry season was due to reduced soil moisture materials, rather than due to change in leaf region indicator or low levels of moisture. Information on constant isotopic arrangement of carbon and oxygen in CO2 example across vertical outline during forest covering are believed to be crucial for rising global carbon budgets. Nevertheless, much more investigation is necessary to comprehend the foundation and implication of temporal and spatial inconsistency in these measurements (Buchmann et al., 1997).

The ‘Biosphere 2’ mesocosm has facilitate investigational validation of straightforward canopy representation used to discover the result of different levels of CO2 and light on net carbon uptake of the forests (Lin et al., 1998). This mesocosm facility permits the creation of data on carbon exchanges under a range of mixture of light and CO2 distribution that at present do not take place under normal conditions. Lin et al.’s (1998) short-term testing and modeling led them to determine that carbon exchange is not in a straight line and that previously atmospheric CO2 levels exceed 600ppm in the forest cannot act as a carbon sink.

This judgment is reliable with the soil–vegetation–atmosphere modelling by Cao and Woodward (1998) for the period 1861–2070. They established clear interaction consequence of climatic change and increased atmospheric CO2 on carbon storage and recommended that in the tropics the harmful consequence of climate change on carbon result will be counterbalance by more well-organized gas exchange under an ambiance enriched by CO2. On the other hand, they foresee that the capability of earthly scheme to store carbon would turn into concentrated once CO2 strengthening surpasses 600ppm.

Laurance et al. (1998) take on a modelling exercise to examine the significance on carbon discharge that biomass decline is greater on the limits of forest fragments in contrast to the entire centre of remains. Their modelling established that land interval that create numerous rain forest segregate (such as that caused by small-scale farms) causes two to five times more biomass decline on forest border than separation for large-scale cattle ranches, in spite of the total area cleared.

They recommend that this distinction is a major additional section of global carbon release that has been in the past unnoticed, perhaps in the order of 22–149 million tonnes per year for forests worldwide. Goldammer and Price (1998) used the outcome of a number of models of the importance of climate change following a repetition of atmospheric CO2. They accomplished that forests, mainly those ruined by logging and clearance, will develop into more fire prone given extended dry seasons, high frequencies of dearth and an increased significance of fires started by lightning. Recurring fires may affect considerable soil nutrient losses from minor forests, thus striking the capability of forests to take carbon (Kauffman etal., 1997).

Conclusion

In a current evaluation Bazzaz (1998) renowned that there can be ‘little doubt’ that forests will react to increases in atmospheric CO2 and related alteration in rainfall and temperature, even if accepting the particulars of these modification will necessitate substantial mutual research from scholars across a wide variety of regulation.

Houghton (1997) exemplify this position by disagreeing that, in order to undertake sufficiently the problem of carbon exchange amid the atmosphere and biosphere, the subsequent five research programmes that function at unusual spatial balance should be engaged:

  • direct field measurements of carbon storage;
  • direct field measurements of CO2 fluxes above different ecosystems;
  • models of carbon cycling at the ecosystem level;
  • geochemical modelling of the global carbon cycle; and
  • modelling carbon flux on the basis of remote-sensing data on land-use changes (Bazzaz, 1998).

Obviously, to carry out such a complete set of research programmes the decision of an amount of considerable scientific, managerial and political problems is requisite. This is so since the worldwide nature of the question, the variety of methodologies and expertise, and the vast quantity of information concerned (Houghton, 1997). Additional, such included programmes are costly and need strong community support in a broad cross-section of rich and poor state all through the world.

Mazur (1998) offer a sobering report of the indecisiveness of the media in gathering together worldwide community support for forest protection. In spite of speed up there is proof devastation of tropical rain forests and matching release of CO2 that this once well-liked media ‘story’ has now turn into decayed. Recurring the fortune of tropical rain forests to the pinnacle of political program entail change in media attention to update the public and reason politicians.

With no extensive support there will be inadequate assets to undertake this grimly serious worldwide crisis. One more urgent subject crucial for the continued existence of forests is the making of financial device that make rich nations pay for ecological services provided by forests, such as carbon storage (Fearnside, 1997). At present, ecological services significant to the preservation of biosphere purpose are not accorded financial cost with the effect that poor nations have no financial inducement to relinquish the change of forests in their anxious mission for hard notes.

An Essay on Conservation of Biodiversity

Conservation of biodiversity is vital for maintaining the Earth’s environment and sustaining life on the planet. There are a number of ways in which the richness of biodiversity helps in maintaining the ecological system. Conservation of biodiversity is important for the survival of living beings on Earth. Hence, a lot of emphases is being given on the conservation of biodiversity these days.

The Extinction in Biodiversity

Due to human activities, numerous varieties of animals go extinct each year. Western Black Rhinoceros, Dodo, Tasmanian tiger, Golden Toad, Woolly Mammoth, Caribbean Monk Seal, Ivory-billed Woodpecker, and Japanese Sea Lion are some of the species of animals that have gone extinct.

Lemur, Mountain Gorilla, Vaquita, Sea Turtles, Amur Leopard, and Tiger are some of the species that are on the verge of extinction. Apart from these many species of plants and trees including Lepidodendron, Araucaria Mirabilis, Wood Cycad and Kokia Cookie have gone extinct and many species are endangered.

Need to Conserve Biodiversity

Earth is a beautiful planet which has given us many things which occur naturally. Natural resources, rivers, valleys, oceans, different species of animals and beautiful varieties of plants and trees are among some of these.

In today’s world, we are busy developing our surroundings and spoiling our beautiful environment. Today, we have exploited most of the things that were available abundantly in nature. Thus, there arises a need to conserve these natural things. Among other things, there is a serious need for the conservation of biodiversity.

Importance of Conservation of Biodiversity

Conservation of biodiversity is important for many reasons. Here are some of the main reasons to conserve biodiversity:

  1. Process of Food Chain: Different species of animals and plants serve as the source of food for other animals and living organisms. Thus, conserving biodiversity help to keep the food chain among the living organisms.
  2. Nutritional Needs: The decline in the variety of plants and animals would mean the decline in the variety of food we eat. So, this is likely to result in nutritional deficiencies.
  3. Cleaner Air: Plants and trees have a greater ability to purify the air and keep the atmosphere clean. As there is a decrease in the number and types of trees and plants, it impacts the quality of air in a negative way.
  4. Better Cultivation of Crops: Fertility of soil is maintained by many insects, organisms and microorganisms work on different levels. So we have to maintain the level of microorganism which is better for the cultivation of crops.
  5. For Medical Reasons: For making different medicines many species of trees and plants are used so as to cure various diseases.

Methods to Conserve Biodiversity

Methods that can help in the conservation of biodiversity are

  1. Control Population: The greater the population the higher the needs which would result in further exploitation of flora and fauna and decline in biodiversity. For the conservation of biodiversity, we have to control the human population and allow other species of plants and animals to replenish on our planet.
  2. Control Pollution: The changing climate, deteriorating air quality and the growing amount of pollution on land and water bodies are leading to different types of diseases in many. It is essential to reduce the activities leading to pollution so as to conserve biodiversity.
  3. Reduce Deforestation: Due to deforestation, there is the loss of habitat. Due to this reason, wild animals are unable to survive in the new environment and die.
  4. Avoid Wastage: We need to understand that natural resources are not only essential for us but are also vital for the survival of other species. We must thus utilize only as much as we require them so that these remain available in abundance in nature for future use.
  5. Spread Awareness: Apart from this, one of the best methods to conserve biodiversity is by spreading awareness. The government can do so at a bigger level. While we can spread awareness by word of mouth and through social media.

Conclusion

Conservation of biodiversity is of utmost importance. We must all make efforts to conserve biodiversity rather than contributing towards its declination. Thus, the richness of biodiversity is essential for the survival of living beings on Earth.

How to Protect Biodiversity As a Student? Essay

While large scale changes in behaviour, policies and measures that protect biodiversity will be essential, individuals have a vital part to play. Reducing consumption patterns can start at an individual level through conscious choices about the food we eat, products we buy and services we use.

Tackling the biodiversity crisis will require cooperation at all levels of society, from intergovernmental agreements down to local community action. Individuals can play their part in creating the institutions and electing leaders who can help to safeguard biodiversity. Reconnecting with nature and encouraging others to do the same can help people to learn more about local ecosystems, respect them and treasure them.

Consumers can have an impact through what they buy and use in their day to day lives. Certain products such as cotton have a disproportionate effect on biodiversity. There is also overconsumption of high environmental footprint meat, especially beef, in many parts of the world. Those with savings and pensions can chose to invest in ways that promote rather than harm biodiversity.

Reducing what we waste and throw away can play a part in lowering pollution levels and the over exploitation of natural resources. Huge amounts of food is wasted and by repairing rather than replacing electrical items, and getting more use out of the clothes we already own, consumers can have a positive effect on biodiversity that could also save us money. Delivering information to consumers about the environmental impact of products is another option. New rules introduced in 2021 in the EU requires manufacturers of electrical goods such as fridges, washing machines and televisions to make them easier to repair – the ‘right to repair“.

Spending more time in nature can help improve our relationship with it and attach greater value to the habitats around us. Educating children about wildlife and local ecosystems can help to make our connection to the natural world clearer and bring about long-term behavioural changes in future generations.

Essay on Invasive Species: Green Crab

An invasive species has taken over the coastline of Maine and is now threatening our economy- the Green Crab. These creepy-crawly creatures came from the ballasts of European ships in the mid-1800s, yet as ocean temperatures are rising, they have become more of a problem than anybody could have imagined. The abundance of clams and mussels in our ocean has become their main source of nutrition, leaving Maine’s clam industry with less and less. Data collected by Maine’s Department of Resources recorded 38.4 million pounds of clams harvested in Maine in 1977, while just 9.2 million pounds of clams were harvested in 2015. Green Crabs eat mussels, another large part of Maine’s fishing industry, and tear down eelgrass during hunting, which hosts larvae for fish, shellfish, and lobster. Along with this, their rapid reproduction terminates all chances of keeping a balanced ecosystem. For the sake of both the economy and the ecosystem, we as Mainers need to take action now.

There are many different theories regarding how to handle the situation. One of the most popular methods people have discussed is a trapping system. If each fishing boat was given traps or money to buy traps, they could try to get the Green Crabs out of the ocean as they were doing their normal catches. This plan seems fairly simple, yet many are worried that this is not the answer. Unfortunately, time is a key factor in the spread of the Green Crabs. If they are not removed or decreased soon, one of Maine’s biggest businesses is at a deadly risk. Because of this, the idea of trapping these crabs seems unpractical.

Another plan in discussion is building fences that separate Green Crabs from some clam and mussel populations. In doing so clams and mussels would be able to reproduce and thrive in their environment with no threat of these predators. There is much debate regarding the practicality of this. One on hand, Maine’s fishers could harvest from these fenced-in areas as well as foster populations to flourish. On the other, this only solves one very small part of the problem. Yes, this may be economically beneficial, but the ecosystem is still at stake. While clams and mussels inside the fence are growing and living, the Green Crabs will still be infesting Maine’s waters. They will still be eating the natural populations and damaging the ecosystem. We must fix the entire problem, not only a particular part.

Fortunately, there may be a way to both remove the Green Crabs and financially gain from it. The Tautog fish is very popular in seafood, many recreational fishers seek to catch them as well and is also a predator of the Green Crab. Using the Green Crabs as Tautog bait could be a perfect plan for both the economy and the ecosystem. We would both remove the problem and use the crabs practically. From Nova Scotia to the Carolinas people hunt these fish, so Maine could keep the Crabs as bait and sell them in the state, as well as export them to other states. This solution is a perfect blend between saving our waters and keeping a stable economy.

Sources

    1. https://www.livescience.com/63647-mutant-green-crabs-invading-maine.html
    2. https://www.maine.gov/dmr/science-research/species/invasives/greencrabs/index.html
    3. https://downeast.com/nature-2/green-crab-invasion/
    4. https://narratively.com/the-great-green-crab-invasion-and-the-battle-for-coastal-maine/
    5. https://www.pressherald.com/2016/05/01/mild-winter-heats-up-efforts-to-protect-clam/
    6. https://bangordailynews.com/2018/03/02/business/fisheries/lobster-supply-chain-contributes-1b-to-maine-economy-each-year-study-finds/
    7. https://maineclammers.org/what-we-do/marine-field-research/green-crab-invasion-mitigation/
    8. https://maineclammers.org/what-we-do/freeport-leads-in-fight-to-stop-green-crab-invasion/
    9. https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1991-09-22-1991265219-story.html
    10. https://www.mass.gov/info-details/learn-about-tautog 

Essay on Invasive Species: Asian Carp

Asian Carp have invaded our lakes and rivers in Kentucky over the past twenty-five years. This infestation has caused a major crisis and has had a huge biological impact on the native species of fish in our waterways. Asian Carp are not native to the waters of our region. In the past, local farmers were allowed to populate these fish in their ponds to help combat the algae problem for their locally grown catfish on their farms. As the demand for locally grown catfish has increased over the years, so needs quality and clean ponds on farms to support this industry. The introduction of Asian Carp to local farms started in the 1960’s. What environmentalists did not foresee is that local farm ponds could not sustain this species of fish over time. When flooding occurs, these fish are swept out of local ponds and dumped into local streams and rivers. Asian Carp breed and migrate quickly and over many years they finally ended up in Kentucky Lake and Lake Barkley. Over the past ten years, this spread of this species of fish has not only become a nuisance but is now threatening the native species of fish that exist in our lakes and rivers. The issue has become epidemic in the past few years as the fishing industry is seeing dramatic reductions in the harvesting of the fish that exist in our region. These Asian Carp are destroying our native fish populations and the devastating problem is now being addressed in a major way.

The Asian Carp is native to China and many other environments in the Southeast Asia area of the world. In past centuries, our region of the country never saw the existence of these fishes. Asian Carp compete for food and space as done any species of fish but at a much higher rate than the native fish we have in Kentucky. This issue has not been limited to Kentucky waterways but is a problem in all the lower Mississippi and Ohio River waterways. The problem first came to light more physically as these fish began to leap from the water and became visible to boaters as they were enjoying our lakes and rivers. Asian Carp have been known to leap up out of the water to a height of as much as ten feet in the air. This became a major issue for boaters and fishermen as they travel our lakes and rivers at high rates of speed. Many people have been hurt over the years being hit with leaping fish as they sped down the lakes. Asian Carp are very sensitive to light and noise and boats cause them to jump from the waters in response to the noise they feel in the water. The physical danger of these fish was seen during the early days of the infestation but the long-term effects of them on our ecosystem have just recently come to light as our native fish populations have started to deplete. This could be devastating to the fishing and tourist industries for our region as millions of dollars of revenue are at stake, not to mention the biological impacts. The focus in the past few years has been the eradication of this species of fish. This has turned out to be a huge undertaking as it is an eradication program aimed at the Asian Carp species, not that of other native fish species in our waterways.

Asian Carp are not as much a problem in their native lands as they are in our environments. Asian Carp are a big species of fish and grow very large. To sustain their life and size, they need a lot of space and a lot of food sources. The problem in our local waterways is that there is only a fixed amount of space and ultimately only a fixed amount of food at one time. Our native fish have competed for this space and these food sources for many years. With the introduction of Asian Carp, the local ecosystem has become very disturbed. Environmentalists have seen drastic reductions in the populations of native fish as the Asian Carp have taken over their habitats and deprived them of life-sustaining food. They are killing and destroying our native fish populations as they breed and grow in huge numbers. Not only do they take from the food supply, but they also destroy the habitat of much-needed mussels and nutrient suppliers to the water. Asian Carp have lowered the overall water quality in our lakes and rivers. As the water quality, has decreased, so has the nutrient base within our waters to sustain the native fish species. By lowering the water quality, it is proving hard for our native fish to survive without these key nutrient bases. Not only is it a space and food issue, but it is an environmental issue also with the decrease in water quality.

Isolating the Asian Carp species has been the approach that Conservationists have taken in Kentucky. Dams in our area release millions of gallons of water into lower rivers and streams. The point of release at the dam and lock site has become an area where our Fish and Wildlife workers have tried to contain these fish in a larger body of water. One possible deterrent to these fish has been what is called a bio-acoustical fence. The BAFF, as it is referred to, is installed near the locks of dams to keep the fish from entering the lower reservoirs. The Kentucky Department for Fish and Wildlife has installed many of these BAFF units in the past two years as a deterrent for the movement of these fish. The BAFF system uses a combination of bubbles, light, and sound to deter the movement of the Asian Carp species. Using trenches that are dug into the bottom of the waterway, these systems are built and positioned near spillways so that when charged they can repel or cause the fish to retreat into the upper waterway. Because this species of fish is so reactive to light and sound, it has been shown that they retreat in a very quick manner and do not end up passing the BAFF system and ending up downstream in lower reservoirs. The logic of thinking is that if these fish are kept out of the lower waterways, they can be contained in regions or specific bays of the larger waterways such as Kentucky Lake and Lake Barkley. This method of deterrent is meant for containment rather than eradication. Fish and wildlife agents have seen this as a first-step approach and are looking to other means to eradicate the fish after they are contained. Using the BAFF system has shown promising results in the lower waterways. If the fish are not allowed to migrate into lower waterways, then native species of fish are allowed to have more ecological room to feed and increase their populations again.

Once there has been an effort to contain the fish, Fish, and Wildlife workers now have turned to another means for the complete eradication of the Asian Carp. Asian Carp are very reactionary and sensitive fish. By using sonar detection, these fish can be seen on sonar once they are isolated to a specific area. Fish and Wildlife workers have now seen that, by using electricity, they can stun Asian Carp and render them paralyzed for some time as they then rise to the top of the water. In recent months, many boats have been deployed to different bays within the lake so that an electrode can be dropped into a large school or group of these fish. After deployment of the “electrocution stick” the electrode is charged with electricity and a large amount of voltage is applied. Within seconds, hundreds of paralyzed Asian Carp float to the surface of the water and workers are then able to scoop them up with nets and bring them into the boats. The fish can then be taken to a local fishery where they are sold or disposed of ethically. This method has shown positive effects in our lakes and there has been an increase in this type of eradication for the Asian Carp species.

With the Asian Carp problem becoming more of an ecological issue over the years, Kentucky turned to the harvesting of these fish to decrease the population along with providing a market for the actual fish. Governor Matt Bevin signed the first-ever Fish House contract in 2018. A company in Wickliffe, KY became the first fish house to partner with the State of Kentucky for the intake and processing of Asian Carp from local Anglers. The contract guarantees that the Anglers will receive 19 cents per pound for Asian Carp and the State of Kentucky supplements the fish house with revenue to help the local fishing industry and the harvesting of the nuisance fish in an attempt to preserve the livelihood of fishermen and their families. The Asian Carp are sold at auctions in these fish houses and are bought by commercial industries all over the country. Some of the fish is sold for human consumption but a large part of the fish are sold for filler ingredients in many foods for pets and livestock. These contracts with the state have been successful and it is fixing the problem in two different ways. It keeps fishermen in business as fishing for their native species of fish has decreased yet it also rids our waterways of the infestation of this large fish.

Being a lifelong resident of Kentucky and growing up on these waters, this infestation is destroying our lakes and rivers as we know them. It is virtually impossible to navigate the waters of Kentucky Lake or Lake Barkley without being hit by a jumping Asian Carp. Not only being hit but seriously injured. Many people have been injured over the past years by being hit by a ten-pound lunging and flying fish. This has taken away from the enjoyment of boating and such activities as skiing and tubing on the lake. It has become a major safety issue. Also, being an avid Angler, fishing on the local waterways has been majorly affected. There are fewer native species of fish and fishing for bass and crappie has become much harder. Asian Carp have rooted out these species of fish and it is affecting the fishing industry. This region can not have its fishing industry and the ecosystem of its waterways destroyed by such an invasive species.

We must find a solution for this invasion of Asian Carp very soon. Our waterways can not sustain this amount of damage for an extended period. Many gains have been made in the eradication of this species of fish, and native populations of fish are returning in numbers, but there is still too large a population of Asian Carp. We enjoy the waterways of Kentucky for the native ecosystems that exist, and I am afraid if the effort is not increased, the ecosystem will not exist as we know it today. That will have remarkable biological and economic changes for the region as we know it. Fish and Wildlife workers need to be encouraged for the work that they are doing and further research is needed in the study of this epidemic.

    1. Precht, D. (2018, September 28). Kentucky Lake’s Asian carp crisis. Retrieved from https://www.bassmaster.com/conservation-news/kentucky-lake-s-asian-carp-crisis
    2. Wired2Fish Editors •Jul 31. (2019, August 1). Asian Carp Herded in Demonstration for New Bio-acoustic Fish Fence. Retrieved from https://www.wired2fish.com/news/asian-carp-herded-in-demonstration-for-new-bio-acoustic-fish-fence/
    3. Moore, C. (2019, February 11). Will Scaring Asian Carp Prevent them from Spreading? Retrieved from https://www.outdoorlife.com/will-scaring-asian-carp-prevent-them-from-spreading/
    4. Deppen, L. (2019, July 31). This video shows just how many Asian carp are invading Kentucky lakes. Retrieved from https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/2019/07/31/kentucky-shock-invasive-asian-carp-out-lake-barkley/1876569001/
    5. Zdanowicz, C. (2019, August 1). Kentucky is using ‘shocking’ boats to show just how bad its Asian carp problem is. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/31/us/asian-carp-kentucky-scn-trnd/index.html   

 

Essay on What Are Invasive Species

As time goes by, we seem to become more and more aware of our surroundings. We start to understand the world around us and our place in society, especially the link between us and nature. Nature holds a very fragile place in the world and must hold a balance with modern society. But what happens when this delicate balance is thrown off? Invasive species (as understood from its name) are invaders of nature. They can take over anything they are exposed to and are difficult to control. Even though controlling these species is difficult, it can be beneficial to introduce invasive species to a new area. Government agencies and businesses must take careful thought into whether or not to transfer an invasive species to another country. To make an educated decision they must consider the benefits that the species will bring, if the species can be controlled, and the risk that comes with introducing the invader to a new location.

Invasive species usually have a bad name attached to them. Their reputation is filled with negativity and is known to simply be unwanted. However, government agencies and businesses should consider all the benefits of introducing these species to new areas. With the aid of a new species in a controlled environment, the economy can take a turn for the better. Farming oceans is an up-and-coming trade that brings many benefits such as “food security and poverty alleviation” to countries around the world (Source C). These underwater farms- commonly known as Aquaculture- also create many new jobs that help developing countries. The underwater farmers offer “a wide range of options for diversification of avenues for enhanced food production and income generation in many rural and peri-urban areas” by farming many different species not common to the area. Though introducing new species to different locations can cause problems, the benefits should always be considered with an open mind.

Control is the fragile barrier between success and chaos. And this barrier brings order to situations that would otherwise run themselves to destruction. Invasive species are particularly familiar with the destruction that comes from lack of control, and therefore the ability to control must be considered when transferring invasive species to new regions. Invasive species can be introduced intentionally or by accident. Either way, the species must be controlled before they cause catastrophic problems. When an invasive species is purposely introduced to a new region- even though the intentions may be good- the species itself can become a problem that affects many people and places. Dybas discusses the horrific effects caused by the accidental introduction of “SARS, a viral respiratory virus” to countries all over the world (Source B). She goes on to explain the many deaths that were caused by the virus and the extreme measures that had to be taken to try and control the invader. Once SARS became an uncontrolled pandemic, however, the virus spread like wildfire using “planes, trains, ships, and automobiles” (Source B). Most invasive species show traits much like SARS and can become a large problem if not properly controlled.

Taking a risk requires understanding the possible consequences and a leap of faith. Risks should not be confused with stupidity, because risks are always taken with a logical reason to obtain positive results. And by balancing the pros and cons of a situation, we can decide whether or not a risk is worth taking. Government agencies and businesses must also weigh their pros and cons to decide if introducing an invasive species to a new area is worth the risk. The positives are clear: employment opportunities, economic growth, decrease in food shortages. But what about the consequences? Ignorance of the risks of bringing in invasive species can lead to destruction as shown in Source A. The photo depicts a barren forest that instills a sense of loss and sadness, all because of an insect infestation. Even invasive species that seem to be a good idea come with consequences. Spotts discussed the cane toads becoming an invasive species in Australia even though “it seemed like a good idea at the time” (Source F). Toads that were originally supposed to battle beetles that attacked sugar-cane plants became invaders that spread throughout the entire continent, “munching on almost everything in sight” (Source F). If government agencies and businesses show no ignorance and are sure to understand the possible consequences, an educated decision can be made on whether or not to introduce an invasive species.

As humans, we like to be comfortable with the events that surround us. We like to know what is going on and have the power to control the outcome of a situation. Government agencies and businesses DO have to power to control whether or not to introduce an invasive species to a new area. And with this power, considerations must be made to make an educated decision. They must understand the benefits the species can bring to the new area, know how to control the species, and know of the consequences that come with introducing these species. And when all the considerations are made with a complete understanding of the invasive species, both ourselves and the world around us can benefit from the final decision.