The Butterfly Effect: Reflection 8

The National Geographic Strange Planet "One Degree" video covers how global warming, elevated C02 levels, and raising the earth's temperature just one degree has dramatic changes. Items covered include Porcupine Caribou, zoaplankton, crabs from California's tide pools, and Asthma in the Children on Trinidad.
The video starts out about the plight of the porcupine caribou. It said that cold regions such as Alaska, Canada, and the Arctic have been experiencing warming up up tp 11 degrees. Since 1987, the population level of the porcupine caribou has dropped by nearly 60,000 and that they are slow to recover and fast to crash. Part of the problem is that caribou are ignoring grassy plains and climbing steep bluffs with limited amounts of food. The reason being that they are trying to avoid being mosquito food. Additionally, the warmer temperatures in winter brings more precipitation. That can make hard crusts on the snow that makes grazing difficult. Also, the more snow that there is the more they have to dig to get their food. In recent years, twice in the spring there has been severe blizzards which prevent the caribou from beginning their migration and because of that calves are being born in transit making it difficult for them to survive. There are many types of indigenous people who rely on the caribou as they have for centuries and would be wiped off the planet if they were not allowed to continue in their ways.
Edward Norton said that the planet is likely to warm 3-10x more in the next century than it has in the past century. Might as well buy some land in Canada now. Its about to be the next LA.
The next person studied zoaplankton. They are tiny organisms who live in the ocean and are the basis for the bottom of the food chain. They migrate to the surface to feed at night and then back down in the day time. This journey is equivalent to 250 miles for a human. (I get mad walking to the Union). In the last 50 years only about 20% of the zoaplankton once present can be found in the oceans. Their crash and recovery seems to be linked to the warm and cold cycles of water or "regime shifts" in the Pacific. They zoaplankton do best in cold and worse in warm. I want to go to the Pacific.
The next study was on the effects of warming waters on crabs found on the California coastline. Many species have been migrating north to stay in the cooler water and can no longer be found where they were once located. Several crabs were hooked to heart monitor machines and put in water with rising temperatures. At 2 degrees warmer than the water that they had been living in all the crabs heartbeats stopped. They all died. In just 2 degrees. One I feel bad for the crabs, I love anything with eyeballs up on stakes like that. I guess you must sometimes sacrifice a few in hopes that something can be done to help the others. Two, 2 degrees doesn't seem like a very big difference. Despite the announcer saying that the crabs were very hardy, people don't die in up to a 30 degree temperature difference. Lets say 60-90 degrees, Might be hot or cold but it isn't going to kill you. However I don't think that crabs regulate their body temperature so maybe that is a big factor. Reminds me of two scenarios. A frog in water brought to a boil won't jump out because the change is gradual but a frog put into hot water will sense the heat. Second, when you get a fish you always have to float the bag so the water that the fish is in can adjust to the water of the new tank.
In Trinidad more and more children are being diagnosed with asthma, sea pain, or aspergilis. Aspergelis is a pathogen found in sands of the Sahara. Global warming has contributed to the drying up of Lake Chad that is now only 1/20th of its former area. This is because the North Atlantic Oscillation which has high and low wind pressures has been forced into an intense phase for the last 20-30 years. Some smart guy plugged this into a computer that reads weather cycles and determined the only thing that would make the cycle get stuck is the elevated levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. Multiplying that is the ever warming Indian Ocean which creates storms which sweep even more Saharan sand from Africa to the Carribbean.
This reminds me of the butterfly effect. Which is the theory that killing one butterfly can change the fate of the world. Doing something that seems so small can have an impact around the globe. One of the previous videos or text said that a breath exhaled today can be on the other side of the globe tomorrow. We are one globe. The spaces between us are a lot smaller than we first thought.

Apocalypto: Reflection 7

The current population growth is expanding so quickly I believe a possible multi-continent collapse is possible. There  is some breaking point to what the earth can produce. Being able to manage the earth's resources is key to pushing that breaking point as far into the future as possible. I don't want my fate to be reduced to a pile of rubble in time so far removed that the collapse of an empire isn't even remembered. As Mary Shelley would say "Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair." Bummer.
The book says that ecocide has now come to over shadow nuclear war and disease. Although I worry about biological warfare and super flu's more frequently than most, and probably more than recommended (hey an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure and my dream job is the CDC what do you expect from me?), it is the well being of the planet that I ponder every day and with almost every action. And for me it is hard to remain optimistic.  Not only is the changes and damages that humans afflicted been severe and scarring, now knowing what we do now know, how is this not a pressing issue on everyone's agenda? I don't know if people as a whole are too stupid, too lazy, or just don't think that it effects them that causes them to remain so detached and empathetic. Modern humans are hardly the last line of the last paragraph in the book of time and look at the damages we have done. Can man, the worlds most advanced and intelligent species, be the downfall of the planet? (my upstairs neighbor walks by a with a heaping trash bag as I realize I've never seen her with recycling. Thanks dumb $#@&% for further illustrating my point). And I lose my train of thought. Do people think that we now have to technology to fix the damage rather than prevent it? A shield to keep some of the sun out, a giant freezer to drop big blocks of ice into the poles again. Sounds like sci-fi. 
Just as these problems have happened day by day, the best way we can seek to counteract their catastrophic effects is to do it day by day. Recycle, be a smart consumer, live minimally, be and be politically active. 
If you have ever seen Apocalypto, a society who manages the natural resources well is threatened when a neighboring tribe needs blood for sacrifice to the sun gods. A few survivors make it thorough the tribulations and just when everything is about back to normal ships arrive. As we know, the Mayan's were wiped off the planet. If it's not one thing its another and just when you think you've covered your bases you may be surprised at what's about to happen next. 
The picture I selected for this entry is post apocalypse Tokyo. 

Those woods look scary: Reflection 6

My first thought while reading is "this must be old. No one has Walkman's anymore" we now live in the era of ipod, mp3s, and satellite radio. My second thought was those woods behind my house do look pretty scary. Not so much for fear of insects, snakes, or panthers but rather more of the homicidal bums that I highly suspect live in every unoccupied expanse murdering all those who venture in. While I also believe that free riders are parasitic in nature, I am surprised the author points out Woody Allen and I wonder if he was ever sued over it.
Being a fervent zombie or apocalypse phobe, I find several reasons in making myself marketable to the survivors as well as essential to my own survival. The more skills you possess: gardening, marksmanship, able to purify water, or store food the more likely it is that you will live. I hope my life is never in such dire circumstances but I see no loss in learning to be prepared. So I read up on things like this. Woody Allen would not be allowed in my post apocalyptic tribe unless he has further skills to offer.
My particular topophilia is not solid. I love both the city and the country. Six months in one and a long for the other. And visa versa. Which is a main component in why I have not bought a house. I don't know where is right for me. I love the diversity of the city and the serenity of the country. The propensity for martial law, plagues, or zombies is significantly less or at least slower reaching in the city and that brings me some sense of peace yet knowing my neighbors can't hear me scream, there's gunshots that raise no alarm, and with out street lights the night gets really dark does not comfort me.
I had never before heard the word anthropocentrism. I absolutely believe that animals feel the range of motions that people do. I also agree with animals propensity for joy. Ever meet a dog that has a bad day? every minute of their life is like the best minute of their life. People should take note in how to derive so much joy from the mundane.
Oooh learning so much. Definitely had never heard the meaning of the Greek terms eros, agape, and philia. But I am also not sure I have ever heard those terms before period. I see the human-nature relationship as a agape. We simply would not be here with out nature and nature does not need us to be here to sustain on its own. This is a one sided relationship.
Who do we have as modern biophils? The crocodile hunter? He died. Ummm... Captain Planet. He is fictional. Al Gore? I suppose he counts as a good one. Not many names come to mind though. I do like this author exponentially more than the previous but I disagree that the two barriers between us and the revolution are denial and imagination. Imagination I can accept as I can not "imagine" a way to end world hunger, or deforestation, etc. However the denial aspect, I feel there are very few people who are still living in denial that we have a problem and that something must be done. Perhaps this article is author a few years old. Pre-Al Gore. Haha.
Suprisingly for me or maybe not so much knowing myself much of what authors say of "we think this and we need that" is already clear to me. There is no way to fix the environment by throwing money at it. It will not take place in a single hour on a single day. It has always been clear to me that the steps are grass roots, individual, small, and unnoticeable making the right choices every day towards the benefit of something I can't see of feel is indeed an abstract concept.
Rootedness as the most important and least recognized need for the human soul. Interesting. For me, only time will tell as I have no solid roots. Maybe a few bushes at best (SWFL, Tomah WI-my hometown, Milwaukee- my favorite place minus all the cold).
I bet this guy listened to the Beatles a lot.
I chose that picture because I thought it illustrated the balance of humans, plants, and animals and how we need to tread lightly. Also, that we need to be looking at all of the flora and fauna in a new way.

Tread softly: Reflection 5

Do unto others as you would have them do to you. I think most people apply this logic to their daily interactions. However, when we pay less fortunate countries to allow us to dump or electronic waste there we are only looking out for our best interests.The amount of chemical laden waste that Americans need to dispose of every year is staggering. Every old computer, printer, and television has very dangerous chemicals in them. But they have to be dumped somewhere. If we left them here they would pollute our waters, raise our risk of certain cancers, and cause elevated fetal deaths.  So we basically pay less privileged countries to be allow ourselves to ravage their lands and give them cancer instead of us. This is an extreme example of unethical human relations but on a smaller scale, not recycling in your home has the same effect; the waste has to go somewhere. Out of sight out of mind is not the solution. When does an item no longer become your property? When it is placed in the trash? When it leaves your zip code? When it become recycled into something new? When it sits in landfill for hundreds of years? When is it no longer your property? I have never pondered this. Sadly, I am sure that somewhere the is the "Leah trash pile" even though I am an avid recycler, try to buy minimally packaged good, and look for ways to reuse or give more life to items, I do generate trash. I guess I would have to say that it is yours until it is recycled or for the duration that it sits in trash dumps. Are the chemical run off also then your property? I guess so. Not that anyone claims there trash that is in the dumps but if you used it in its life, it has no other owner.
I like the quote "the Golden Rule tries to integrate the individual to society, democracy to integrate social organization to the individual." Which is precisely why I seek to one day hold a political office, focusing on mayoral. The population is growing so fast and the world is pretty full of people already. As it continues to grow civilizations are going to become even closer to each other (physically/spatially) and soon there wont be a yours and mine. There will only be an ours. As the reading says "the individual is a member of a community of interdependent parts."
The days of grandeur where man took what needed as vital to his survival and to manifest destiny is over. We belong to the land as much as it belongs to us. Only the soil and water can not protect itself we must be there for its best interests and to preserve it. Have you ever seen the moving "The Happening?" (SPOILED ALERT) Basically, all the trees get mad that so many of them are being destroyed and through communicating with each other they decide to release a pheromone or something airborne that makes people want to kill themselves. Hence, dead people don't harm trees. Unlikely scenario but with a strong message. How much can we push this planet until it starts pushing back? When I moved to Florida I marveled at how beautiful the landscaping was. Now I no longer see beauty I see artificiality. Its all fake, unhealthy looking. Same goes for flying over Florida. Looking down to see the endless canals, and fingerling lakes, and man made ponds, it really looks like at any time Florida could just sink into the ocean. How much of the landscape is the way nature intended it versus what we have created and engineered?
Think of the American Dust bowl. Mother nature being heartless and robbing the soil of moisture? No the Dust Bowl was caused by humans poor management of crop lands and soil erosion. For the most part we are lucky that we seemed to have learned our lesson in this specific scenario but there are many that are unfolding now as well as in the future that will get catastrophically worse before we learn and they get better.
"Obey the law, vote right, join some organizations, and practice what conservation is profitable in your land." Good motto. I firmly support all of those endeavors. Except for maybe some of the obey the law doctrines. But none of which are related to conservation or the environment. I follow all of those laws.
I am originally from (first 20 years of life) a farming community in southwestern Wisconsin and had never heard of the Soil Conservation District Laws. In a way I can understand the farmers only adapting the proposed changes that we profitable. This goes back to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and  being able to make enough money to provide for your family on a yearly basis is understandable but in  no way is acceptable for the consequences that mismanagement will bring in the future. It reminds me of a sand hour glass. The sand going through the glass is having to be able to make enough profit to provide for your family but not looking for future sustainability is like a making the hole gradually get bigger. The window of opportunity will only get smaller as time progresses.
The substitutes for land ethics sounds much like the children's rhyme "If that mockingbird don't sing." If something isn't working right for you go buy something else or a new one. How ever with soil management we can't go buy more soil or new soil. When does something become of value to where we can not afford to lose it? When is the threshold of having to do something begin?
On the land pyramid I had always heard that people were in the same categories as bears, large omnivores. Or even that bears were one above us as bears eat people and people do not eat bears. However I have never heard of people being categorized with raccoon and squirrels. First off, what kind of meat does a squirrel eat? Nuts? Is they surveyor counting nuts as meat because they are a protein. I don't think that counts. Maybe I need to become further educated and learn that squirrels love filet mignon. Do raccoons operate trawl line fishing boats and enjoys sashimi grade ahi like I do? Doubtful. But that would be really cool if they did.
Just as plankton is the essential first step in the food chain of the sea, healthy soil is the first step in the food chain for terrestrial beings. I have heard of using prairie grasses to detoxify once damaged lands. I know that ferns and river birch absorb soil contaminates faster than other like species. There has actually been some land recovery of places that had previously been condemned dumping grounds for waste have been brought back to life though carefully calculated land management.
Well said that the products of fertile soil maybe both qualitative and quantitatively superior. Simply, my vegetable garden in fairly sandy soil which lacks the fertile humus and pirth grows significantly less and also inferior size, color, and quality of vegetables. It is my responsibility to enrich this 20 x 30 foot plot yearly so my soil is enriched and my harvests more bountiful.
I have never heard anyone denounce land conservation as being futile. Indeed all ideas need a well rounded depth of comprehension to be appreciated but there has to be a jump off point for everything. Land conservation and land conservation activism are beneficial to the everyone who depends on the soil as well as the soil itself. The author says that our current problem is one of attitudes and implementation. But I don't see how you plan on changing some one's attitude until you educate them through conservation so they are behind the implementation of aspects. They form their own pyramid and are interdependent on each other.
The image is Aldo Leopold, the founder of ecology sitting on an "Aldo Leopold" Style bench writing a journal entry in 1946.

Not A Tasty Brew: The State of the Environment: Go Walk It Off: Reflection 4

Not A Tasty Brew: The State of the Environment: Go Walk It Off: Reflection 4: Have you ever been upset and someone tells you to go walk it off? Going for a walk can relax you and help clear you mind. I believe tha...

Go Walk It Off: Reflection 4

  

  Have you ever been upset and someone tells you to go walk it off? Going for a walk can relax you and help clear you mind. I believe that walking it off is a combination of passing time and, most likely, you're going to be in the calming outdoors. Nature definitely has a calming, soothing, centering effect on most people.
  I saddens me to learn that elementary schools have cut or have considered cutting physical education and recess. I remember looking forward to recess as a time to be able to exert some of the pent up energy you are forced to keep in while in classrooms. Furthermore, I believe recess teaches students things not fully expressed in the classroom that will be beneficial in adulthood like sharing, empathy, working in groups, and imagination. Likewise, gym class stressed the importance of working it teams, sportsmanship, and helps to combat the growing obesity epidemic. With recess teachers themselves get a short break and an opportunity to collect and refocus themselves allowing them to be more prepared educators. Overall, recess and physical education are beneficial to both teachers and students.
     I am not shocked to read that the use of stimulants went up 600% from 1990-1995. Ritalin, like many pharmaceuticals, is so overly prescribed. I know a ton of kids who love their Ritalin prescriptions not because it helps them to stay focused but because they can sell it to other college students for cash. Not only do they not take their prescriptions to treat their "illness" they are willing to illegally sell it to another student for the money! Pretty sure that's not the way that it was designed to work.
      The part about 90% of ADHD patients being boys annoys me. I can't think of any other psychological conditions that affects such a percentage of only a specific gender. Which leads me to believe that ADD and ADHD are made up. What do I think causes these diseases? Not disciplining your children. Remember the 1950s where if you didn't pay attention you got smacked with a ruler? Didn't seem to be an outbreak of ADHD kids then. Have you ever hear someone say "boys will be boys," that is little more than a euphemism for "I enable my child to get away with crap because of his gender." Lets say we have a 7 year old boy with ADHD. While he has a hard time focusing on history and English, but give him a new monster truck and I bet he can stay focused for hours. So what? He can only stay focused on something that is amusing to him? I call that selective thinking, much like selective hearing, you only hear what you want to when you want to. Lets use me for an example: it could be said that I have ADHD when it comes to economics. I have a hard time listening and staying focused. Because of this the concepts are difficult for me to understand. Now, do I have ADHD or do I just hate numbers and can't stand learning something so irrelevant to my life. Hmmm...  At the bottom of page 3 it says "may have been misdiagnosed or missed completely, causing suffering for the children and their families" more like when the kid is diagnosed he gets a free pass to continue acting out inappropriately and has a fall back as to why his actions and outbursts are okay for him to do. So while I defend my opinion I can go along with the article for the sake of argument.
    Of course kids should go play outside. This is little more than common sense for me. Maybe rather than these children with ADHD being calmer outside maybe we are misinterpreting what types of behaviors are acceptable in certain locations . There's nothing wrong with a child running and yelling if they're OUTSIDE but such behavior inside is unacceptable. The setting dictates what sorts of behaviors are acceptable.The very behaviors that result in discipline inside the home could be encouraged outside the home. I remember being told "if you're going to play with that ball you're going to have to take it outside," which does little more than enforce the idea that certain more rambunctious behaviors are do be done strictly outside. No one plays tackle football  in the house. So in a roundabout way, an ADHD child SHOULD take their energy outside to expel it. So by discrediting the article did I in fact just reinforce their point?
  I am going to stop talking about children with ADHD and rather focus on the "restorative environment." I always do my homework with the blinds up. I like to let the natural light in and I enjoy looking out at the trees. On days like today with the intense storms, I practically have to stop what I am doing to watch the rain, it's just enchanting. On days when I am really fatigued there is nothing better than a nice walk outside to clear my head and to settle me down. When available, I like to camp, canoe,  hike, fish, and swim. The natural beauty puts me in a good place and I leave feeling refreshed.  However, the peaceful zen that comes from being in nature isn't permanent. It needs to be renewed continually. A fifteen minute walk may be enough nature for one day but it may not cover the stresses of the next. In contrast, after 2 weeks of camping in Colorado, Wyoming, and the Dakotas with my family I had taken in enough nature to last me several weeks. I think the amount of calm derived is proportional not only to the amount of time but also to the purity of the surrounding. While walking in my apartment complex is nice, there's trees, flowers, grass, and squirrels, it is also on side walk or black top, around buildings and cars, and through landscaped yards, kind of a synthetic nature, if you will. Or urban nature unlike the pure wild where there are no signs of people. For example, New york City's Central Park is designed to give urban dwellers a taste of nature. For many who live in the concrete jungle it probably does. Yet for me, from Wisconsin, being in a park so heavily populated would have to opposite effect on me. I would be watching all the people and wondering if any of them had the intent to mug me (in 2000 in Central Park I saw a man defecating in a raised shrub). The definition of "nature" is objective, yours may be different than mine. As for the misguided youth who were guided through Alaska, I would be surprised to learn if the effects were long lasting. While there are events in life that can change you, I don't believe that 2 weeks is enough to give them life long inner peace derived from nature. Hopefully though they learned the ways that nature can enrich their lives and bring them an internal calm and they seek to repeat the procedure throughout their lives.

Who Will Speak For Me? Reflections 3

I've never been a huge Jane Goodall fan and these chapters didn't reach as deep as the previous ones although there were a few parts I did enjoy and find touching.
      It's very easy to say "its just a bug" etc and not worry about things that are too small or even too unattractive to have practical purpose in modern times. I think what these people are missing is the inter-connectivity that plants and animals share. One small bug could be solely responsible for the pollination of a plant that is the sole food for an animal. Or that one ugly bug could play a major role in the decomposition of dead plant matter and the converting nitrogen into usage oxygen. If we let a few species go then where do we draw the line as to what is valuable as a species and worthy of being protected? My title comes from the infamous Martin Niemoller poem about the Nazis:

"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out -- 

Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak for me."

(United States Holocaust Museum, 2011 http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392).

Which I think could also be applied to flora and fauna if we began deciding which species were worthy enough to be protected. We are not the definitive power as to what plants and animals deserve to live whereas others are allowed to perish. If we put ourselves into such a position I believe the consequences could be dire as I feel we are ill prepared to make the correlations of each facet of the biological webs significance. 

    My favorite part of the reading were the activists reports of their special interactions with their species and how they interpreted the animals actions and emotions. I am frequently amazed to see people who did not grow up with various types of animals and the limited amount of emotional interpretation!  To me, there is so much variation of emotions expressed through movement as well as vocally and through expressions. I can tell when a chicken is annoyed, when a rabbit is thinking, when a cat has been scorned, and a horse about to be naughty. I really took for granted these kills I had honed over time until I was exposed to people who didn't have the skills. Perhaps like once we have allowed certain species to go extinct will be the time that we start to miss them. I chose the photo because animals have relationships that bring them joy and sadness much like people do. Its just our ability to interpret them that is lacking. 

Ruffle Your Feathers- Reflection 2

       After reading Vandana Shiva's article I began to think about GMOs. It is uncharted waters into the health effects of eating genetically modified foods. Yet in the video "National Geographic: Troubled Waters" geneticist Richard Meager genetically modifies plants to absorb mercury from the water. So in one instance GMOs are bad but in another they are good? Or are all GMOs bad? I guess a case by case evaluation is needed. I've always had an interest in syntax, the way people choose to express themselves. With in the first page it was clear to me that she was not from the United States. A few pages deeper and before she wrote it, I could tell she was a Buddhist. This is not only from her choice of words but also from her broad introspection that just didn't characterize her as an American to me. She seemed both vehement in clarifying and getting her point across yet non destructive and at peace. So I was impressed when she proved me right!

    I have heard some things about the erosion of biodiversity. One of which being there is a company that owns the right to the corn. All corn seeds must be purchased from that company and if you find and attempt to use another type of seed you will be sued. I don't know if this is urban legend or true. Which would be sad and definately a horrible example of erosion of biodiversity but with this crazy world, I wouldn't be all that surprised. When I googled "field corn seeds" the words heirloom open pollinated non hybrid did appear on about the first 6 sites.When I googled corn seed monopoly I did get some proof of what I had heard (http://blog.seedalliance.org/2011/08/12/seed-monopolies-threaten-seed-diversity/) but nothing awfully concrete. Another interesting (and saddening) link is http://disasterandemergencysurvival.com/archives/monsanto-the-seed-monopoly-that-caused-genetically-modified-food-to-start-showing-up-on-nearly-every-dinner-table-in-the-united-states. So anyway that was my venture into seed monopolies and GMOs. Gross. I don't want to eat that. I was also saddened to read the numbers on how much more pesticides are used than in years past and how crop yields are declining. That is alarming and we are clearly doing something wrong here. It's difficult for me to understand how people are not concerned, not doing something about the problem. Maybe its because just not enough people know about the problems that are ending up on their plates.

    I very much enjoyed the salmon need to forest and the forest need the salmon. Although you might not immediately realize the connection it is very true. The gentleman who grooms my dog had several framed photos behind his desk of various dogs and I asked him about one particular dog that  I thought was very pretty. He went on to tell me that each of the dogs in the frames was a dog that he had owned in his life time. And the one that I had inquired about had been one of his favorites. However that dog had a bad habit. The man used to catch a few extra fish every year and bury them in his garden to enrich the soil. (I'd never heard of such a thing. He said the Ho-Chunk Native American tribes indigenous to that area had done it for centuries). And that the dog would habitually dig up all of the fish to roll on! No matter how long he kept the dog away or how deep he buried the fish that dog would jump at the first chance to dig the up to roll around on. But this was the first time I had heard of using fish to bring nutrition to the soil, other than using fish blood as a fertilizer. 

     She continues on about how breeds of animals that aren't the strongest, or don't produce the most eggs, milk, or meat are disappearing at alarming rates. I know a little bit about breed preservation from the oddest of endeavors. I grew up with all kinds of animals and was active in both the 4-H and the FFA. I try to stay involved with the projects as an adult because they were so fulfilling to me as a youth. A great foundation of animal welfare, pride, and dedication can be cultured from a young age. So in 2009 I decided that I would buy some purebred day old chicks from a very well established hatchery to sell to the kids to raise for fair projects. When I received my free color catalog it had the American Livestock Breeders Conservancy Lists. Which is pretty much a breakdown of how endangered certain breeds are: critical, threatened, recovery, watched, and study. So the I picked my baby birds arrival date to be 2 days after my graduation from Edison State University with an AA, AS in crime scene technology, and my certificate in the same field. Just enough time to drive cross country and be home to meet the little cluckers when they were to be delivered. On May 12th, 2009 65 critically endangered fowl arrived noisily at my front door. I had very little luck distributing them to be fair projects but I did find 45 of the 65 birds good homes. The remainder of the flock lives on my property for their good looks and their eggs. The breeds I have include Blue Andalusian (hen pictured), Sumatra, Phoenix, and Buff laced polish. I had never heard of the ALBC but I learned that if you have a flock of 50+ chickens of the same ALBC listed species you can become a nationally recognized breeder! Which I would like to one day do. You should see the looks on people's faces when you tell them you raise critically endangered chickens! I often get asked if I need a special permit to do so.  I have also looked at raising rhinelanders, a very unique breed of spotted rabbit. 

   So once again, I like to try to do my part as an individual to promote biodiversity. 

Hippity Hops and Environmental Stability- Reflection 1

I'm a girl who knows her place. Well at least I think I do. I read up on the current state of the environment, I turn off lights when not in use, shop with eco-bags, refill water bottles, eat a mostly meat free diet from sustainable practices, I grow my own herbs, vegetables, and eggs. We split a cow with our neighbor and I hunt for deer which my family would also eat. I own a mixed breed dog from the animal shelter, and recycle everything in sight including garbage picked up from the side of the road. I do however own a gas guzzling V8 powered muscle car and indulge in long showers. But for the most part I like to think that the good that I do outweighs the bad. I look for further ways that I can improve my lifestyle which would in turn benefit the planet. I'm known to my friends as the barefoot earth loving hippy girl and for the most part I am okay with that. I do love the earth an awful lot, I mean, its the only one we have! I find organic and sustainable agriculture to be intriguing, wholesome, and all out sexy. Say the words "renewable resources," "of the grid," or "free range" and you have my undivided attention. I take the environment very seriously yet it is something that gives me much fulfillment in doing what I believe is right.  My vast and varied interest include organic farming (which I do), raising exotic and critically endangered animals (which I do), trying to minimize my footprint, and one day using some sort of renewable energy to power my home.
     I view myself as a hippy but also and enlightened, persistent, and peaceful. Very weird inspiration for me comes from my pet bunny, Lola. Not only do I have the strong maternal instincts to take care of her and protect her but also by observing her I gain much inspiration. As a vegetarian she seems completely happy on her supply of legumes, fresh fruits and vegetables, grains, nuts, and seed. Her and I have nearly the same diet and we share everything from strawberries to apple cider, almonds, popcorn, and carrot cake. She helps to remind me that when eating meat your food had a face. Just because you did not have to kill it does not take away from the face that it still had to die to be on your plate. I've never heard a vegetable scream before. She also reminds me to be happy in your every day life and not take things for granted. Not only do rabbits have much shorter life spans than humans but they are also less treatable by modern medicine. Many risks come with being so small. In Wisconsin we had to worry about hawks as well as stray dogs. Additionally I couldn't tell you the last time I chewed through a power cord but rabbits love to, must remind them of being in the wild and chewing vines, who knows? Anyway what I am getting at is their lives are very fragile so everyday with her is truly a blessing. We will be celebrating Lola's second birthday Sept 10, 2011. She has come along way from a tiny baby at an exotic reptile show as snake food to a VIP princess who has had several cross country trips and pretty much rules the entire house. But back to the subjects at hand lets go with "just because you don't have kill it doesn't take away from the fact that it had to die"
    I feel most people are so far removed from the process of their food being on their plate that they forget to reflect that their burger was once a living animal. And sadly, its easy to do. But I feel it is important to remember that the animal was born a tiny baby chicken, calf, piglet or whatever and would you be willing to eat it then? How about when it grows up in cramped living conditions? Many factory farmed animals never get to frolic in the sun or eat a single blade of fresh grass? Would you eat it now? How about the end of the line when the animal reaches the end of its life and becomes meat, would you eat it knowing it was still alive and its skin was removed? Somewhere people lose the idea the meat was an animal. They don't farm it or feed it and therefore it just never crossed their mind. For me, pushing these thought to the back of my mind is like lying to myself. It all happened just like that whether you choose to think about it or not. I'm not advocating being a vegetarian. I know its not for everyone. I, myself, eat meat occasionally. But I don't take it likely. My belief is based on two objectives. People are made to eat some meat. As much as is consumed now? Absolutely not. But some can be a part of a balanced diet. However, I can not eat something that lived a life of misery. I literally think of misery on a spoon. Whenever possible I try to buy organic, free range, no antibiotic and so on. I know many don't believe in the endorsements of these labels but I believe the conditions must be somewhat better. Being a Wisconsin native there is an abundance of fresh off the farm meat. And that's the way I like it. We have our own eggs (took us almost 2 years to be able to start eating them and we had to start small like using them in brownie batter. Those were Audrey's [potential] babies!), we buy half of Neighbor Dan's Scottish Highlander Cow, and although we never have before we know right where could buy Amish butchered chickens. Knowing that the animals had happy, healthy lives, the lives they were intended to have, takes much of the meat eating guilt off of me. My second philosophy is that if you couldn't look at it and shoot it, you shouldn't be eating it. I know not everyone has access to farm animals or its even practical so not so much in a literal sense but at least a moment of ponder should be giving. You choosing to eat that animal did cause it to loose its life for you. So whether you pull the trigger or not, you are killing that animal. Like I said, we do eat meat at my house. And we do occasionally buy it from our local store but have no doubts that we DO take the time before diving in to say "thank you, cow" or "thank you, chicken" and a solid a second of reflection and gratitude for that animal who involuntarily ended on my plate to feed me ever widened American waistline. I was a vegetarian for a solid 5 years. Not one single pepperoni of straying. For me, thinking that if one single animal had been spared, even if one was never born and therefor never died that it would all be worth it. I read somewhere that in one year of being a vegetarian you save a cow. WOW! That's totally worth it to me! I imagine hypothetically that is some green pasture on rolling hills there are cows Leah 1, Leah 2, Leah 3, Leah 4, and Leah 5. Now I know that's not quite how it works, but hey that's a nice thought. Plus, think of all the rain forests that didn't get bulldozed. Plus, think of the thousands of gallons of water and food that would have been used on the cow. Yeah, that's worth it to me.    
        Maybe being from Wisconsin and growing up with crops, fields, and farm animals gave me a strong connection and concern for the ecology and environment. Maybe it was the way my mother raised me, with respect and appreciation of all animals and the delicate webs of the environment. I'm not sure but either way it works for me. And one day I plan to raise my kids the same way.