Marijuana is known as a good crop to grow in the economical sense - it doesn't take up a lot of room and can be sold for a lot of money. However, scientists are discovering new unprecedented reasons why marijuana farming should definitely be regulated - and it's not the moral issues. One acre of marijuana causes up to 1.5 times more forest loss than other plants, and 2.5 times greater fragmentation of the landscape. Marijuana takes a lot of nutrients out of the soil, and it also leads to soil erosion and deforestation. In some cases, it was even found to be a rodenticide when it got into the waterways.
Just last November, marijuana was legalized in California, making the total number of states where marijuana is legal 30. This will surely, and already has, lead to a spike in the number of people trying to get in on the profits by growing marijuana. Clearly, this is bad for the environment. This may lead to some issues for people who voted yes on legalizing marijuana but would have voted no if they knew the environmental cost. At any rate, if marijuana is to continue being legal in California and other states, new laws need to be drafted to lessen the environmental impact. Because clearly, unregulated marijuana farming will spell disaster for the environment in our own backyard.
0 Comments
Now that officials say the wildfires in California have been contained, tallies are being done and the damage is being assessed. The number is still climbing, but as of October 20th the official number of homes destroyed in the blaze was 7,000. The death toll stands at 42. 22 of those deaths took place in a particular Sonoma County fire, making that fire the third deadliest fire in California history. As of last Thursday, more than 15,000 people still remain evacuated as Governor Jerry Brown issued an executive order to speed up the recovery efforts and ban price gouging on emergency supplies.
A fire once in a while in a natural setting is a normal thing, but when fires grow out of control and spread to urban areas, the consequences for the environment are disastrous. Not only the animals and plants who have been killed or displaced, but the humans whose lives have been destroyed as a result of the fire are a paramount concern. The pollution and damage done by the fires will also have further repercussions on the environment in the coming months. More must be done to take preventative measures against fires in the future. In Southeast Asia in 2015, the drought following El Niño caused severe wildfires. Now that the area has somewhat recovered, Dr. Benjamin Lee from the University of Kent has been analyzing the changes in animal acoustics activity in the forests. His research shows an alarming 37.5% drop in animal acoustic activity in the period of time following the fires. This is because the pollution and haze as well as the blaze itself was detrimental to many of the species living in the forest.
Dr. Lee's research is especially alarming considering the wildfires that are currently happening in the northwestern United States. Even after the fires themselves have been put out, the ensuing pollution and haze will still spell disaster for many animals who call the northwestern U.S. home. Further action should be taken in the wake of the wildfires to monitor animal activity and ensure that a drop like the one in Southeast Asia either doesn't happen at all, or is able to recover at a faster rate. When people think of renewable energy sources, they often think of solar power or wind turbines. One unlikely source, however, is the common ocean plant seaweed. Seaweed can be processed into a renewable and environmentally friendly biofuel. The plant also grows relatively quickly, making it a perfect choice for a major source of energy. The U.S. Department of Energy has designated over a million dollars to be poured into seaweed farms, in order to help research and experiment with how to slowly replace some fossil fuels with this new form of biofuel.
Now that fossil fuels are understood to be unsustainable and bad for the environment, many wonder where we should turn next. Seaweed is both renewable and good for the environment. Furthermore, seaweed farms as a source of energy would be far better than drilling for oil or mining for coal. The U.S. Department of Energy is smart to be investing in this new source of energy. It is a source of hope for future generations who will inherit this planet, and a step in the direction of reversing the damage done by fossil fuels. The results of a new study done on honey from all over the world has found an amount of neonicotinoid chemicals in 75% of the honey. Neonicotinoids are some of the most common insecticides, because they can be put on seeds before they're even planted and are often considered less detrimental to the environment than other more toxic insecticides. However, many scientists have been concerned about neonicotinoid's effects on pollinators, and this study proves that they have a right to feel that way. Although the level of chemicals in the honey was not enough to harm humans, 34% of the honey had levels of neonicotinoids that would be detrimental to bees.
Bees are pollinators, meaning their movements transport pollen between plants, helping them to reproduce. Bees are crucial to the environment, both natural ecosystems and human-run farms. If insecticides are killing off bees, this could contribute to the decline of biodiversity in some parts of the world. Some countries are already being forced to revert to humans pollinating their own crops, such as China. While this is effective in agriculture, this does nothing to save biodiversity, which some scientists say is already in the stages of collapse. The authors of the aforementioned study are proposing a complete ban on neonicotinoids. It is only one study, so more research should be done to confirm it, however, the importance of bees should not be underrated and measures should be taken to ensure their safety and their importance in the environment. The U.S. has a new system of earthquake early warnings that is going to be implemented up and down the entire West Coast next year, called ShakeAlert. According to the NBC article, "FEMA also believes that within the next 30 years, there is a 99.7 percent chance that California will experience an earthquake stronger than 6.7, and a 10 percent chance the Pacific Northwest will experience another 8.0-9.0 megaquake, like the one seen in 1700." ShakeAlert will first be implemented in Los Angeles coming January 2018, where the earthquake would do the most damage. However, under new administration, some of the funding for ShakeAlert (which operates under the USGS) has been cut, despite its bipartisan support. Funding has been cut by $46 million. This leaves it with an operating budget of $1 billion, which means it can still operate another year.
After the recent devastating earthquakes in Mexico, the reality of earthquake preparedness is in full force. Mexico's earthquake early warning system saved tens of thousands of lives, and a similar system could do the same in the U.S.. If FEMA's prediction is accurate, which is most likely is, we should be doing everything possible to prepare for a massive earthquake. The implications for the environment are disastrous, but at least we can save as many human lives as possible. President Trump has called 27 national monuments (land set aside by the government because of its cultural, historical or scientific value) under review regarding their status. The issue is the size, according to the Department of the Interior Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke. He says that he will recommend to President Trump that none of them be abolished altogether, however, he will be recommending that some of them be downsized. Some are worried about the power unilaterally awarded over land that can be up to, in cases such as Grand Staircase-Escalante in Utah, three times the size of Rhode Island. This debate is not a new one. Farmers and ranchers have always been opposed to national monuments, arguing that it's a waste of land that could be used to grow/raise food. On the opposite end of the spectrum, conversationalists say that if Trump tries to go through with pushing back the borders of these monuments, they will go to court.
But what does this mean for the environment? There is something to be said for the issue of one government body having solitary control over such massive amounts of land. It could be seen as a violation of the agreements of federalism. However, these monuments are important pieces of land for preserving the environment and wildlife, as well as the cultural/historical significance they hold. If they were taken over by farmland, that would be disastrous for the ecosystems. And as has been proven time and again, once nature is taken over by farmland, there's often no getting it back. With the hurricane crises in Texas and now Florida, the media and government attention has been focused largely on the south over the past few months. However, an equally media-worthy weather catastrophe has been sweeping the western United States. In Montana, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, California and Utah, more than 24,000 firefighters have been fighting 137 fires over the course of six months. Eight of those firefighters have died. Despite heavy rainfall last winter, these western states are still in recovery from droughts, which has lent to the severity of the fires. In Montana, thousands of acres of crops and land have been destroyed, driving farmers who have been in the area for generations away. In Washington, Governor Jay Inslee issued a state of emergency in 21 counties and schools have been closed due to the air quality. In California, Los Angeles was forced to declare a state of emergency during the La Tuna fire in early September.
These are just some of the specifics of how the west has been affected by fires. The government isn't able to divert its full attention and resources to helping these states solve the problem of fires, due to the simultaneous hurricane disasters happening in the south. However, these fires will have catastrophic effects on the environment. The air quality will be further tarnished by the smoke, and it will take years to get back the vegetation that would help restore the air quality faster. People are being driven from their homes and losing their livelihoods in the form of land and businesses. Wildlife also has nowhere to go, because in many cases once they are driven out of their forest habitat all that's left to run into is cities and suburbs. It is imperative that the fires be contained, however, it is well past the end of the typical fire season and the blazes are showing no signs of stopping. Now that Hurricane Harvey's devastating winds and rains have passed on from Texas, the hard part begins: assessing the damage. One of the biggest problems in Houston and surrounding areas in the aftermath of the hurricane is found in the damage done to factories and industrial plants. The lids on many fuel tanks have been compromised, as well as the spike in air pollution required to restart many of the factories that were shut down due to the storms. Since August 25th, "more than 5 million pounds of air pollutants have been released beyond the normally permitted emissions, according to a review of industrial companies' filings with the state's environmental authority by Neil Carman, a scientist who spent 12 years in enforcement at the state agency and now works with the Sierra Club." Additionally, Texas governor Greg Abbott has agreed to suspend various regulations and relax the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's requirements. Therefore, many pollutants being released and/or spilled may not even be factored into the data.
As many families return to Houston to try and rebuild their lives, they may be facing a danger just as great as the storm. Many of the pollutants that are being released from industrial plants are linked to various cancers and diseases. Exposure to air pollution can also cause non-lethal ailments such as asthma. While the effects of the pollution won't be felt immediately, they will cause many long term problems as people migrate back into the area. The pollutants cause problems for the natural environment as well as the human population. Many pollutants have spilled into the local waterways, as well as the water that is draining back into the ocean that has collected pollutants after swirling around the city. As Texas proceeds with the rebuilding process in the wake of the hurricane, they must be sure to be mindful of the pollution that restarting their industry will cause. If not, they may be facing a crisis just as big as a hurricane in years to come. In 2011, the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife announced that the gray wolf population in the Great Lakes had recovered enough to be removed from the endangered species list, causing environmentalists everywhere to rejoice. However, a federal court has recently ruled that this celebration may be premature. In 2014, a U.S. district judge overruled Fish and Wildlife's declaration, and just recently his ruling was upheld by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington D.C.. With this new ruling, the hunting and trapping of gray wolves is no longer permitted in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin and they are once again considered an endangered species.
This news is good for the safety of the wolves, however, they are certainly not out of the metaphorical woods yet. With this ruling to continue keeping wolves on the endangered species list comes the knowledge that their population is being threatened and we need to do more to help them come back. Some states still don't consider wolves to be endangered despite their low numbers. In Wyoming, it is legal to shoot a gray wolf on sight. Wolves are critically important predators in the ecosystems they inhabit. They keep prey populations under control, which in turn helps the vegetation and the environment as a whole. As such, the fate of their survival in the wild is something we can't ignore. |