Mass Species Extinction Is Exaggerated

Mass Species Extinction Is Exaggerated

Article Written By: Peter Foster

Financial Post, September 13, 2007. Copyright © 2007 The National Post Company

Summary:  It is often assumed that human actions are at the forefront of the phenomenon known as "Mass Species Extinction." We have been told that among the millions of both unknown and known species across the planet, human activity has caused the extinction of thousands of species. However, is that entirely the case? This article takes the issue head on as Foster dives headfirst into the heated debate over mass extinction. His findings conclude that the extinction rate among species is highly exaggerated and exploited. While he agrees that extinction is very serious business, he believes that it is just another part of nature's cycle. Perhaps extinction facts may be skewed, and the reasoning behind the belief of mass extinction may be a bit flawed. Mass extinction takes into account the millions of other species that we have yet to even prove exist. Foster drives the idea home that mass extinction may not be as catastrophic as we think it is.

The Javan elephants were thought to be extinct after they were hunted by settlers in the 1800s. However, in 2006 the elephants were rediscovered 800 miles away on the island of Borneo.

Opinion: Initially, I was taken aback by the very strong point the author makes in the title. Mass extinction cannot be taken as lightly as the author makes it out to be. He hints that mass extinction is simply inflated for attention and funding. There may be a small dose of truth in his article about funding and attention, but the big picture is still the same. Mass species extinction is a very serious threat, and it’s taking place in our era. The disappearance of any species is a disaster, let alone hundreds or even thousands of them. In stead of taking drastic measure to preserve dying species, we should be adjusting our actions so we cause no harm in the future. On a personal level, I recycle paper, plastic, and metal. I also make a conscious effort not to abuse privileges like electricity, hot water, and fuel. If everyone took these miniscule measures, we’d have a much more pleasant environmental future ahead of us.

Questions:

1. What are your thoughts on mass extinction? (Is is natural, should be stop it, are we to blame for it, is it exaggerated ect.)

2. When scientists study mass extinction, they take into account species that haven't been discovered yet. Is it fair to include these unknown species? Is it scientific?

3. How much do you think humans play a part in mass extinction? What could we do to limit our influence in mass extinction?

Non-Native Species Are Not Necessarily a Threat to Biodiversity

Article Written By: Dana Joel Gatusso

Published By: Greenhaven Press in 2006

Article Link: http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?displayGroupName=Viewpoints&disableHighlighting=false&prodId=OVIC&action=e&windowstate=normal&catId=&documentId=GALE%7CEJ3010131241&mode=view&userGroupName=hatterslib&jsid=4731a015468185dfb2fd4f84b23ada6a

Picture Link: http://webecoist.momtastic.com/2009/12/15/incoming-the-worlds-10-worst-invasive-species/

 Picture: This graphic shows Kudzu, a plant that is now considered an invasive species but was actually brought to this country to control soil erosion.

Summary: It is estimated that there are anywhere between 6,500 and 50,000 non-native species in the United States and only a very small number have become invasive where they have caused economic losses or extinction of native species. Most of them are actually beneficial and were purposely brought here to try to solve certain problems. A prime example of this is the Asian Carp introduced to control algae throughout lakes and ponds in the South. Many conservation activists and law makers are trying to group all non-native species together as invasive and pass laws to control or ban their introduction. There are currently more than twenty government agencies and billions of dollars involved in managing “invasive” species each year.  Many organisms in our environment were once non-native and have made their way into our culture with no problems. In fact, ninety-eight percent of our entire food system is made up of exotic or non-native crops and livestock. Many activists claim that invasive species are a “threat to the variety of species within ecosystems” but some scientists actually think that non-natives increase biodiversity and lead to a larger number of species over time.

Opinion/Reflection:  There is no scientific evidence that supports the statement that introduced species are causing global extinction of native species. Therefore, I think that there is no reason to be generally banning all exotic species if the majority of them are actually integrated nicely in their habitats and actually beneficial to their ecosystems. Even when certain species have some damaging effects, it can’t be ignored that they also have positive effects. For example, the zebra mussels that are multiplying rapidly in the Great Lakes are causing some economic troubles and affecting some species but they are also improving the water quality and increasing aquatic plants that shelter other species of fish. I do agree that some native species do need to be controlled but we should not waste resources in controlling ALL non-native species. Overall, I believe change is good and it could lead to more species and a better biodiversity ratio.

Questions:

1.      Should the government be spending billions of taxpayer money on creating laws to control non-native species?

2.      Is it worth losing the benefits of many non-native species by banning all new species to avoid the negative effects of some of the invasive ones?

3.      Does introducing invasive species threaten or promote biodiversity?

4.      Could invasive species be controlled more effectively at the state or local level where the problem is occurring?

Biosphere Blog #1 By: Brandon Timm

Invasive Species are a Major Threat to the Great Lakes
Article written by: Andy Buchsbaum, and published by the Greenhaven Press copyright 2010
Article:
http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?displayGroupName=Viewpoints&disableHighlighting=false&prodId=OVIC&action=e&windowstate=normal&catId=&documentId=GALE%7CEJ3010670210&mode=view
Picture:
http://michpics.wordpress.com/2010/09/15/yesterday-sand-today-zebra-mussels-quagga-mussels/

Picture:
This photograph shows the zebra mussels that have wreaked havoc upon the Great Lake's ecosystems. As you can see, the amount of these mussels is truly incredible for a species that has just recently been found here.
Summary:
The Great Lakes are in some serious trouble. The infestation of species like these mussels, as well as human pollution are putting major questions towards the survival of many native species. After
a 2005 report on the situation, the issue was truly discovered. Many invasive species that were not priorly known to live in the Great Lakes were found to have been destroying the ecosystem within the Great Lakes. One key factor that was majorly affected was the food web of this region. Because many of these invasive species feed very much on the organisms at the base of the food web, this is causing the higher level organisms to decline in population. Efforts have been made to stop further invasions of these harmful species and others of the sort. These efforts include an electric barrier placed at the mouth of an entrance to the Great Lakes.
Opinion/Reflection:
This kind of invasion comes at no surprise to me. I have seen several documentaries of these types of infestations on the Mississippi River. It does surprise me though that this type of colonization is happening so quickly. It seems to me like something of this caliber would be such a fast occurence. As I stated in the picture section, the populations of these new species are incredible. It interests me at how these species are causing issues. These mussels are said to just cover the entire lake bottom for acres at  time. This kills off the producers that grow on the bottom. I don't think that there is a way to control infestations like this, more likely, they have to stop them before they even start.
Questions:

1. Why are the native species having difficulty coping with these new species?
2. How, if possible, could the people of the region handle this infestation?
3. Do humans play a part in these infestations?
4. Why do these species multiply so quickly in their new environments?