#mocksmock

[ecocentricpractices]

jmock: final project

Oyster Farmer: The Game Experience the thrills and perils of oyster farming, from a business management aspect to an environmental one. Breaking even is tricky with all the equipment costs and fees—and watch out for predators ready to snatch your harvest away! Meanwhile, maintaining a healthy oyster population plays a key role in keeping nitrogen levels low and warding off eutrophication, which can cause the death of other sea creatures. The very health and balance of local aquaculture is at stake. Do you think you have what it takes to be an oyster farmer?

[ecocentricpractices]

jmock: final proposal

Bivalve molluscs such as clams, oysters and mussels are beneficial not just as a coastal food source, but also for maintaining water clarity. As filter feeders, they help to regulate the nitrates and phosphates that can lead to nutrient pollution in the water. This pollution, a natural process that becomes aggravated by man-made contaminants, leads to excessive algal blooming and the depletion of oxygen in the water. In 2003, a massive die-off of fish in Rhode Island’s Greenwich Bay was determined by the Department of Environmental Management to be the result of storm runoff from sewage treatment plants. The role of bivalves in aquaculture can't be stressed enough, but disease and over-harvesting has negatively impacted the denitrification process.  In Maryland, oyster depletion has been so dramatic that pre-colonial populations would have filtered the entirety of Chesapeake Bay in three days; in 1988, the same process would take almost a year. Historically, bivalves have served an important function in Rhode Island culture. From the Narragansett tribe's use of Quahog clams in wampum, to nineteenth century roads being paved with crushed oyster shells, the re-purposing of shellfish for human use is a rich tradition. What happens if over-harvesting leads to the annihilation of a species? What happens to our ecosystem without bivalves? Conversely, what does overabundance lead to?

RESEARCH

Brennessel, Barbara. Good tidings: the history and ecology of shellfish farming in the Northeast. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 2008.

Historical look at shellfishery in New England, plus insight into modern sustainable practices.

Bricker, Suzanne B., Karen C. Rice, and Owen P. Bricker. "From Headwaters to Coast: Influence of Human Activities on Water Quality of the Potomac River Estuary." Aquatic Geochemistry 20, no. 2-3 (2014): 291-323.

A study of aquaculture in the Potomac River with a recommendation that forty percent of the river bed be used for shellfish cultivation.

Gosling, E. M. Bivalve Molluscs: Biology, Ecology, and Culture. Oxford: Fishing News Books, 2003.

A look at marine bivalves as a keystone species, examining their ecosystem and important role as a barometer of water quality and health.

Lyerly, C.M., A.L. Hernández Cordero, K.L. Foreman, S.W. Phillips, W.C. Dennison (eds.). 2014. New Insights: Science-based evidence of water quality improvements, challenges, and opportunities in the Chesapeake. College Park: Ian Press. http://www.ian.umces.edu.

An examination of water quality in the Chesapeake Bay and preventative measures in reducing pollution.

Rice, Michael A. "A brief history of oyster aquaculture in Rhode Island" Aquaculture in Rhode Island: 2006 Yearly Status Report. Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council, Stedman Government Center, Wakefield, RI.

A history of shellfishery in Rhode Island—dating from colonial times to early 2000s—with a focus on regulatory practice.

[ecocentricpractices]

jmock: assignment 2

http://penpentilestream.herokuapp.com/#!/map/assignment2

[ecocentricpractices]

jmock: assignment 1

[ecocentricpractices]

jmock: reading responses

Etiquette of Freedom

I appreciate the redefining of nature to be more inclusive. Many people—city dwellers especially—tend to view nature as something outside of their realm of experience. The processes and structures by which mankind suppresses or mediates the wilderness has led to this estrangement. Individualism has been valued more and more as the key to personal fulfillment, but this is a naive approach according to Gary Snyder. According to him, “an ethical life is one that is mindful, mannerly, and has style … Rudeness in thought or deed toward others, toward nature, reduces the chances of conviviality and interspecies communication, which are essential to physical and spiritual survival.” I was thinking about how this mindfulness translates to our personal diets. When nature becomes an abstract “other” and the process by which we obtain meat is abstracted and less transparent, killing animals suddenly becomes more palatable. Would we be better off following Mark Zuckerberg’s philosophy—that is, only eat what you kill?

When Species Meet

The “Great Divide” that Haraway speaks of is not just about interspecies interactions, but the many dualities that exist—analog vs. digital, nature vs. society, etc. Of note is her description of Freud’s ontological arguments ascribing different “wounds” to mankind’s perception of self. It’s true that our world-view is largely anthropocentric, and Haraway sees this as too limiting. She writes, "Species interdependence is the name of the worlding game on earth, and that game must be one of response and respect.” Barbara Smuts’ study of social behavior in baboons was an interesting example of a paradigm shift helping to bridge the Great Divide. Her problem, initially, was that her understanding of the animal’s behavior was defined primarily by her human experience. It didn’t occur to her at first that the human researchers were exhibiting anti-social behavior in the baboons’ eyes. Also relevant is the Rowell quote, "Do we prefer living with predictable sheep or with sheep that surprise us and that add to our definition of what ‘being social’ means.” Seemingly, mankind is more concerned with bending their conception of other species to fit their needs.

Do Plants Have Primacy?

I understood the primary dilemma to be whether or not trophic cascades, or feeding interactions in an ecosystem, are top-down or bottom-up. Hairston, Smith and Slobodkin proposed a top-down where predators are the greatest determining factor in the makeup of an ecosystem. Alternatively, the Hunter-Price theory posits that plants are the driving force. I can’t say that I comprehended much of the reading, but there seems to be many complicating factors, ranging from inter-predatory fighting/competition and the prey’s use of the environment for camouflage. I wonder though—how much of a difference does a top-down vs. bottom-up viewpoint make to a conservationist? It’s not like you can just tend to one thing and expect a complete rejuvenation of an ecosystem.

New Paradigms in Ecology The classical paradigm in ecology is essentially closed and self-regulating, The idea is that even in human interference, an ecosystem will naturally adjust  and bring balance. The problem with this model is that it seems to rid humans of any sense of responsibility. It also operates under the dangerous assumption that in the end, everything always works itself out. Conversely, the contemporary paradigm assumes no equilibrium “end point” and is more inclusive of outside variables—humans, for one. The author illustrates this idea the best with a side by side conservation agenda for Mettler’s Woods: the old paradigm simply establishes the memorial center, while the new paradigm goes further and entails active management. Destructive natural processes such as fire and grazing are integral in the new paradigm, thus the need for controlled wildfires. The length of the leash that humans are tethered to is determined by functional, historical and evolutionary factors, and it is within these constraints that we will be able to live in co-existence with the Earth’s species. Given that this article was written over a decade ago—and the fact that the human blight on Earth has never been so pronounced—I wonder how approaches to conservation biology have changed. While an examination of process and context should always be a concern, what new issues might have arised?

Ecological Thought

There are a lot of big questions posed in the introduction to Ecological Thought, and although many of them seem unanswerable, I definitely want to hear more. Many of the ideas that Timothy Morton poses are building off of what we’ve read before in the Gary Snyder and Donna Haraway readings: there’s the call for an expanded notion of ecology and also the philosophical pondering of sentience/humanness. I liked the example of people’s opposition to the wind farms because they “spoil the view.” There’s a seemingly arbitrary line where we draw the line between what’s acceptable and what’s not acceptable. I think of food ethics too—why is eating one animal okay, but not the next? Morton jumps all over the map asking similar questions: for instance, why must eco-babble always be cheery and anti-septic? The point that he makes is that most approaches and modes of thinking are too narrow in scope. Is it really possible to see these simultaneous dichotomies—the macro and the micro or the lightness and darkness at the same time like Morton suggests?