Urban Ecology and Restoration

"City and Nature" by Anne Spirn

Refers to the city as a 'granite garden' which is nestled in a larger garden. This is an interesting metaphor which brings to mind some interesting mental pictures. I picture limestone like blocks that are almost covered by large trees -- a sort of miniaturized city. I have to say that as I got to the end of the reading, I didn't really have a better grasp on the city as a 'granite garden' more as some sort of spoiling thing that contaminates... I really was hoping to get a better grasp of this concept of a 'granite garden' than I did.

Further in the reading I came across the statement: The city "in not unnatural but , rather, a transformation of wild nature by humankind to serve its own needs." This is the first time I have ever heard of someone referring to a city as "natural". I have always heard the argument as a city being almost the opposite of natural.  Embracing the view of a city as part of nature is being argued as the one of a few ways to slow or stop the degradation of the environment. If people become aware of nature in the city, perhaps they will also become aware of the city's impacts on nature.

Furthermore, the author elaborates on select cities which are already suffering from ignoring nature in the city. Most common amoung these issues are issues relating to water -- flooding, mudslides, sinking.  It apparently takes compressive solutions to deal with many of the issues associated with cities and this starts with understanding nature. Until then, cities will continue to affect plant communities, hydrology, and air and water quality.


"Land Development and Endangered Species: Emerging Conflicts" by Timothy Beatley

Biodiversity loss is commonly interpreted as something that happens elsewhere, with little emphasis to biodiversity loss in our backyards. The major contributor to biodiversity loss is attributed to land-usage issues and is especially correlated with population growth

There seems to be a silent battle insuing between conservationists and Urban Developers and there are there are many questions that are associated with balancing urban development with conservation. Among these are "what is the best strategy" in both the ecological and economic sense. I personally don't see any clear cut way to solve any of these problems. The most blaring issue to me is the population growth. This essay says that the current population size is 5.4 billion and many expect it to reach 12 billion before it levels out. I do not see anyway that the earth can sustain that large of a population!! I hope I am no longer around if/when that ever happens. The quality of life would be terrible!
The benefits of protecting biodiversity include" Human uses both medicinal, emotional and commercial, protection of intrinsic values of life and protection of ecosystem as a whole.  I can't not imagine these benefits surviving in a world of 12 billion people!  Hopefully a balance between conservation and urban development can be found. And hopefully people will stop having children.

"What Is Restoration" by Ann L. Riley

Ecological restoration is "the process of intentionally altering a site to establish a defined indigenous, historical ecosystem." There are other definitions which include things 'like reversing the human impact.'

Restoration is something that is personally very interesting to me, it is what I want to do when I am done with school. This essay brought up many aspects of restoration that people very commonly question. One of these is 'what do you restore it to?' Sometimes this is a very hard question to address to to land-use change and degradation.  An area that was once a wetland but is no a dried up agricultural field may be very difficult to restore back to a wetland. Furthermore, restoration encompasses very complex ecology and requires the inputs or several different experts in different scientific fields. This makes the process very time consuming and sometimes very expensive.

Despite these hurtles, the benefits of restoration are worth it.  Not only are you restoring a landscape, but you are making habitats for animals, resetting hydrology, carbon sinks, and natural filters of pollution.

Two years ago, I worked on a stream restoration project with a local arboretum. Prior to this experience, I had no idea what restoration was. I quickly learned that it wasn't simply "planting a whole bunch of trees" just as the book says, there were so many maps, delineations and  experts. Things like, deciding where to get the rock from, the contours of the stream and the plant species to introduce to a lot of time and effort. Even after the project was completed, one of the banks washed out and had to be fixed. It is a crazy process and can take many years of succession before the area is successfully "restored." None the less, I feel very strongly about the benefits of restoring areas, especially wetlands and prairies since they have been targeted by development.  These areas have suffered major losses. I am from Ohio and I know that 90% of the original wetlands are gone. The land that makes up the corn belt was once a vast wetland home to many species of migrating water fowl. To protect biodiversity in light of over development, some un-development needs to take place.