Michael Grunwald Article #13

The excerpt of Michael Grunwald’s “The Swamp: The Everglades, Florida, and the Politics of Paradise” can be an example of conservation policies for the future and also an example of the struggle between conservation of nature and man. The excerpt starts as a David vs. Goliath type of story with a small environmental group with little support money trying to save the “only everglades in the world” against the building of the Homestead Airport along with acceptance of the bill through numerous politicians. This story is a great example of the struggle of conservationism vs. urban development all over the country and especially in Florida. We need to realize what is more important to us, housing and development or conserving our ecosystem, there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

 After reading this excerpt I was also in favor for the restoration of the Everglades and against the building of the Homestead Airport. As the author brings up a good point in that there is only one Everglades, which is not worth taking for granted in favor of an airport, strip mall, or housing sub-division. This is something we’ve probably all recognized while living in Florida, especially during the housing boom. Do we want to put the ecosystem in danger so developers can build more and more sub-divisions and golf courses and attract a constantly growing population? This excerpt also made me realize all the political nonsense that environmentalists need to go through just to conserve the planet we all live in. Again, like in Leopold’s excerpt, it is a classic example of conservation vs. economics.

Leopold's Article #11

Soil, plants, & sunshine

After reading Aldo Leopold’s excerpt from “A Sand County Almanac”  I began to realize how the majority of the population views conservatism and was given some insight on what needs to be done to change people’s thought and actions regarding conservation of our environment. Since the environmental movement has been brought to our attention, the general population has been viewing the environment more as a business rather than the fragile land pyramid Leopold brings up where each part of the environment is part of an organized biotic structure. We’re looking at the environment economically as if it were a corporation and we’re all accountants trying to find the economic value in each resource, which tree or plant is more economically useful than the next one. The major problem with that approach toward the environment though is that you can’t use up one resource without affecting the other. The capitalistic approach to our land will benefit it’s people temporarily but cause problems for our environment in the long run and deplete us of our resources as well.

            I strongly believe in Leopold’s Land Pyramid theory which goes to show how delicate and complex the cycle of energy is in our environment. Using up one resource such as the soil in one particular area can restructure the circle of energy, having a domino effect on the whole ecosystem and destroying important plants and animals that are crucial to our environment. We can’t be picky about which resources we need to salvage because they are more economically important than the other 95% of  resources that have no direct economic importance to humans. In the future we will start to see more thorough education on environmental conservation and more accountability will be taken for people’s actions toward how resources are being used rather then just what makes more sense economically.

Exempt From Entry due to Downtown FT- Entry #12

Exempt From Entry due to Downtown FT-  Entry #12 omitted

Downtown Scavenger Hunt

Solar Parking Meters

It's been a while since I've been to downtown Ft. Myers. There are many places that are tucked away in areas I would never have thought to explore prior to the scavenger hunt. If you are just driving around in your car its very easy to miss how many new places there are. I didn't know about the art galleries that were here or about the Ichiban in the Hotel Indigo. One thing I did notice was that there were a lot of law firms scattered everywhere. The coolest law firm was the one that took over the old building that used to house First National Bank. Unfortunately I didn't snap a picture of it but it looked authoritative and noble, to say the least. A rather odd building that I spotted was a very skinny 3 story building which was occupied by a salon. This building really stood out from all the others and didn't fit in. I thought it was neat to see such an unusual building because it added character to the environment. Other buildings had old designs on them that you just don't see on modern buildings anymore, such as lions and other fancy looking things that would remind you of the Rennaisance period. I took a peak inside Space 39 and I liked how artistic it appeared to be, especially for being a bar. The tattoo shops were also neat to take a peak inside because they were also artistic. Every so often there was a particular sign that you would see along First St. The sign explains how the street used to be a sandy trail until it was paved with shells for automobiles to drive through. The downtown area didn't develope until the 19th century and tourism contributed to its growth.


Sign on First St.



I had such a fun time in downtown today that I plan to come back during a time when it is more busy and more places are open. It looks like it would also be a fun place to come to at night since there are several good looking bars and restaraunts.

I think the stores that have moved in, combined with the old-style buildings, is what makes the place special and unique. Even the dentists that have moved in have a different sense of style than the dentists you would find elsewhere. I think maybe the area brings that out of the tenants because perhaps that is a vibe that they sense from being here.



A glimpe inside the General Dentist office



Untold Stories: Downtown Ft. Myers

Ford, Edison, & Firestone

 I agree that preserving the history of an area is important. Seeing architecture of a time long past creates a sense of culture rooted in history. Besides, it's always fun to take that detour into the historical district of a city and just have fun exploring! It's been a while since I've been to downtown Ft. Myers and I am looking forward to going there perhaps tomorrow. It's also nice because it gives you a sense of history in relation to the present which, puts a dot on the map, so to speak.

 I've visited the Edison Estates once before and it felt nice to know that I was walking in what used to be the property of Thomas Edison. You can't really let things like that go to waste and be forgotten, especially when it's right here. It's hard to imagine what Ft. Myers would be like if such were the case and nothing was preserved at all. Downtown Ft. Myers has it's own little sparkle with a lot of potential if more retail businesses would move in. They've done a good job of renovating and making it look pretty. I used to sometimes go there to see how it has been developing.

 The area near the bridge in downtown that overlooks the water is such an amazing view. One can only imagine what life was like before roads were abound. I imagine life was quite difficult. Nowadays we have performing art centers, community colleges, and the newest university to join the state university system, FGCU. Though I can appreciate the history to get the point we are at now, I am definitely glad to be here today in this time. Yet, the area will only continue to grow, so it is best we think about the direction it should head while we remember it's past.

Dimming the Sun, Entry #9

You'd think that people were doing something right with reducing air pollution (aerosols). Then you find out that there are two competing counter-effects: global warming & global cooling. I had never heard of such a thing as global dimming, but at first it seemed to contradict the idea of global warming because they are opposite. Global dimming has a cooling effect. It can easily make someone think that global warming is not as threatening anymore or that it shouldn't be an issue. Yet there is evidence of global dimming in highly polluted areas of the world. Global dimming due to pollution in certain areas had blocked the sun from getting through and caused a decline in evaporation. Pan evaporation is where there is a decline in water evaporating yet the global temperatures are increasing, which alters rainfall. It almost seems like this has the potential to take the focus off of global warming altogether in a political sense. They are in a tug of war with each other, but both are bad and lead to horrible outcomes if not curbed. You can't really ignore one or the other. On the one hand, we can't necessarily compromise our health in order to make the two effects more even. The same looming problem is that we need to lower emissions, or get rid of them completely. I think this is the more feasible alternative. We already know that we can't keep pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. We can imagine the fate of the world if we don't stop. The peculiar thing about these two competing effects is that continuing to reduce aerosol, while at the same time we continue to increase C02, will lead to a disastrous rise in temperature. Sadly, I don't think it will be that easy to reduce CO2 because everyone is reliant on oil. We would have to go completely solar and use all electric cars. Oils are used to make just about anything, like plastics and rubber. Our lifestyle is one of convenience and over-indulgence. How do you change that!?

Rewriting the Science, Entry #10

I am not surprised about this video. Clearly, Bush didn't want oil to be regulated for various interests that are interrelated both politically and economically. Our society is just too dependent on oil and it drives our whole economy. Supporting anything that required urgency which limits the burning of fossil fuels would have created chaos. The alternative approach is a moderate one that relies on technology that slowly makes things more efficient. Yet the scientists said that this is an urgent situation and there is a great danger if we don't take action now.

 I don't think that it is right to label science as not sufficiently reliable especially when they know more about it than anyone else does on this planet. Those scientists are the ones who have devoted their lives to studying climate change. It does not seem ethical or legal to limit what a scientist has to say about something that effects the entire world. It is indeed a form of free speech. I don't understand how the White House's review process was able to get away with rewriting the science. In fact, I have never heard of such a screening process when it comes to a report or press release involving NASA scientists. No wonder they are angry, as I would be too. It makes sense when you begin to examine what the players in this game have to gain. For example, what does the scientist have to gain by over exaggerating a climate report versus what that particular lawyer had to gain? Turns out the lawyer was a former lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute. No wonder he edited out some of the words that were in the report. His ethics must've went out the door when he took on this assignment because when a lawyer is practicing law (in the sense of representing people and making a case for them) they are not supposed to represent someone when there is a conflict of interest. In other words, the lawyer cannot represent someone if he/she has a financial interest or can gain in some kind of other way. I suppose that since he was a "former" lobbyist for the institution is what allowed this one to slip through. I only wonder if he had held stocks in any type of petroleum company at the time he edited those reports. Maybe then he would be in trouble because he would have had an interest in keeping the reports from potentially harming the petroleum companies. Then again, he is a lawyer so I am sure he found some way of limiting his liability for what he had done and it was all legal somehow.

 The wording is very important in every document when it comes to what lawyers do. In fact, it is something that I have been learning in my law classes. Every word has a meaning, and you have to be careful with how you word things. For instance, the word "may" leaves a choice. It may, or may not happen. It is not definitive. Yet when you use the word "shall" that means there is no choice. It is a definitive word meaning that you will do what it says. I am not surprised to learn that in the video the word "is" was changed to "may be." The word "is" is like the word "shall" in terms of the words meaning something absolute. Lawyers are taught two different standards of proof. They are beyond a reasonable doubt and preponderance of the evidence. Beyond a reasonable doubt means that there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever. This standard represents something which is unquestionable, that there is not one single contrary piece of evidence. This is the most difficult standard to prove. The latter means that the evidence proves 51% or more that someone is likely guilty. This is the standard that leaves room for doubt. The lawyer changed the word "is" to "maybe" because the topic of climate change had not been debated beyond a reasonable doubt. To this day there are many people with conflicting thoughts about it and many who deny it altogether. To use the word "is" means that there is absolutely no doubt that global warming is threatening. To change it to the word "may be" means that we realize it is threatening but we don't realize to what extent so that's the better word to use. The funny thing is that we can't definitively know to what extent until we reach the point we are able to look back and see it. For example, when there is a hurricane we realize that it's going to be disastrous if it hits people's homes, but can we ever really know exactly to what extent a hurricane is threatening? I don't think we can. I think it is the same thing with global warming. We can predict that if we delay our actions any further that something threatening will happen but we can't exactly know how threatening it will be. This is the loophole, and it is caused from that aspect of uncertainty. It is
also where the play on words occurs. I think that the two fields of study collided in a bad way.

 When everyone with power has the ability to rewrite science it makes you realize how dangerous a thing that is. I am not in any way against government because I know why government in necessary. We need laws in order for our society to run well and people need those guidelines both for their own good and for the good of others. However, we should always remember that people in government are people like you and me. As humans, we have the potential to lie, to cheat, to steal, to abuse, etc. I suppose that is our only weakness, that we are not perfect at all times. Don't take your eyes away.

Journal #8 As the World Burns

Promises kept and promises broken, such is the world of politics. A person running for a government office will often try to win over the people by promising new changes ahead. A President, though (he) may be forthright in his optimism of change by bringing forth new bills, will often be over-ruled by the Senate. This is the same reason why we had heard about climate change & the need for a new energy strategy, only to not hear much about it since. While it may have been a genuine priority for Obama to address climate change, it's not going to fully come to life when people with financial interests are preventing you from doing so.

Fortunately, an entire body of law exists specifically for environmental issues and thank goodness for that. For without it, this world would have already been destroyed.
Individual States are in the best position to regulate, and have the power to regulate, greenhouse emissions (air pollution) and not necessarily Congress. This is why there are now "no smoking zones" because the States are granted this police power. It is also the job of the EPA ,a  federal administrative agency, to carry out this function through directives of the President. The States do their part by incorporating elements of the Clean Air Act into their respective Statutes. This is much like giving the job to the best candidate who can carry it out.

As for the EPA's authority possibly being curtailed, there is certainly no case for that to happen. They are granted Constitutional authority to regulate greenhouse gases. In fact, it is their duty to do so and failing to do is a violation of human welfare. Since they have the authority to regulate emissions, and it is through emissions that global climate is changing, then they have been regulating global climate change through their efforts; and not necessarily through direct policy. In other words, even if they are not directly authorized by Congress to regulate global climate change, they have been doing so all along as an effect of regulating automobile emissions. Just because Congress does not regulate greenhouse gases does not mean that the EPA is not in a position to. The Clean Air Act, which was drafted by Congress, gives the EPA the authority to regulate "climate" in the event that it forms a “judgment” that such emissions contribute to climate change, as carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases fall within the Act's capacious definition of “air pollutant.” Clean Air Act, § 202(a)(1), 42 U.S.C.A. § 7521 (a)(1)

Trip to ECHO, Ft. Myers

  ECHO stands for Educational Concerns for Hunger Organization. They are a non-profit organization in Ft. Myers, Fl. Their mission is to improve the lives of the poor, and reduce hunger, by teaching them how to utilize natural resources for farming. The idea behind it can be extrapolated from an old Chinese proverb by Lau Tzu which reads,

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime"

Instead of simply giving poor people food, it is far better to teach them and equip them with the knowledge they need to sustain themselves for lifetimes.
  This was not my first trip ECHO but it was my first time taking a tour of the farm. When I had volunteered here last year I had a chance to help with the annual Farm Day, harvest the fields, work in the seed bank, and remodel an old house which would house interns. There are many different types of crops growing on the farm and their seeds are being collected in a seed bank. When I worked in the seed bank I was cleaning and sorting seeds that were going to be shipped to Africa. The seeds that are collected are an assortment of rare seeds that happen to thrive in harsh growing conditions. It is hoped that by introducing the seeds into areas where agriculture is difficult that it will diminish hunger as well as improve the soil. Of all the seed banks, ECHO's collection are one of largest in the world. In the event of a disaster, these seeds will come in handy.

  ECHO is basically a huge research farm where studies are being conducted on crops in order to gain a thorough understanding of the best farming methods. Everywhere you look you will find something different, from bamboo trees to rice.

Bamboo trees

The guide told us that bamboo trees do great in hot climates and that they have multi-uses and are very valuable. They also grow very quickly, up to about 16 inches daily.

Wet Low Lands Rice

The "Wet Low Lands Area" is where the system of rice is growing. This is actually part of a two year study in multiple locations that has been evaluating whether rice grows best in a flooded area, or a not so flooded area. Their research has determined that although it has been tradition to grow rice in floods in order to keep the weeds from growing, that you can actually produce more rice by growing in an area that is not so flooded. The right side of the rice is where it was growing in the wet land, and the left side of the rice is where it had been growing without as much water.



me at duck & talapia pond



After you pass through the bamboo trees you arrive at the duck & talapia pond. This is an area where the duck, fish, & water exist symbiotically. This means that everything living here depend on each other for survival. It is a system that is sustained all on its own and which is perfect for tropical climates.



ducks at the pond



another view of the pond



 As I had mentioned before, there are animals present on this farm such as goats, rabbits, ducks, and even worms. They act as helpers by providing manure for crops to grow and as tillers. The manure from worms can be turned into a tea to water plants as compost. The chickens will naturally dig and till out areas around crops. This lessens the need for techonology and electric power.



Goats at the goat house























The guide said that whenever they use irrigation pumps to deliver water without the use of electricity, it is an example of what they call, "appropriate technology." This basically means that you should use what you have in order to make what you need.

Irrigation pumps

Another technique is called drip irrigation which is a technique for irrigating crops that conserves water and reduces weed pressure.



The Miracle Tree: Moringa























Aside from learning about appropriate technology, we also got to learn about and taste several different plants. We were told that the leaves of the Moringa tree are highly nutritious.

Since the people living in poor countries are typically malnourished, a Moringa tree would be of great benefit to them. Virtually all parts of this tree can be used to aid in nutrition, which is why it is called the "Miracle Tree."

Another one of nature's miracles is the Neem. Neem seeds have both medicinal and non-medicinal uses.
Disclaimer: None of the claims contained herein have been evaluated by the FDA nor have the claims been documented by medical research. The information here is not intended to replace the care of a licensed physician. Please seek a medical professional regarding your medical decisions and health needs.

In the bookstore at Echo you will find Neem products for sale. Neem has been used to make creams, lotions, oils, insect repellant, soap, and toothpaste. One of the plants that the guide allowed us to taste was called Katuk. It didn't have a distinct taste, in fact, it reminded me of tasting a pea pod.

  It was a beautiful day to visit ECHO today and I learned a lot of different techniques for farming in all kinds of areas and conditions. Even in an urban environment one can grow crops. Plants don't always need to grow in the ground in soil. They can be grown in tires, in plastic bins, even in plastic bags and growing tables.

Photo of a "working" chicken.



Cognitive Dissonance Theory, Journal #7

I'm Right & You're Wrong

  While it is frustrating to have other people question or disagree with our point of view, I believe the other point of view is necessary to some degree. Problems are seldom solved based on a single approach, oftentimes problems require multiple minds working together. But they have to be willing to work together, and usually it's always easier to work with people who think such as yourself. I don't think people should only seek out others who are like themselves to work with. After all, we are not all the same and we must learn to live with and interact with each-other. In fact, I would go so far as to conclude that our own future survival depends on whether or not we will be able to work together and set our differences aside.
  We all see the world differently and have had different experiences that there is no way that we will ever be uniform in thinking. This is something we should just accept and something that we should be appreciative about. We don't all share the same logic either and what makes "sense" to someone will make no sense to another, and that's OK. What it doesn't mean is that we should always be at polar ends with one another to the point of lunacy. In situations where we need to work with each other, I think we should first be open-minded and willing to listen to other points of view. I think that it is possible for two very different people with two very different perspectives to reach a consensus. However, I think it is not possible until we drop our ego's. I think it is our ego which causes us to lose respect for other viewpoints when it contradicts our own. It seems as if we are always trying to prove someone else wrong because in doing so we might make a name for our-self. Again, this is the desire of the ego; the need to feel smart and important and better than everyone else. If we were to drop trying to prove the other party wrong, then I think we could focus on the real issue's and work together.
  In terms of cognitive dissonance theory, I see it all the time and I think it's a very human response to how we deal with our concept of self. I think that once we have our values and beliefs concretely in place it becomes hard to change them. Then again, people can be easily persuaded, but it's most commonly done with rhetoric and not scientific evidence! Sometimes it is more about the show than it is about the facts of the matter. This is what troubles me the most. I'm not troubled about people who don't agree with me, I am more troubled by the people who fall for a false truth.
  Also, we are creatures of habit due to the comfort that we find in it. Thus, once we are in our comfort zone we don't want to leave it for something that appears contradictory. When we perceive things to be a threat we put up a wall and close off our minds, we may even stop listening because we don't want to hear it. Even when common sense tells us that we are wrong and we should stop a certain behavior, sometimes we rationalize it in order to keep doing it for some small satisfaction we derive from it. Part of thinking logically and being able to arrive at the right conclusion comes from being able to recognize a sound argument. Equally important is the other end of the spectrum willing to question the logic and examine how we arrived at that particular answer.