This picture from Fotosearch sums up a fraction of frustration in finding smaller Animalia in Florida. But it isn't the feral cat's fault. It's ours.

This female A sagrei has a tell "tail" sign of problems. Bioaccumulation is suspect. This presentation of posterior growth after a break is not considered within normal limits. The lawn where this specimen was obtained is still frequently sprayed with organophosphates, any of several organic compounds containing phosphorus and is used by the resident for pest control and management. If the proper equipment had been available, diagnostics would have been run on this specimen. Rising numbers in abnormal Anolis specimens are being noted, just as in presentations of other abnormal Animalia in Florida (aside from limits within normal ranges, such as high incubational temperatures in Amphibia or Testudinae ovum). Frogs

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allows atrazine levels of 3 parts per billion (ppb) in potable water. Tyrone Hayes of the University of California, Berkeley found that when tadpoles were exposed to atrazine levels of only 0.1 ppb they developed extra testes, or even ovaries. Atrazine promotes the conversion of testosterone to estrogen, which explains why male frogs often developed both male and female sexual organs. Also, when adult frogs were exposed to these low levels they developed smaller larynxes and had only one-tenth the testosterone level of unexposed frogs. [Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 02;99(8):5476-80]

In another study on the effects of bioaccumulation, researchers found that reproduction was disrupted in female orniths that were exposed to estrogen at levels now commonly found in the wild. Finches exposed to estrogen produced fewer eggs and had more fragile shells. Numbers of hatchlings fell dramatically and the newborns had malformed oviducts. [Horm Behav 02;41(2):236-41]

Floridian Poetry

The Coming of the Change

How fragile the young and twisting green
For lack of rain a sight most seen
Brown beneath the withered trees
Sick and fraught with drought’s disease

Lazy haze of summer long
Crunch and snap the season’s song
Alas, the moor ‘tis nearly gone
Those eager await the dew at dawn

Time sullen until the day did come
Brisk breeze bade the fragile boughs hum
Hark! ‘ Tis blessed rain in the sky!
Alluring, now the time is nigh

Crisp and fresh the coming air
All creatures ready and prepare
Storms drawing near to liberate
Those succumbing to El Nino’s fate

© Copyright 2001 - LadySofia (no trademark)

Check out more poems like this from this website: Piptalk Poetry

Worldview in Formation of the Natural Sciences 14th-17th Centuries

Thought I'd do something a little different and post my panel group presentation research paper from Spring Semester. This was for an Honors Interdisciplinary: Renaissance class. Warning: the following material is posted on Turn It In , an anti-plagiarism site for undergraduates. If you erase the author's name and put your own in its place, your teacher may know, and you could be penalized for it, including disciplinary interventions. And yet, cite it properly all you like. Sorry, all three professors for this class required submitting papers to this site.

As natural science develops and spreads to different parts of the globe, Arabians, Europeans, and Chinese form separate yet similar conclusions on its worth, application and meaning through interpretation according to authoritative belief systems and ancient thought between 1400 and 1700 AD.

The established order and understanding brought by authoritative indoctrination was coming under question for Arabian culture through introduction and digestion of works by Aristotle. "[Aristotelianism in] … Greek and Islamic science had become magic terms … depending on how one felt toward modern ideas and their unsettling impact on fixed intellectual ways.” (Dr Goldstein 245)

The influence of Aristotelianism is the work of one classical thinker, an Athenian man named "Aristotle … [who] spent several years in travel and study, crossing the Aegean Sea to Asia Minor [and its coastal islands]. During this period he undertook biological studies … For Aristotle … a brilliant zoologist, the growth and development of biological organisms [was] easily explained [using his own philosophical views] … the product of this research effort was a series of large zoological treatises … [Aristotle] admitted that animals are ignoble by comparison with the heavens and acknowledged that zoological studies are distasteful to many. However, he considered this distaste childish … he argued that in zoological studies the quantity and richness of the available data compensate for the ignobility … He argued, moreover, that zoological studies contribute to knowledge of the human frame owing to the close resemblance between animal and human nature … [he] acknowledged the gathering of biological data as the first order of business. His History of Animals, which was intended to meet this first need, is a vast storehouse of biological information … Aristotle made [one of] his greatest contributions … in descriptive zoology … in his History of Animals … structure and behavior of many [Animalia is] described in considerable detail, often [through] skillful dissection … [Aristotle devotes] … attention to … theoretical problems [in nomenclature] , [and] in practice Aristotle adopted "natural" or popular groupings based on multiple attributes … his works [are] plentiful evidence of empirical method, including dissection." (Lindberg 47-67)

Information of such depth and magnitude has far-reaching impact upon outstanding traditions and practices, and how one views placement in nature and the universe, namely in the idea of man related to animal, an idea contrary to popular belief during the Renaissance period in Arabia. Aristotle’s influence, through absorption and acceptance of Aristotelianism, is infamous in the Middle East, however, let us not forget: "There are two aspects of Islamic science, on the one hand the scientific ideas which were imported from outside and, on the other, the contribution of the Arabs themselves to the sum of scientific knowledge." (Ronan 202) Often an emphasis is made on retention of ancient thought by Arabs, "in favor of the more exciting advances which were to come in Western Europe from the sixteenth century onwards. Too often science in Arabia has been seen as nothing more than a holding operation." (Ronin 203) Arabia's contribution to natural science is not only through retention of ancient thought, but by experimentation, classification, and observation. "In biology … the Arabians inherited a vast amount of material from the Greeks … To Arabian philosophers, plants were primarily studied for their use either in agriculture or in medicine, an attitude taken at the beginning by Jabir ibn Hayyan … which set the seal on much that followed … [in] zoology the Arabian peoples were familiar with the life and habits of all the domesticated animals which … provide the basis of living for nomadic tribes." (Ronan 233-234) This means that cultures in the Middle East are more interested in practical, everyday applications of advancing natural sciences in the Renaissance rather than understanding the world around them and their place in it, although Arabs were no exception. In the fourteenth century "Kamal al-Din al-Farisi wrote The Great Book on the Life of Animals. This proved to be the foremost late Muslim work on zoology; in it al-Farisi systematized all previous studies and so produced a large compendium of zoological knowledge … [which then spread to other regions]." (Ronan 234) This interest in zoology and botany carried into the Mughal era of India after the translations made of al-Farisi’s book into Turkish and Persian, due to its religious as well as factual material. The Mughal emperor of India, Jahangir, devoted entire sections of his work Book of Jahangir to careful descriptions of plants and animals. (Ronan 235) Such empirical observations of nature and of living things gave Arabian culture a better understanding of their place in the world and brought order to imbalance established through the introduction of ancient thought.

For Europeans as with Arabs, though far more traumatic, the imbalance and instability caused by the introduction of Greek thought began to see a tilt of normalcy through "… Bacon's development of the principle of experimental science … For thousands of years before Bacon … it was normal practice to accept the word of authorities rather than to observe anew, frame hypotheses, and test them using scientific principles. But Bacon, like the modern scientists who followed him, rejected this "natural philosophy". He would not accept pure argument; everything should be subjected to experiment." (Clegg 3) As in some Arabian circles, though in far greater terms for Europeans, authority did not appeal to any form of science and in fact often publicly denounced any dalliance in natural sciences. The attitude accredited to Galileo was essential in breaking away from established classifications, though others, such as Dewey, would appeal to a different approach: "It is not easy to break away from current and established classifications of the world. The difficulty in this respect, however, is eased by the notion that after all it is only error that the mind needs to cut loose from, and that it can only do this by direct appeal to nature, by applying pure observation and reflection to pure objects." (Dewey 219) Like a very familiar Grecian philosopher, Bacon suggests an establishment of collaborative thinkers, "[One] … of Bacon's many fertile suggestions for the improvements of science, probably the most fruitful one was his proposal … [in] The New Atlantis, [Bacon] includes an academy of scientists, liberally provided with brains and funds. A few such academies already existed when Bacon wrote, but after Atlantis they sprang up everywhere … but not all … were adequately financed. The most important of them was the English society which … was finally chartered in 1662 as the Royal Society of London for the Improvement of Natural Knowledge." (Gay 17) Consideration of providing an organization of scientists is a great example of the import of science on the changing worldview in the natural sciences for Europeans. It was worth sharing and managing, thanks due in part to duress caused by authoritative indoctrination. It was Bacon who also said: "I cannot but be raised to this persuasion, that this third period of time will far surpass that of the Grecian ... learning, only if men will know their own strength and weakness both, and take one from the other light of invention, and not fire of contradiction."(Sutton 12) Yet even with all their similarities in empirical methodologies, Bacon yet holds hostility to Aristotle, and "says empiricists were mindless ants that gathered bits of information but didn't use it or know how to apply the data to practical purposes."(Magee 74-75). Indeed, in Europeans, a lack of control in nature and a feeling of helplessness led to an exploration in ways in which to understand and explain, and thus bring under control again, the events, creatures and environments that surround and inhabit the biosphere. But Europeans also made unique discovery for the sake of discovery alone, rather than finding a practical purpose for advancements in natural science. A traveling naturalist which frequented the Middle East, “Pierre Belon … published several zoological works, discovering that cetaceans were mammalian and not fish through empirical dissection, and published his findings for critical analysis by peers. He also compared the anatomy of birds to human structure, a pioneering study that earns him the title “Father of Comparative Anatomy”. (Ronan 283-284) Although dissection held negative implications in its practice, authoritative doctrine on such policies slowly began to give way, allowing more discoveries to come forth.

A rise in the scientific worldview of nature could be seen in China during a period when interest had grown "in a "purer" age, when things were better – the age-old belief in a "golden age" back in the distant past."(Ronan 135). Confucianism and Taoism developed for a period of time and had become the leading intellectual philosophies, though there were other small groups. Aristotelianism and empirical methods show some similarities in Confucianism, in Taoism, and other Chinese philosophical branches. In Taoism, for example, "it was a mixture of religion and philosophy, magic and primitive science, and its name was derived from the aim of its followers to seek the Tao ... a philosophical and spiritual term for ... "The Order of Nature" in the sense of the essential power of the universe; not, it must be emphasized, power of a divine all-powerful personal ruler, but the immanent power of that vast organism which is at once man and the universe ... these beliefs stimulated a desire to ascertain the causes of things, to observe the natural world, and even to conduct experiments. The Taoist would contemplate Nature not out of idle curiosity but in the belief that the knowledge gained would bring inner peace. Instead of using this knowledge to gain mastery over nature (as was the inspiration of so much Western scientific inquiry), the Taoist would never undertake what would be considered "contrary" action to use force against Nature." (Ronan 135) After bitter battles between Confucians, Buddhists and Taoists, and a dip in Taoism, the "... revival of Taoism left the Confucians feeling very acutely their lack of any ideas about the universe and the natural world, an intellectual lacuna emphasized by the Buddhists, who had their own views on matters of this kind." (Ronan 136) The Chinese were avid naturalists, writing innumerable volumes of encyclopedias describing plants and animal species, though far more more botanical references, as pharmacological experimentation was of utmost import to their culture. "In the Western world there was little development [in natural sciences] after the Greeks until Renaissance times, but in China there was no such hiatus." (182) Given a greater breadth and variety of microcosms and the specimens they in turn held due to the vastness of the region, Chinese scientists had much more at their disposal to analyze critically and experiment upon than Western scientists or Middle-eastern scientists, and had more free reign in such dalliances due to their own intellectual perspectives.

Works of Aristotle flow into western culture during the Middle Ages from the Middle East. Through them, Europeans rediscover the ideal system of ecumenical laws. Philosophical, ethical, and religious views shift throughout the world as humanity digests this new intellectual influence. Through a vast series of empirical observations, man is found not central in the universe, nor is he central of it, but is an integral part of something much more substantial, interwoven. The introspection and retrospection brought on by this new perspective, being a part of a vast, relatively unknown whole, techniques like vivisection and dissection, and other forms of empirical methodology, all lead to greater awareness of interrelated microcosms and humanity's place in such things. This humanistic questioning leads to a collapse in certain truths the establishments of authoritative and religious traditions, values, and morals instilled in humanity. Balance is struck through a blending of traditions and science in many instances.

One of the most unsettling developments, when natural science was finally beginning to feel more acceptance in authoritative circles, was " … [an] inner ambivalence [of scientists and authority] that has always inspired a peculiar blend of awe, a mixture of apprehension and admiration, among those who witnessed science's dynamic rise ... [like] Medieval citizens terrified by the experiments of the alchemists ... Throughout its rise to power glaring ambiguities have made it difficult for the contemporaries to recognize that science, despite our tendency to see it in simple moral terms, is neither good nor bad but an impersonal force as morally neutral as a computer or a machine, whose ethical value depends in essence on our uses. Perhaps behind these age-old fears here always lurked some presentiment about science's future destructive potential ..." (Dr Goldstein X) Chinese natural scientists rarely felt this sentiment of ambiguity as most of their religious and philosophical establishments had incorporated ideas of the universe and nature that allowed for empirical observation, experimentation, and the questioning of their place in the universe, developing natural knowledge over a greater period of time, like the Arabs devoting the study of botany to medical and agricultural practical matters, yet still maintain an aloofness toward the notion of "conquering" what westerners would consider the "barriers" of the natural world.

Works Cited

Cohen, Bernard I. Album of Science: From Leonardo to Lavoisier, 1450-1800. Charles Scribner's Sons. New York 1980

Clegg, Brian The First Scientist: A Life of Roger Bacon Carroll & Graf Publishers, New York 2003 pg 3

Dewey, John Experience and Nature Dover Publications, Inc, New York 1958 pg 219

Dr Goldstein, Thomas Dawn of Modern Science: From the Arabs to Leonardo Da Vinci. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston 1980 pg x, 245

Gay, Peter Age of Enlightenment. Time Incorporated. New York 1966 pg 17

Hamer, et al. Exploring the Old World Follett Publishing Company, New York 1957 pg. 177-178

Lindberg, David C. The Beginnings of Western Science. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. 1992 pg 47-67

Magee, Bryan The Story of Philosophy. DK publishing. New York 2001 pg 63-71

Ronan, Colin A. Science: Its History and Development Among the World's Cultures. The Hamlyn Publishing Group Limited. New York 1982 pg 135, 136, 202, 203, 233-234

Rubenstein, Richard E. Aristotle's Children: How Christians, Muslims, and Jews Rediscovered Ancient Wisdom and Illuminated the Dark Ages Harcourt, Inc, Florida 2003

Sutton, Ian, ed. Age of Expansion: Europe and the World 1559-1660 Thames and Hudson London 1968 pg 12

Way too many highly invasive non-indigenous Polychrotidae can be found residing within and dominating the only native Polychrotidae in Florida, Anolis carolinensis, such as this A. sagrei sagrei pictured above. This is another bi-product of the agricultural industry, which imported this particular species with cargo of sugar cane from Cuba. The agricultural industry of Florida is also still evading responsibilities of conscientious industry by continued dumping of waste into the Everglades, which it helped drain, pollute, and destroy, contributing to the pollution through a "philosophy of dilution" and by other archaic industrial, developmental, PR and managerial pratices.

What does it mean to "mow the lawn"?

When you utilize backhoes or other machines, like bobcats or sodcutters, and remove the top layer of sod containing all the native seeds from the earth that have survived your consistent mowing habits and non-native plant revegetation pleasures, will the native plants survive? And when you make laws requiring that a resident remove native plants through non-native species requirements, grass, shrub, and tree height requirements, or landscaping requirements, what are you doing to the food sources for native wild animals?

When you use non-organic fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides, are you not poisoning the environment of the city and non-city entities by causing bioaccumulation and a reduction in native wildlife through minimization and contamination of native arthropoda (an invertebrate animal of the phylum Arthropoda, including insects, crustaceans, arachnids, and myriapods) populations? Even using organic pesticides still minimizes arthropod populations and causes a disruption. If bird populations are in drastic decline, insects are poisoned and declining, and wetlands dredged, pipelined and filled, what is spreading new native flora seeds? What flora are surviving the blades of the mowers to flower, for the few insects to pollinate?

Well, here is a study on the effects of the removal of plants and trees which is thought to possibly reduce water levels and water quality. It may just be another reason we should re-examine our habit in molding our world to suit our needs, investigate the consequences of such actions before acting them out. A study on Water Quality. I believe this paper would have been much better had it not geared towards a profit in draining water from wetlands and increasing water yields for human use. Evapotranspiration is the loss of water by evaporation through soil and through transpiration, the act of releasing vapors from the stomata of plant tissue. It may be that natural evapotranspiration from flora is necessary in helping create higher annual rainfall indexes, while maintaining minimal soil evapotranspiration. The water quality study points out that cutting trees and other vegetation around waterways will increase the flow of water and soil evapotranspiration. Of course it will. But this also creates a different kind of ecosystem, increases erosion and lessens sedimentation and natural filtration, among other problems.

The "lawn" does not need a manicure, nor food, nor removal of "pestilence". "It" needs to be left alone, as "it" stands, to grow to be six feet high, if "it" wishes! And the lakes do not need to be trimmed along their banks, or the bushes hedged. No caring mother would want to look at any more poisonous oleander bushes planted in cute little rows all in the name of petty landscaping! Lawns and unnatural landscapes are neither viable nor sustaining in biodiversity, nor function as accurately as native flora in its natural numbers. If landscaping and "lawn" restrictions were lifted so that residents could let natural Florida flora take their intended place and course, it is feasible water consumption could be curtailed immensely. Man-made landscaping is repellent, repulsive, and revolting, and its popularity is sadly amusing. To think that humans believe they can create better than what is already there.

It's a wonder if evapotranspiration could possibly aid in the spread of pollen, another way that flora have adapted to propagate. Are we cutting their chances with our actions, literally?

Here is what I have been looking for, Anolis carolinensis. It's a great indicator of wetland health and biodiversity, the variety of organisms found within a geographical region, along with a few other key native Floridian species. This particular species is also a favorite for this author in native herpetological studies, but due to destruction of its habitat, is hard to find in natural settings. It also falls under pressure by one of its non-phylogenetically-related (a relative by origin or evolution) species, Anolis sagrei sagrei. In southern areas such as Miami-Dade Counties, Anolis equestris and Anolis garmani colonies dominate all while preying upon Anolis carolinensis, as with other predators like Cyanocitta cristata andTokay tokay. Yet, Cyanocitta cristata is the only one of the aforementioned which is native and substantiates natural predation upon the only native Anolis species in Florida. Extra pressures coupled with common predation occurences on our lone Anolis are a tax on its very survival. Concentrating populations of Polychrotidae or other wild animals will not preserve a native species, notably when species radiation, non-adaptive spreading of a group of organisms into new environments or adaptive, diversification of a species or single ancestor into forms which have evolved to specialize in a specific environmental niche (such as ecomorphs in Polychrotidae) is inhibited to parks and preserves, and non-indigenous species which compete well with the natives are introduced to such regions.

Desperate for more biota than feral cats

Every day, I try to absorb myself with the native biota of the unfortunately urban sprawl. Often it's getting harder and harder to find the native biota interspersed with the new non-natives (some being highly invasive and costing millions to monitor and remove, including the highly predatorial non-native felines and Varanis species). Memories of crawling through the mangrove swamps to get to the nice, natural sandbars, say, of Fort Desoto Park, before much of the surrounding development had risen nearby, brings tears to my eyes when I look at what is left of it and many barrier islands and coastal areas of Florida today. Growing up in late 1900 Florida lends poignant memories of vast coastal and inland wetlands, pristine, potable-from-source waters, clean, breathable air. It is what brought many of the early residents down to this area, and continues to bring innumerable tourists and new residents, now making Pinellas County one of the most densely populated counties in the country. If we can maintain Florida's pristine waters and undeveloped lands, we will maintain our image as a popular destination for exploration, retirement and enjoyment. But mitigating the loss of wetlands through the construction of faux wetlands in another area is not a viable alternative.

Wetlands have always been a barrier here for development, yet certainly not unnavigable in any way if one uses his or her child-like sensibilities. Most locals call them swamps, or at least, at one point they did. The barring from development of the swampland is what keeps alot of Florida's waters clean, filtered, and admired- and why many residents have always touted and demanded keeping such water pristine and clean. How did it become tainted in under two decades? Why do I have to strive to relive what I once lived every day in the passing of a fond reverie?

Are they just memories from childhood, and wishful thinking when I walk through a reconstruction at Weedon Island Preserve (and now, Cultural Center, because humans couldn't build it in the city?)? And why is the change coming so drastically, so suddenly? Shouldn't there be a check and balance that maintains proper species ratios outside of hunting? This is not in reference to felines native or non-indigenous. Invasive non-indigenous species do not seem to be the biggest problem, though they contribute. It is easy to forget the source of the non-indigenous species: human encroachment and its subsequent contamination. A zoonotic disease in our present state, wiping out everything natural around us and replacing it with our so-called order and balance.

Seeing a violation like this is stunning. Both of these felines should be on leashes, or otherwise indoors. Can you see the ornith limp in its jaws? Feral feline owners should be more responsible and take proper care of their pets by following the leash laws or keeping them indoors, or both. Proper canine enclosures, such as typical fencing, are not recommended containment for your cat, whether or not it is declawed. Feeding a cat before letting it outdoors does not stop predatory behavior in felines. Your pet should not have free reign to run loose (by law it does not). Not only can your pet spread disease to other pets and animals, it will prey on wildlife, and it is a feral, non-indigenous species on the American continent which can disrupt natural predation. This doesn't even touch on your pet being shot, injured, hit or killed, infected with feline leukemia or HIV or other such diseases through cat fights, exposure to endoparasitically-infected feline spore, unwanted procreation, ectoparasitic exposure and the sort. And when the worst happens, your pet decides to run away from home, it rapidly decimates localized populations of migratory and resident orniths and other Animalia, all whilst breeding at an alarming rate.

This is not a wetland, repeat: this is not a wetland (and should not be calculated as one, either, nor should other retentions made "wet land"). It is a feeder channel of Joe's Creek, which has the telltale film of pollution from runoff visible on the top of the stagnant water. Perhaps if the county did not interfere with the growth of vegetation in this channel, it could be a bit cleaner and would maintain enough soil protection from most erosion so the county would not have to continue to patch the road with toxic concrete (it should be stone, in my opinion). Yet, even if flora is left undisturbed by grass cutting trucks and specially made mowers, contaminants would still be present, absorbed by the vegetation herbivores and insects ingest, other parts of the web of life. How unsightly, that we think to impose on nature in such a horrible way. Here, YOU clean up our mess! We forget that we still make contact with that mess in one way or another. We eat the food, flora and fauna, that grows in it. We bathe in it, we drink it. Earth is in us all, as is everything we put into the Earth. To put it humorously, humans and other Animalia are all sponges, and the Earth is a watery bucket we get thrown into.

Retention of raw sewage and runoff should be facilitated by capable water quality technicians, whose primary job is to achieve totality in removal of non-naturally occuring chemicals, organisms, and our posterior extretions without treatment with further chemicals, then releasing the water. There should be no grandfathering or loophole to abide the guidelines of the Clean Water Act, nor should we amend it yet again. Through Florida's karst topography, water is an integral part of the very foundations we build our houses over. Sinkholes can attribute to these underground rivers and streams; their very presence is responsible in the degradive erosion in the limestone bedrock, giving way beneath human structures. It's why many choose to use groundwater. The water table is quite high. And it tells us a little something about how what seems to be an isolated incident of toxic spill, or a phosphorous or chemical or waste facilities' runoff in a contained area, can radiate out into other areas and bioaccumulate without our even knowing it.

A raw sewage drain that empties into a feeder channel which connects to the main channel known as Joe's Creek, which not only goes through several industrial zones but dumps directly into wetlands and Tampa Bay. My question is: "Why do I pay for sewage again? "

Experiencing Interference

One of the key negative elements in wetlands is bioaccumulation through exposure to man's shallower side. Those wetlands unlucky enough to lie beside burgeoning development pay full price, namely near new roadways, highways, and especially in Florida, condominiums and "marts", another Floridian slang term that perhaps describes discounted indoor markets. And let us not forget the coastally blocking, mangove filtration removing malbenefits of the ever-increasing shallow enterprise of high-rise units unfit for tropical sunset views and clean waters.

Bioaccumulation is the accumulation of a toxic chemical in various tissues of a living organism (this subject is of great interest to me due to the fact that I am majoring in the functional anatomy of the vertebrates). For instance, if wild shrimp are exposed to mercury, any animals preying on those shrimp, such as orniths (birds), will accumulate this chemical in possibly harmful doses over time, even though the presence of the chemical in the contaminated shrimp is small, due to an accumulation in the biological material of the greater predator in the food chain. If mercury is so toxic it causes fetal deformation, what is it and other toxic substances (even if toxic only in higher doses) doing to our indigenous wildlife out there? Some of which we humans happen to prey upon ourselves? And why are we removing the natural filtration mechanisms of wetlands in record numbers? Actually, many scientists studying amphibians and orniths, for instance, have discovered how bioaccumulation of certain substances do effect and inhibit normal function, growth and reproduction. If we are supposed to protect our waters, why are we continuing to let these potentially threatening substances enter them? In the case of mercury, there are ways to reduce emissions of mercurial contaminants by over 90%. If you walk around the neighborhoods of Pinellas Park or Clearwater and other city entities in Florida, many post signs that warn of dumping toxic materials down the storm drain, even with a little fish representation as a reminder, perhaps, to those in fishing industries. To me however, that is not enough. The drain should not exist, or it should connect to a facility that never connects to natural waterways, wetlands, or any lands whatsoever. This is an atrocity, and it is potentially dangerous.

It has been found that Florida has the highest mercury contamination in the country. I guess that study suggests that if you are pregnant, nursing, elderly, or planning to visit Florida, don't eat anything that comes from the water or preys on aquatic life, and definitely don't swim in the water. Beaches and estuaries seem to hold the greatest bioaccumulation due to raw sewage and runoff being diverted through channels directly into the Gulf on the west coast of the peninsula, which is where most of Florida's fish is derived by the local fishing industry. This practice of runoff and sewage release is also prevalent on the east coast and throughout the state. It seems that rather than do the right thing in filtering this wastewater before even reclaiming it, authorities long ago decided it was okay to swim in your own feces and runoff and eat the creatures that live in your feces and runoff every day of their lives as long as authoritative entities don't have to pay to clean up their act (a similar case study of such a problem is during the Civil War, where soldiers drank and bathed in the same water in which they used as a toilet and a dump. We know more people died from dysentery and disease than did bullet.). There are laws such as the Clean Water Act (ammended, of course, let's hope not again) of 1972, which have been enacted to not only protect people but protect natural wetlands. Those channels used to divert such runoff and waste into our economical and ecological treasures run through some of the worst industrial zones, picking up their often illegally dumped, unfiltered refuse as well. Would you bathe in or drink that? Then something is wrong. And I'm tired of it. Why are my tax dollars going "down the drain", as it were?

So why do such laws protect "navigable" waterways, whilst some would consider dense wetlands not deserving of the same regulations, as if the supposedly unnavigable ones would deserve less (I'll tell you few Americans could navigate anything in this life if they didn't know how)? And who is out there enforcing this? Why are my tax dollars not going towards the purpose of maintaining, intact, virgin, pristine wetlands without being under a pretense by those who cut the checks from my tax dollars or utilizing it as a park? Allowing wetlands to be thoroughfared like a scenic parkland, then overdeveloping the tourist trap hell out of it is not in the public's best interest, say we the people. It's not a complex task, it's common sense: deny the permits, provide the funding, fund the research, greatly reduce growth to more acceptable levels. You don't let growth overburden your resources, any of them. That is the real meaning behind the word mitigation.

But before you start by saying I have no documentation to prove such things occur, if you are not a resident of Florida year-round like myself, you had better start doing some research of your own, counter-documentation, if you will. You may wish to start your research on this matter by clicking the links at the above right under the heading Links, or can ask for an archival copy of the headline articles (front page news) of the St Petersburg Times for Sunday, May 22 and Monday, May 23, 2005, in which all parts of the segment hold remarkable journalistic insights of documentation. Here, I did a search for "vanishing wetlands" between those dates for the archives in the database for you: vanishing wetlands. All links shown for those dates are relevant, as are other predated archives in the Times database. This is merely one region among many in Florida.

Welcome to Mitigation

So what does that mean, anyhow? To mitigate oneself, or their life, let alone while in college? How can anyone find Apollonian insight or ecumenical balance in today's hectic schedule of events? Well, that's not my goal. This blog is an attempt to question mitigation of another sort altogether, but will also include some of my other projects and thoughts as the year moves forward (sometimes leaving me lagging a little behind).

The word mitigation is defined as: to moderate in force or intensity. When applied to wetlands conservation, however, the definition seems to change radically, perhaps reflecting more ancient notions of wetlands conservation: the act of absolving or the state of being absolved. Irreplaceable wetlands are being pandered off for a price, often at the push of the leaders many have elected to protect such national treasures. The solution to this loss is that the Corps requires the developer to save wetlands at another site or build new, incomparable wetlands at the existing site. But, what do you do when there are no wetlands left to buy because the ones previously set aside are eventually sold for development as well? How can you justify man-made wetlands when there is no data showing success in projects by non-conservational entities, due to the indiscretion that no one is out collecting that much-needed data (but oh yes, there are industrial-type uses of wetlands with plenty of data on its effectiveness in filtering our contaminants but not in ability to sustain wildlife biodiversity)? It would seem that recently published data indicates, however, that wetlands are being bull-dozed and replaced in mini-versions to suit the needs of humans for key purposes: cheap filtration through planting of select vegetation and permitting among them, rather than leaving the wetland(s) standing intact. It is not known the consequences of diverting the great flow of wetland water across the state, nor is it known if scientifically organized wetlands built to suit the needs of industry and agriculture will effect biodiversity, however, the effect of radically altering he forces and processes that produce and control all the phenomena of the material world does not sound like a good idea. It truly is playing God in the eyes of some. Selfishly molding the world in our image of beauty, to suit our purpose, and staggering thousands of years of life in the making (I say that in reference to life in FL after the asteroid impact event which caused the mass extinction). Little do we know, as studies in mice would suggest, that even our fertility is being permanently removed from our generations, some sort of perverse side effect of eugenics from bioaccumulation of pesticides, which, in a way, would be a good thing. Perhaps slow us down a little.

Drought has been all too frequent, annual rainfall has been down for years, migratory and resident bird numbers are plummeting at an alarming rate, and temperatures have been increasing incrementally. Are these indications of something wrong?

Myakka State Park, Florida Why reserve nature to tiny little pockets of life such as this when the entire state should look like this? How can we be sure that only leaving parks for wildlife will be enough to sustain biodiversity? And what do we do if parks and preserves are all that is left of our native flora and fauna?