In looking back through my old posts I began to detect a trend in my writing, and not one that I am particularly proud of. When first observing nature and the impact of the human influence, I seem to rush to condemn our species for wrongdoings that I assume. Perhaps I do so because I feel guilty about my own carbon footprint on the environment. Or maybe I am quick to make judgments because I have seen humans blamed so many times for the blight of our planet in the popular media. Looking back now I realize that I mustn’t equate all people to same no-good, environment-destroyer that I may see in the mirror or in the news. This is not to say that the overall human impact on our planet has not been overwhelmingly negative (I am not questioning that), but rather that perhaps I should take more care in learning all of the facts before jumping to conclusions about specific, localized examples of the human impact. To show what I mean by all of this I will refer back to my previous postings, starting with my very first blog about the Gambles Mill Trail.
In this blog entitled, “The Human Footprint”, I explored the phenomenon that I mentioned earlier about my carbon footprint, namely the impact that humans have on the environment and the tracks, literal and physical, that we leave behind. (see my post here: http://blog.richmond.edu/james/2012/01/17/gambles-mill-trail/#comments) Walking down the trail for the first time I was quick to notice, “…tire tracks, severed trees, manicured hills [the Virginia Country Club golf course], and barbed wire.” Now I do not take back some of the accusatory inquiries I made about the way humans treat nature, including the comparison of the attention paid to the uptake of the golf course to that of the litter strewn about the trail, however; I would like to make some revisions. As I began to do in my comment on the post, I do wish to re-evaluate the assumptions I made about the tire tracks, blue paint, etc. After heading down the trail for the second time, this time with TLB as our guide, I learned that these observations may have actually been signs of the recent efforts made by the university to upkeep and update the trail. Now with that view in mind I can see this evidence of construction as the markings of a positive human impact on the trail. I can be nothing but excited about the possibility of the trail becoming a better-known part of campus where students can get out to appreciate nature, as well as make their way over to Pony Pasture or even Starbucks. In my next post about my reflection spot I did seem to learn my lesson somewhat by refraining to jump to conclusions when I saw that this area had also been littered (http://blog.richmond.edu/james/2012/01/26/little-westham-creek-riffle-reflections-part-1/), but any progress I had made seemed to go by the wayside in my next post, “An Urban River Revival?: A Response Letter to the New York Times”.
Left to my own devices with a completely open prompt, I decided to further investigate the phenomena we had been discussing in class, such as the urban stream syndrome, by looking up recent articles about the health of the James. (my original post: http://blog.richmond.edu/james/2012/02/01/an-urban-river-revival-a-response-letter-to-the-new-york-times/#comments) The hard-headed science major that I am, I decided to write a response to one article I found about the, “Signs of an Urban River’s Revival in Virginia” by a certain New York Times journalist named Sarah Wheaton. (Now I am not saying all science majors do this, just that I believe my passion for numbers and science played a central role in causing my overreaction to the article). In what I thought to be a brilliant exposé of her article, I began railing against Ms. Wheaton’s evidence of “blue herons, shad, and people along the river” as signs of a revival of the James. I wanted more. I wanted numbers, tables, and graphs demonstrating such a revival, especially after reading another article by a local new station stating that the James had recently been downgraded from a “C+” to a “C” for its overall health. This other article did give me the numbers I so desired, such as the recent reductions in the amount of other wildlife, which I used to argue against Ms. Wheaton’s claims. However, once again TLB set me straight.
On our first trip to the river as a complete class he gave us a walking tour of the falls at Richmond, as well as Brown’s Isle, all the while sharing with us his knowledge of the river. He mentioned that not long ago the river was so polluted that it was not sanitary for people to swim or fish in it, which I must admit was also mentioned in Ms. Wheaton’s article. Then, he gave us specific examples of efforts, such as bayscaping, made by the state and other organizations, to reverse the damage we have caused to the river. Without doubt, progress has been made. Looking back, I do not regret the claims I made about Ms. Wheaton’s lack of scientific evidence and information regarding the recent legislation about the river, but if I could add one more paragraph I would say that her view is not all too unrealistic. In my conclusion I incriminate her for making the general public think that the river is better off than it is, thereby reducing their likelihood of supporting expensive efforts to, for lack of a better word, “revive” the river. However, perhaps there is value in recognizing the progress we have made, as it may enthuse the common citizen about our ability to make a positive difference in the health of our river. Perhaps my plea should not have been for Ms. Wheaton to completely switch to a negative view of the human impact on the river (which I seem to love to have), but rather to one that more adeptly shows both sides. In other words, I would’ve preferred a title more along the lines of, “Signs of an Urban River’s Revival in Virginia, but We’ve Still Got Some Work To Do”. Moving forward I realize I should try to refrain from approaching any given issue with fists raised, but rather with a more open mind. For help with this task I turn to my fellow classmates.
In my search for the way my fellow classmates approach the issue of the human impact on the environment I first came across Hans’ post about his reflection spot along the Westhampton Lake. (http://blog.richmond.edu/james/2012/01/26/my-reflection-spot/#respond) He mentions that he has somewhat of a history with the trail along the lake as his biology class sophomore year came here to take samples to test the water quality of the lake. However, instead of focusing on the failing health of health of our lake, he notes, “Now the situation got a lot better…the side of the lake no longer has any visible used bottles or trash bags in it anymore and the water seemed a lot less polluted than before…it made my day knowing that people are starting to treat the lake well.” Now, as I have shown, this is hardly the stance I would have taken had I gone on the same walk that Hans had, but frankly I like his better. His ability to recognize the bad, yet also note the good impacts that we have had on our lake show me that it is not too difficult to introduce a little optimism into my own view. All I have to do is so keep my eyes open and think about the past about the progress we’ve made.
Another post that I found particularly inspiring was C.J.’s post about what to make of the Gambles Mill Trail. (http://blog.richmond.edu/james/2012/01/18/the-gambles-mill-corridor/#comments) What struck me about C.J.’s post was his ability to avoid dwelling on the same litter that I saw, and instead make a vow to do his part to help reverse the damage done. He makes it a goal to, “…go out with a trash bag and collect the junk I passed on my way out…I hope to make the stream near the well my place to revisit during the spring and, if not, just make it a little cleaner.” And with his first visit to his reflection spot, that is exactly what he did. I remember him coming back to the room (we’re roommates), hands filled with trash, beaming about what he had collected and the treasure he uncovered (namely a cup from freshman orientation 1994). In his reflection post he echoed Han’s sentiment about our ability to reverse the tides saying, “People can have a big impact by trashing the environment, but also by cleaning up the mess others have made.” Once again, I by far prefer this view to my own, and hope to learn from C.J.’s more holistic outlook on the human impact on the environment.
Ok so I know I by now have already surpassed the 1000 word recommended length of this post, but before I wrap things up there are just a couple more inspirational posts by my classmates that I would like to mention. First, in his impression of the GMT, Mike seems to lie on the fence about the human influence on the trail. In his concluding paragraph he asks, “But would we be overstepping our boundaries if we spruce it up a little bit? Build some bridges and new walkways?…Would it be promoting nature? Or perhaps, it would simply be a finely groomed diversion, a golf course of a different color”. (http://blog.richmond.edu/james/2012/01/18/a-gambles-mill-horror-story/#comments) Here he seems to consider our ability to make the trail a more attractive part of campus, but questions whether that is truly a positive impact on nature. Still, I cannot help but respect his ability to see both sides, and not pigeonhole himself into one close-minded view.
Lastly, I would like to mention one of Carolyn’s posts, also about the GMT. (http://blog.richmond.edu/james/2012/01/18/impressions-and-relfections/#comments) Once again, after making the same walk that I made, she held a completely different view of our influence on the trail. She does note that the work on the trail seemed like a “manipulation of natural resources” which “encroaches on natural space”, yet she also makes the point that “with so many people of all ages learning the value of the beauty of nature especially through increased interest in outdoor activities like biking, running, and rock climbing, I hope that these spaces will begin to be valued anew.” Here I admire her ability to recognize the potential positive implications of our re-shaping of the trail, as I completely agree that public exposure and awareness is a main driving force behind preservation of the natural world.
Finally, I would just like to sum up by apologizing to anyone who has read my previous posts for my close-mindedness, and by making a vow to change. I realize now that humans are not all bad, all the time. Now, when looking at an area for the first time, I will strive to consider both sides of the story. Never will I give up my willingness to condemn our species, as I believe introspection is healthy (as shown by this post), but I will make it a point to open my eyes to those efforts regarding the environment where we have done well. I apologize for such a long post and thank you for bearing with me. I truly feel that this has been a beneficial exercise for me and that I have grown even in just the first month of this course. Hopefully with the help of TLB and my fellow classmates I will continue to grow. I honestly can’t wait to see what happens next!