Nonnative Invasive Plants - The Invasion of America by the Yellow Starthistle
Introduction
Our planet is made up of seven continents and seven oceans holding hundreds of thousands of environments and ecosystems, each with unique variations, compositions, and distinctions, and each carefully balanced in the functions of its different members. Over time, equilibria have been reached, as the organisms that populate areas stabilized, intermingled, and interacted with weather, soil, water availability, and other innumerable environmental factors. This is not to say that such environments are stagnant, for they are far from it. In order to remain healthy and profitable, however, change must happen slowly in an ecosystem, so that all members of the ecological community can adapt and survive. Radical change results in dangerous instability and threatens the livability of the system for the animals, plants, and even humans who depend upon it.
As systems are vastly different and extremely delicate, species that are successful, profitable and enhance the livability in one area are sometimes entirely inapplicable and in fact dangerous in another. It is for this reason that we find ourselves confronted, in recent history, with a relatively new problem: nonnative species invasion. As human populations have begun to engage in widespread travel, exchanges, and modification attempts worldwide, they have also--both knowingly and unknowingly--introduced, transported, and intermingled species between ecosystems in a manner that is neither gradual nor delicate. Imbalances and frailties have ensued in the very ecosystems upon which we depend for our survival, health, and economic success.
New animals, plants, bacteria, and organisms of all shapes and sizes and from every kingdom are being introduced to once stable environments on a regular basis through human carelessness and ignorance. Once introduced, they often negatively affect their newfound homes, taking over with unexpected force and threatening the native organisms. Many are well known, like Kudzu, an oriental plant initially introduced for erosion control, which now covers millions of acres in the Southern United States, or the tiny Zebra Mussel, originally found in Poland, which now blocks water supply and treatment systems nationwide. Invasive species are not a distant threat which will make their effects felt twenty or thirty years from now. They compose a current problem having major impacts on life and industry everywhere, and the magnitude of this problem continues to grow.
The re-wilding of North America is basically a conservation strategy (Donlan 2005), aimed at restoring the Pleistocene era (Donlan 2005, Rubenstein et al. 2006). This could be achieved by reintroducing African and Asian megafauna, these species are phylogenetically known to be direct descendents of the extinct Pleistocene species or animals of similar taxa (Donlan 2005, Rubenstein et al. 2006). Re-populating North America is essential for both ecological and evolutionary potential (Donlan 2005) and also economic gain (Donlan 2005, Rubenstein et al. 2006). In this paper I will be discussing the main arguments presented by two papers regarding the Pleistocene North America re-wilding. The first paper is written by Donlan (2005), it is a commentary paper in which he proposes the plan of re-wilding North America based on his opinions. The second paper is by Rubenstein et al. (2006), it is a research paper where he outlines some facts contrary to Donlan (2005)’s paper, unlike Donlan (2005)‘s paper his arguments were supported by variety of recent Scientific published papers which are relevant to the topic discussed.
Some feel that by not paying college athletes that college institutions are thereby exploiting their athletes free of charge, which is unfair. However, this article feels that college athletes are paid very favorably by the large amount of money they receive for schooling through scholarships. Also, since college athletes don’t pay to play or go to school they are receiving a free college degree whether or not they decide to stay in school for four years or not. With the training that they receive from professional trainers and nutritionists for a professional controlled diet they save possibly thousands within the 4 years they attend school and perform in collegiate athletics.
Daugherty, Paul. "College athletes already have advantages and shouldn't be paid." Sports Illustrated. Sports Illustrated, 20 Jan. 2012. Web. 25 Apr. 2014. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/paul_daugherty/01/20/no.pay/
College athletes are undoubtedly some of the hardest working people in the world. Not only are they living the life of an average student, they also have a strenuous schedule with their specific sport. One of the most discussed topics in the world of college athletics is whether or not student-athletes should be paid money for playing sports. The people who disagree with the idea have some good arguments to make. Primarily that the athletes get to go to school for free for playing sports. Another argument is that if student-athletes were to get paid then it would ruin the amateurism of college sports. People who are against paying the athletes do not want to see the young people become focused on money. “Paying student-athletes would dramatically shift their focus away from where it should be - gaining knowledge and skills for life after college” (Lewis and Williams). This is very understandable because one of the biggest reasons college sports are so popular is because the athletes play for school pride and for bragging rights. They play because they enjoy the game, not because it is their job. Most people that disagree with the idea of paying the athletes fail to realize what really goes on behind the scenes. At most Universities around the country the bulk of the income the school receives is brought in through the athletic programs. In fact the football and basketball teams usually bring in enough money to completely pay for the rest of the athletic programs all together. To get a better understanding of how much has changed in the world of college sports a little history must be learned.
Should college athletes get paid an additional salary? They are an important assets to universities and colleges, so why should they not? How else would universities justify taking advantage of these young men and women? These are questions that arise when pondering the issue. This has been a large controversy over the years of rather or not college athletes should be paid, more specifically football and basketball players. However, they fail to mention that colleges are only considering paying a select few, the stars of the sports. Every single sport in colleges is making revenue for those campuses, making colleges money hungry. Thus, if they decide to only pay a select few, would that leave out women sports all together? Why pay college athletes more on top of everything they already receive? Most college athletes receive free tuition, medical care, meal plans and room and board, which can acquaint to more than a quarter million dollars for their entire college career (Scoop, 2013). Why ask for more? What is this teaching our youth? They should appreciate their chance to do what they love and value the education they are receiving, because that education is far more valuable than a potential sports salary. Even though colleges and college athletes have a few good points on why they believe they should get paid, over all the issue is larger than that, college athletes already make their share of “money” through free education and much more.
Eitzen, D. Stanley. "College Athletes Should Be Paid." Sports and Athletes. Ed. James D. Torr.
Global change is taking place every day; therefore, it is important to understand how human activities and behavior alters the biodiversity and functions of ecosystems. Alien species is a stimulator of major changes in ecosystems (Vila et al. 2011). An invasive species, is a non-native plant, animal, or fungus that moves to a new ecosystem in a foreign environment. Invasive ecology explores how the invasive species affect the economic, environmental, and human health on the new environment. For example, invasive ecology studies how an invasive species tends to crowd out and sometimes replace a native species (Richardson and Pysek 2008).
Time and time again it has been seen that human interaction with his/her environment and it’s ecosystems has shown to be increasingly arrogant and self-serving. These endless accounts are proven by the amount of important biological diversity that is being lost to the surrounding environment due to these threats of human development and population growth. There are two forms of these losses of diversity by human hand: direct and indirect. Direct losses would be the destruction of an area needed for human requirements be it social or economical. Examples of these losses would be housing, agriculture, and others. Indirect losses would be those caused by the destruction of an area also needed for the same requirements but the area’s commodities which are valued, water, food, land in general, is needed elsewhere. These losses are few in number compared with those of direct losses yet they are of the greatest importance. They are important because they involve the removal of resources of an area in which other inhabitants are dependent upon. A great example of this regrettable indirect expansion is the loss of the rich habitat of the area known as Owens Valley.
College athletes should be paid! College athletes are often considered to be some of the luckiest students in the world. Most of them receiving all inclusive scholarships that cover all the costs of their education. They are also in a position to make a reputation for themselves in the sporting world preparing them for the next step. The ongoing debate whether student athletes should be paid has been going on for years. These athletes bring in millions of dollars for their respective schools and receive zero in return. Many will argue that they do receive payment, but in reality it is just not true. Costs associated with getting a college education will be discussed, information pertaining to the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), and benefits student athletes receive. First, I’ll start with costs associated with college and most of all why student athletes should be paid!
classifies Division I football players as amateurs, not professionals, student-athletes, not employees, which is how colleges get away with paying them nothing.” In a way it is not fair with the players that are who are generating most of the profit to the team and the league, but more important is the fact that they are being offered a free education.
College athletics is a billion dollar industry and has been for a long time. Due to the increasing ratings of college athletics, this figure will continue to rise. It’s simple: bigger, faster, stronger athletes will generate more money. College Universities generate so much revenue during the year that it is only fair to the players that they get a cut. College athletes should get paid based on the university’s revenue, apparel sales, and lack of spending money.
A different scenario takes place when an alien species is transported to a new area. Although direct competition with similar species is still a problem, the new kid in the block may have no natural pests and diseases. Thus, large stands of monocultures can occur. It is generally accepted that one plant species will support 10 species of animals. If one species takes over 99% of a given habitat dozens if not hundreds of species are lost from that area and some populations are stressed enough that extinction is possible.
Invasive alien species are disrupting and changing the normal ecological functions of biomes, ecosystems, and the biosphere as a whole (CBD, 2009). They are a threat to biodiversity and can cause damage to, or even eradicate native species which natural cycles and other organisms depend on. While disrupting energy flow, food chains, and shaking the structure of ecosystems to the core, invasive species create not only ecological, but also a whole host of social, economical, and health issues that affect the livelihood of almost every organism on earth, including humans (CBD, 2009).
Through millions of years of evolution, well-balanced habitats have co-evolved to provide for the wide variety of species and their needs. Trees have adapted to weeds, weeds have adapted to the predation from herbivores, and so on up the food chain. Similar scenarios are seen throughout the world. Through the process of natural selection, specific species or broad species families will go extinct. However, these occurrences have largely been due to the natural flow and evolution of time. It wasn’t until recently that dominant species, such as humans, have taken the course of nature into their own hands.
Invasive species are organisms that have “moved into an area in which it previously did not exist” (Snider, Mahan, and Holloway).Often times, the introduction of invasive species is usually for the purpose of controlling a native species that is considered a pest, but sometimes they are introduced because people are importing them as pets or ornamental plants, and even sometimes they are introduced as a mistake (Evans). Many environmental scientists consider invasive species as the most dangerous cause of endangerment, because they affect the biodiversity of ecosystems and biological communities, thus affecting the natural food webs and habitats of species. Ehrlich actually contributes fifty-four percent of the one hundred and seventy extinct species, of which the causes of extinction have been reliably identified, directly to invasive species (Ehrlich 37). Therefore, the introduction of invasive species to any new environment causes a threat to the ecosystems, as the foreign species will fight to survive and ultimately thrive in its new environment, meaning that invasive species hold the risk of pushing native species into extinction (Ehrlich