I agree with the speaker Jeff when he says that are an importance of politics on policies, and it shapes the directions of things goes nowadays. Whatever level of biodiversity we seek as a society, will automatically represent a political compromise. In general, i understood that the main point talked about on the video is that society should find a way to combine conservation of biodiversity and work lands.
Let me begin by saying that, as a lay person in a BIO 103 class, I found all this policy talk to be mind boggling. As a result, I fell behind in my homework projects, because I stopped the video 40 minutes into this video the first time I watched this, because I had to take a breather and reflect on the plethora of information that I was bombarded by. That being said, I’m glad that I was able to power through the entire video, because I feel as though I am better educated on these topics. I think that a lot of my confusion coincides with the themes set forth by the presenters. It sounds as though there are a lot of polices and classifications that still need to be clearly defined. Take for instance the idea of urban and agricultural landscapes. Defining these two things at a base level seems to be elusive in general, and when you add the fact that either environment is in a state of perpetual change in regards to the way that it is cultivated and elemental effects on the land, it makes it even more challenging. The way that federal and state policies interplay is another example of how extensively complicated it is to try to maintain biodiversity in a working landscape. I can understand why that would be difficult to accomplish. I felt myself phasing out anytime this topic came up. There’s so much involved with it, that I found myself sympathizing with the cattleman and other landowners that are being asked to conserve on their private land, rather than the species that the ESA is trying to preserve and protect. I know that if I owned large chunks of land, and I had to jump through bureaucratic hoops in order to contribute to preservation efforts, I would be less inclined to do so. Even when the plant and animal species have been identified, a large amount of uncertainty remains as to the incentives that are available to the landowners, and it must be a hassle to people that are simply trying to maintain their livelihood on their own terms.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the speaker Jeff when he says that are an importance of politics on policies, and it shapes the directions of things goes nowadays. Whatever level of biodiversity we seek as a society, will automatically represent a political compromise. In general, i understood that the main point talked about on the video is that society should find a way to combine conservation of biodiversity and work lands.
ReplyDeleteLet me begin by saying that, as a lay person in a BIO 103 class, I found all this policy talk to be mind boggling. As a result, I fell behind in my homework projects, because I stopped the video 40 minutes into this video the first time I watched this, because I had to take a breather and reflect on the plethora of information that I was bombarded by. That being said, I’m glad that I was able to power through the entire video, because I feel as though I am better educated on these topics.
ReplyDeleteI think that a lot of my confusion coincides with the themes set forth by the presenters. It sounds as though there are a lot of polices and classifications that still need to be clearly defined. Take for instance the idea of urban and agricultural landscapes. Defining these two things at a base level seems to be elusive in general, and when you add the fact that either environment is in a state of perpetual change in regards to the way that it is cultivated and elemental effects on the land, it makes it even more challenging.
The way that federal and state policies interplay is another example of how extensively complicated it is to try to maintain biodiversity in a working landscape. I can understand why that would be difficult to accomplish. I felt myself phasing out anytime this topic came up. There’s so much involved with it, that I found myself sympathizing with the cattleman and other landowners that are being asked to conserve on their private land, rather than the species that the ESA is trying to preserve and protect.
I know that if I owned large chunks of land, and I had to jump through bureaucratic hoops in order to contribute to preservation efforts, I would be less inclined to do so. Even when the plant and animal species have been identified, a large amount of uncertainty remains as to the incentives that are available to the landowners, and it must be a hassle to people that are simply trying to maintain their livelihood on their own terms.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete