A Block Physical Geography - Today, we'll watch the Discovery Channel Raging Planet Volcanoes episode...Sweet!
We'll look at the differences between explosive and effusive volcanic eruptions (think silica and gas) and you'll have a big question to look at. For more on the differences between explosive and effusive eruptions see:
San Diego State University "How Volcanoes Work"
Volcano World "Volcanic Gasses"
Science World 2005 "When Mountains Fizz"
B Block Human Geography - Today we'll try to answer the Key Questions Why Do People Migrate and Where Do People Migrate Within a Country? To do this we'll look at push and pull factors along with the difference between a refugee and an internally displaced person. I'll have you fill in a chart on push/pull factors and then we'll look at internal rather than international migration (migration within a country). The text talks about Russia, Canada, China, and Brazil so you'll need to fill in a chart on these 4 case studies of internal migration. Lastly we'll look at (and yep you've got a thing to do on it) urbanization, suburbanization, and counterurbanization.
C & D Blocks Environmental & Social Sciences - With Benton in 145 you'll be looking at soil as a product of the 4 spheres, working on a diagram and discussion along with the composition and process of formation of soils (continuing with the diagram along with some definitions – use to guide lab). Next you'll do a Sand/Silt/Clay breakdown lab of local soil. (Lab – reflection) and finally look at Enviro-Assess for Vanier, example cores and analysis.
National Geographic Why Soil Matters
Digging Deep Reveals the Intricate World of Roots
With Young (in 115) we're back to the idea of worldview. Today we'll focus on conservation vs preservation in terms of social justice for both animals and humans. From National Geographic Magazine:
Conservation is similar to preservation, but while both relate to the protection of nature, they strive to accomplish this task in different ways. Conservation seeks the sustainable use of nature by humans, for activities such as hunting, logging, or mining, while preservation means protecting nature from human use.So today I'd like to look at grizzly bears on the edge of the Great Bear Rainforest. My question that I'd like you to try to answer today is considering your worldview, "In order to preserve a population, should we intervene in nature to help animals"? This is based on the recent news about starving grizzlies in Knight Inlet.
Emaciated grizzly bears in Canada spark greater concerns over depleted salmon population
B.C. First Nation feeds hungry grizzlies 500 salmon carcasses
'The bears have been starving': 500 salmon donated to feed emaciated grizzlies
Wildlife photographer raises concern with photos of emaciated grizzlies
What should we try to protect? How should we balance different, potentially conflicting, values such as nature protection and individual animal welfare? Is "well being" or "suffering" a more common state in nature? Should we prevent suffering of natural events? Is a bad salmon run a natural or a human caused event? In general, a wildlife policy determined by an animal rights perspective would direct us just to leave wild animals alone. Should we?
The Mamalilikulla Guardian Watchmen and volunteers are temporarily feeding grizzlies. From First Nations lead transition to conservation-based economy in Great Bear Rainforest, Haida Gwaii
Four Guardian Watchmen have been trained for Knight Inlet, with another three in training, and the monitoring program is a model for managing the surrounding territories. Indigenous-led guardian programs empower communities to manage ancestral lands according to traditional laws and values. “We are moving away from a totally extractive economy with publicly traded companies coming into the Great Bear Rainforest and Haida Gwaii and extracting value and leaving little value there,” Brodie Guy said, “We are shifting from an extractive and exploitative model of development to one that has benefits for everyone. It’s not just Indigenous people that are benefitting. It’s everyone of the Central Coast,” he said.
Is this because of the natural value of grizzlies or because of the financial value of grizzly bear watching? Nothing indicates it's the latter but saving grizzlies certainly helps the Knight Inlet Lodge which is owned collectively by Na̲nwak̲olas (representing five limited partner First Nations; Da’naxda’xw Awaetlala, Mamalilikulla, Tlowitsis, Wei Wai Kum and K’ómoks First Nations). Knight Inlet Lodge is a founding member of the Commercial Bear Viewing Association of British Columbia (CBVA). So a benefit of intervening in nature, to preserve a population, is the long term stability of ecotourism for Knight Inlet Lodge. Sigh...what should we do?
No comments:
Post a Comment