Unnatural Kingdom

The article Unnatural Kingdom by Daniel Duane presents two ways of preserving animal populations through new types of technology.  The two types of preservation are the relocation of animals and the prevention of predation of the endangered population.  These methods help to protect and monitor these endangered animal populations while keeping them as relatively wild and in their natural habitat as possible.

Scientists monitor the predation habits of the endangered population. If this population is being preyed on too frequently, scientists and hunters will intervene and take out the predators. Animal transportation is another method while trying to protect a population. The animal transportation method takes animals from one area of the endangered population and moves them to an area where there is a less dense population. The article describes how pregnant female sheep are captured, bagged and dangled by helicopter to their new location.

In my opinion, animal relocation is the better method. Although this method separates animal families and drops animals in new locations to have offspring, it is more humane than predation prevention. The predation prevention method is killing other animals in order to save another, which doesn't make sense. I personally do not like either method and should let things happen on their own.

Restored populations of big horned sheep will have less genetic diversity than they did 200 years ago due to the near extinction. The species was brought back from a select few sheep with the help of scientists leaving a very shallow.

Although the sheep are not domesticated, I would say that these animals no longer can be considered wild animals. They are under nearly constant surveillance and could possibly extinct now if not for human intervention.

Topic 1: Public Health

Topic One: Public Health

Executive Summary

The Industrial Farm Animal Production (IFAP) has replaced the small family farm and traditional farming operations. The IFAP system confines large numbers of animals to small areas, resulting in crowded conditions for the animals. The current system of raising farm animals presents unacceptable risks to public health of workers at agriculture operations and processing facilities, communities near these confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs), and to the environment. Specific problems include an increase in antibiotic resistant bacteria resulting from an overuse in antibiotics and poor animal health due to limited movement & confined quarters.  Neighboring properties may experience poor air quality or contamination of ground and surface water resulting from improperly managed animal waste.


Main Article Summary

The goal of agriculture has always been to meet human demand for food as the population grows. Improved agricultural methods have resulted in increased yields and decreased cost of production over the centuries, to keep up with the needs of an increasing human population. Industrial farms have provided short-term farm efficiency and affordable food. The goal is to grow more animals in less space, use cost-efficient feed and replace workers with technology. Public health affects of IFAP include the spread of disease and pathogens from animals to humans. The system relies on a large number of animals in on place, which produce large amounts of animal waste. This waste is stored in manure lagoons, stockpiled and applied to agricultural fields where pathogens and nutrients may cause a threat to public health.  Specific public health concerns of IFAPs include transmitting diseases from animals to humans, food born diseases and the safety and health of workers.

Solution:

The Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York has laid out a simple solution. NOFA-NY promotes organic food production and local marketing. If consumers no longer purchase products from industrialized farms, these farms will go out of business and the problem will be solved. NOFA-NY's organization of farmers, gardeners and consumers work together to create a sustainable food system that is economically viable and environmentally sound.

https://www.nofany.org/

Tar Sands and EROI

1. Tar sands should be extracted first has a higher energy return on investment compared to oil shale.
2. Extracting oil shale and tar sands both require being heated up to extreme temperatures to break up the minerals that the oil is attached to.
3. The key difference between the two extractions is that you have a higher quantity of oil when extracting from tar sands.
4. Off-shore oil drilling results in a much higher EROI. In this case more oil is retrieved with less fossil fuels to get it. 
5. When ordering pizza I try to find the closest pizza place who sells pizza for the least amount but is still really good pizza. Therefore less money is spent, less energy is wasted going to get it and there is still a good output.