Article 10/11/10

Conservation of nature is key. Sure, the human species has a way of taking away from nature, but it has been depleting it these days. Because of our growing need of resources, it has began to increase the amount we take from nature. 250,000 people are born each day, drastically increasing the population on Earth. Of course, scientists have been debating constantly on how we are to stop the depletion of biodiversity, and a few ways have gone into action. The first is called hot-spots. A hot-spot is an area of land dedicated to complete biodiversity, keeping the human population out of that certain zone. There are arguments to this method, one being that in some of the hot-spots chosen, there isn't enough animal population. Other setbacks include the loss of land for humans that includes agriculture and farm land. People that depend on that land are relocated, some in a habitat that is almost unlivable. These relocated people have to build a society, and sometimes hunt animals to extinction (the black rhino for example [It's not extinct, but pretty dang close]). Although hot-spots are still active, a new way has come forth: Ecosystem Services. Ecosystem Services can maintain biodiversity in an area, but get an economical benefit and not relocate humans. An example are the penguins on the coast of Argentina can be used for tourism and be unaffected by the human population. Basically it's a win-win-win. But, we aren't the only things that hurt biodiversity. There are the elements of the world that can do damage (i.e. Pakistain floods, Katrina, tsunamis, etc.). Dust from the (seemingly endless) Sahara Desert can be blown across the Atlantic Ocean and dumped several hundred tons of dust onto the coast. This really put some hurt on the coral reefs and wetlands. Also, forests being hit by forest fires can take a toll on organisms that live there. But, there are some ecosystems that resists disasters like these. Wetlands that were in Hurricane Katrina were barely damaged. Most of the orgainism living there got out alive. Unfortunately, there isn't as much biodiversity in a wetlands than a rain forest (In fact, one-tenth of the species in a rain forest would equal the amount in a wetland). If Katrina hit a more vulnerable area than a watland, there would be a devestation for biodiversity. Of course, that would lead to expenses to humans (protecting endangered animals, perserving ecosystems, etc.). Any way that you look at it, poverty and biodiversity are linked in some way. Usually, we will always choose money over anything, and that will probably continue. If money is chosen over biodiversity, the entire force of nature will be eliminated.