my envir. ethics

Halie Cousineau 3/18/11
My Environmental Ethic Eng. 308j
?Title?
If someone where to ask me about my opinions on the environment they better be sit down because they are going to get a mouth full. Ever since I was little you could ask me about what I thought of the environment and I would have had an answer for you. Granted when I was little I would have told you it is beautiful, it’s fun to play in, and I love it because it is my home. Now if you ask me I would say the same answers but also more. Throughout my life the environment has always been something extremely important to me so it is only natural that my environmental ethic is what it is. I believe that, maybe without knowing, I have always believed in Biocentrism and Ecocentrism, even as a kid.
My opinions and how I feel about the environment starts early in my life. I think it all started with my primal education; my parents. My parents brought my brother and I up in a way where I cannot separate the outdoors from my everyday life. They grew us up to enjoy and love being outside and everything that goes with it. Even family time was spent outside, we eat outside every minute we can, we do every outdoor sport, and we also make up reasons to work outside. I think that my beliefs started at a young age not only because I spent so much time outside but because I was very active in nature and educated about it at a young age. All my life my parents, brother and I have gone on hour long walks through our woods, were my parents would point out tracks of animals, and different types of trees or plants they know. We also chop our own woods, pick wild fruits and berries, ice skated on our pond, when it’s frozen, sail sometimes to no where, just to enjoy being on the water, and watching deer eat apples off one of our trees during lunch. A lot of my life has been formulated around the environment, weather it be the ocean or the forest. My life is all about doing activities outdoors therefore the outdoors is my home. It is something that I live in and with. I want it to look beautiful and feel great like the way it makes me feel so I treat it with respect. It is hard to come up with just one memory that makes me thinking of the environment and how it influences me because my life is what made me who I am, which is a person dedicating her life to improving the planet, mainly dealing with environmental issues.
Before taking this class I would say that my environmental ethics were the same as they are now or at least extremely similar. Although this class did increase my drive, like most environmental classes I take, giving me more motivation to change and to become more sustainable. Education of course has always been a massive influence on me. The more environmental classes I take and the more research I do, the more important it becomes to me and it gives me things to work towards. My love for the natural world has always been apart of me; it has always played a vital role in what my life will be. When I research a topic like the ones I did in this class, it brings out strong emotions I have toward that problem and inspires me to change it. After researching overfishing and seeing something like shark fining it really emanates inside of me my feelings toward how humans treat animals. I believe that animals and nature itself is just as important as humans; humans are animals so I find it ridiculous that we consider ourselves something better than what we are. I feel that everything has an instrumental use to it, but only to a certain extent should it be used. Everything in nature can be used for something, but that is just one level of their worth to me, an important one, but what the world has to offer has more to it than what we, as humans, take out of it.
Throughout history humans have used the world for themselves. Cutting down tress for their homes, killing animals not just for food but also for entertainment, and extracting anything we can that will benefit us. I do not believe in this destructive way of like. My reasons why are best described into two environmental ethics: Biocentrism and Ecocentrism.
I strongly believe all things, living or nonliving, have a value above what it can be used for. Biocentrism supports how I believe humans should be treating animals and plants: it means that everything in the world has value but this value is not based on humans it is based on nature ("ecocentrism"). I do not place a value on something because of what it can give to me. I think all life, human or not, has equal value. I would like to think that the reason people do not treat animals like they treat humans is not because of greed but because they are separated and cannot relate to the animals “we reached the old wolf in time to watch a fierce green fire dying in her eyes. I realized then, and have known ever since, that there was something new to me in those eyes – something known only to her and to the mountain.” (Dobrin ,89). This quote from Thinking Like a Mountain shows that the man in the story did not realized the consequences of his actions until he saw the wolf die in front of him, and then later in life he and society saw the lasting effects of killing off wolves. This is just one example of how using or killing something for human satisfaction is not always good for the rest of the world and the human want for something should not why something is killed or extracted.
Ecocentrism is also something I strongly believe in. It means to think and work for an entire ecosystem rather than humans want ("Ecospherics Ethics"). It is like working on a team, what is best for one person my not be the best choice or the entire team and their sustainability of surviving together. “Human value systems have traditionally been inward-looking, preoccupied with the immediate concerns of the individual, and by extension, of society and culture” ("Ecospherics Ethics"). Ecocentric however has a boarder out look on these viewpoints. Ecocentric is usually my main argument when I talk about sustainable ways of life. In my last two papers I talked specific places on Earth that are being injured by humans that do not think in an ecocentric way. My paper about overfishing is a prime example of how overfishing is hurting an ecosystem therefore having other ripping effects on ocean diversity, the increase of animal extinction, and a decrease in a human food source. In one of the readings from class in Saving Place the story Save the Whales, Screw the Shrimp, is not only a great example of a form of overfishing but it talks about how humans don’t stop for the environment: "When you love something, it had better watch out, because you have a tendency to love it to death"( Dobrin ,205). Another quote from this reading to express how humans abuse the environment is "wild things exist only of you have the graciousness to allow them to"( Dobrin ,208). I also wrote a paper on the killing of Virginian Gorillas in Central Africa, this story shows how even things like warfare and the charcoal making business can not only effect gorillas in the surrounding areas but also the habitat and the people in theses areas. I believe that the entire world is one ecosystem with many more ecosystems inside and each has to work together in order for the world to be successful and survive.
These two environmental ethics that I have gave me different feeling and ideas, than those who do not share my environmental ethics, on many different things we looked at for class. The movie Food Inc. gives a very strong sense of anger, sadness, and determination after watching it. This movies played a lot towards what I think; it not only explained the horrible treatment of animals and how they should be treated better but also how the food industry can not be supported forever by the worlds ecosystems. My environmental ethics also played a role in how certain readings made me feel. Many people in class did not like the tone of Save the Whales, Screw the Shrimp because of the way it was telling the audience what they are doing wrong in the world in a semi sarcastic manner. However I love that pieces, but that is probably because I agree with what the author was saying. It probably also didn’t bother me as much because I make conscious efforts to be environmentally friendly so something mentioned in the book are things that I don’t do, like eat fish or____. I think because I try to be environmentally friendly reading or watching about bad things humans do to the planet doesn’t upset me as much as it does make me happy to see that others share my opinion and are trying to get the word out. I tend to have very strong opinions on different topics and the environment happens to be a topic that I have cared about since before I can remember.
As a kid my life was just a big imaginary world and outside was the setting. I didn’t need a play set, or a fenced in yard like a dog, I had miles of freedom in woods that my parents let me experience to the fullest. I was not given boundaries because my parents let me learn them, understand and respect them. Of course I am not sure they knew what they were creating. At a very young age of about 7 I laid in a bush all day to protest against my dad who wanted to tare the bush up. My parents thought it wasn't very attractive, yet to me it was beautiful, it was playhouse and an imaginary world that I could play in anytime I wanted. I have always been one to be outside and enjoying what it gives to me, like music of the wind in the trees or birds chirruping and how the sun makes me feel happy. The woods give me peace, a place to go, somewhere to be a lone or to play in. My playground as a kid was the rocks, trees, grass, and berries around me. My childhood is inseparable from the outdoors and it still is inseparable from me now even more so now since I understand the importance of the relationships in an ecosystem. Therefore I believe in Biocentrism and Ecocentrism. Throughout my life the environment has always been something extremely important to me and it will continue to be so for the rest of my life


Reference:
"Biocentrism." ecocentrism. N.p., 2011. Web. 8 Mar 2011. .

Dobrin, sidney. saving Place An Ecocomposition Reader. New York, NY: McGraw- Hill, 2005. 87-90. Print.

Dobrin, sidney. saving Place An Ecocomposition Reader. New York, NY: McGraw- Hill, 2005. 203-213. Print.

"Ecospherics Ethics." N.p., Feb. 2009. Web. 8 Mar 2011. .

More information about bycatch if you are interested:

The Oceans

Halie Cousineau 2/24/11

Envir. Issue English 308j

"The fish don’t stand a chance"

Environmental sustainable issues today deal with many things humans consume, whether it is food, water, fossil fuels, or fish. Fish may not be the first thing that comes to mind when someone talks about environmental sustainable issues but the oceans are being overfished and many marine species are in danger of collapsing ("MarineBio"). The oceans cover about 71 % of the surface of earth and they provide the largest amount of protein for humans ("help save the sea") but about 80% of fish are almost completely depleted (Koster, "Why is overfishing). The decrease in the fish population and diversity is mainly affected by overfishing. Overfishing has a large negative effect on the fish population because of the destructive fishing techniques, and the general overfishing of depleting species, but there are ways to help recover the fish in the sea.

The fish people buy at the grocery story are not caught by the methods most people may think. Fishing has received the name industrial fishing because large ships with processing plants, refrigeration storage and packing plants on board go out fishing with sonar to point out where to catch the fish that will be sold around the world ("Background”). These fish are also not caught by the pole and line method they could be caught with FADs, which is a fish attraction devices, or drift nets, dredging, harpooning, and more ("Fishing on Line"). Two extremely destructive and popular forms of fishing are long line fishing and bottom trawling.

Although most humans have not been able to explore the ocean floor we know that it is just as diverse as dry land. There are plants and animals living in habitats like in your back yard ("USGS"). But when bottom trawlers fish they tear up the floor of the ocean. Bottom trawling is a form of fishing where a large net is dragged behind the back of a boat, however this is no ordinary net. These nets that are dragged along the bottom of the ocean have metal plates and wheels along the bottom of the net to collect everything in its path. "Think of it as driving a huge bulldozer through an unexplored, lush and richly populated forest and being left with a flat, featureless desert. It's like blowing up Mars before we get there” ("Bottom trawling"). This method of fishing is not only pulling everything up from the bottom the ocean, but all the fish caught are not being used; "bottom trawling operations catch 20 pounds of “bykill” for every pound of targeted species" ("Bottom trawling impacts”). This means most of the fish caught are unwanted and thrown back into the ocean, usually dead: “many creatures end up mistakenly caught and thrown overboard dead or dying, including endangered fish and even vulnerable deep-sea corals which can live for several hundred years“ ("Marine Conservation Biology Institute"). It is said that 90% that is caught in bottom trawling is thrown back ("Marine Conservation Biology Institute"). Bottom trawling has even more problems; it causes a large stir up of the ocean sediment, to the point where the clouds of sediment can be seen from satellite imagery long after the trawlers have been there ("Bottom trawling impacts”). Bottom trawling is just one of many destructive and abusive forms of fishing, another way to fish that also causes environmental issues is long line fishing.

Long line fishing is dragging a long line about 50 to 100 km in length behind or under the back of a boat. This line will have hooks placed along it with bait to attract and catch as many fish as possible, but the intended catch is shark, tuna or swordfish ("Fishing on Line"). Long line fishing is banned in some areas like the United States along the Pacific Coast; it is banned because the negative impact it has on marine life (stop shark fining). Yet long lining is still used around the world and it is a popular form of fishing. This method of fishing is a large threat to many marine life, not just to fish but to marine mammals: “They are indiscriminate - they catch not only the "target", but endangered sharks, leatherback and loggerhead turtles, and seabirds, especially albatross. Over 25% of long-line catch is thrown back into the sea, usually dead” ("Fishing on Line"). Long Line fishing also has a direct connection to shark fining.

Shark fining is not only a wasteful form of collecting food but it is viewed by many to be cruel. Sharks are very important to the sustainability of oceans because they are the top ocean predator that controls fish and other marine life populations (Drinkard). However sharks are being caught for their fins, which are cut off and then the body of the shark is thrown back into the ocean. Many times the shark will still be alive when thrown back into the water (Nichols). A popular way to catch sharks for their fins is to use long line fishing (stop shark fining). “The National Marine Fisheries Service reports that in 1999, 87,576 sharks were caught on long lines in Hawaiian waters, and about 29,000 of them were released alive. And 57,286 were finned" (Nichols). Long lining is not always used for the fining of sharks however when the sharks are unintentionally caught they have a low survival rate. Overfishing has a lot to do with improper or illegal fishing techniques and fishing species that are vital to a balanced ecosystem but also sometimes fish are just fished too much in an area.

Overfishing causes fish stocks to decrease so much that they cannot recover ("MarineBio"). This is happening everywhere around the world due to the demand of fish because we are extremely dependent on fish for food. Due to the demand of specific fish the prices are increasing making it more appealing for people and governments to industrialize fishing (Nuttall). Over 3.4 billions people’s primary food source is the ocean and it is said that this number could double to 7 billion in the next 20 years ("Help Save the Sea"). The result of overfishing is “52% of fish stocks are fully exploited, 20% are moderately exploited, 17% are overexploited, 7% are depleted, and 1% is recovering from depletion” (Koster, "Why is overfishing”). One of the biggest problems with overfishing is the overfishing of specific fish. “Seven of the top ten marine fisheries, accounting for about 30% of all capture fisheries production, are fully exploited or overexploited” and “As many as 90% of all the ocean’s large fish have been fished out” ("Poorly managed fishing"). Although the oceans are being overfished there is optimism and things people can do to help reduce the demand of fish to diminish overfishing.

Overfishing is becoming a large problem that could expand to an even larger one within years, but there are ways to change what is happening. One small action taken by everyone such as eating the fish that are in-season would be very helpful. Save the Sea says, "Not all seafood is created equal. There are good - and - bad choices for the ocean." so being a conscious shopper and consumer could help. Save the Sea labels good fish choices as eating fish that have a high populations and also eating this type of fish in a sustainable way. The best way to know what to eat or buy is being educated on the subject and spreading the word once you know. A great place to look at if you are unsure is: http://www.montereybayaquarium.org/cr/cr_seafoodwatch/download.aspx. This website is for the Seafood Watch where they give you a guide to seafood depending on the area you live in ("Seafood Watch"). Other things can be done too like putting limits on the amount of fish that can be caught and on the "bycatch". This would limit not only the amount of fishing coming out of the sea but also the fish that are killed but are not used in fishing practices like long lining and bottom trawling (Koster, "What can I do"). In order to have these regulations there would need to be enforcement of the fish caught, to ensure no illegal fishing takes place. Another thing that is starting to happen is the protection of specific areas, mainly important and pristine areas. Theses locations would be the sea floor, coral reefs, estuaries and other important habitats for fish (Koster, "What can I do").

“Overfishing cannot continue,” warned Nitin Desai, Secretary General of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development, which took place in Johannesburg. “The depletion of fisheries poses a major threat to the food supply of millions of people" (Nuttall). Overfishing is becoming a problem and this problem will increase over time creating a deficit in a major food source. Although the failing fish population does have another element creating a decrease overfishing plays a large role in it. Some things that have a direct correlation with overfishing and fish populations decreasing is destructive fishing techniques, and the general overfishing of depleting species, but there are ways to help stop overfishing and it is an obtainable goal.

Reference:

"Background: Industrial fishing: emptying our seas." GreenPeace. 17 June 2008. Web. 24 Feb 2011. oceans/stop-bottom-trawling/industrial-fishing-emptying-o/>.

"Bottom trawling." GreenPeace. juniperblue, 2011. Web. 23 Feb 2011. trawlin

"Bottom trawling impacts, clearly visible from space." Web. 23 Feb 2011. .

Drinkard, Annie. "Shark Facts." N.p., March 2009. Web. 23 Feb 2011. .

"Exploring the deep ocean floor: Hot springs and strange creatures." USGS. juniperblue, 24 june 1999. Web. 23 Feb 2011. .

"Fishing Methods." Fishing on Line. juniperblue, Web. 24 Feb 2011. .

"Interesting Ocean Facts." help save the sea. Web. 23 Feb 2011.

Koster, Pepijn. "What can I do to help." Overfishing- A global disaster. 2011. Web. 23 Feb 2011. .

Koster, Pepijn. "Why is overfishing a problem." Overfishing- A global disaster. 2011. Web. 24 Feb 2011. .

Nichols, Katherine. "Sharks benefit from efforts to protect their environment." 14 Jan. 2001. Web. 23 Feb 2011. .

Nuttall, Nick. "Overfishing: a threat to marine biodiversity." . Web. 23 Feb 2011. .

"Our oceans are being plundered ." Poorly managed fishing. WWF. Web. 23 Feb 2011. shing/>.

"Protecting Marine Ecosystems." Marine Conservation Biology Institute. Web. 23 Feb 2011. .


"Select a Seafood Watch Pocket Guide." Seafood Watch. N.p., 2011. Web. 25 Feb 2011. px>.

"Sustainable Fisheries." MarineBio. 2008. Web. 24 Feb 2011. fisheries.asp>.

"What are long lines?." stop shark finning. Web. 23 Feb 2011. .

Videos:

"OCEAN of TRUTH." Web. .

"Sharks are going extinct; help save them!." Web. =1&list=QL&index=39>.

"The Truth About Bottom Trawling." Web. dex=3>.

rough draft

Halie Cousineau 2/24/11
Envir. Issue English 308j
?Title?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXLbQrK6cXw

Environmental sustainable issues today deal with many things humans consume, whether it is food, water, fossil fuels, or fish. Fish many not be the first thing that come to mind when someone talks about environmental sustainable issues but the oceans are being overfished and many marine species are in danger of collapsing (http://www.marinebio.org/oceans/conservation/sustainable-fisheries.asp). The oceans cover about 71 % of the surface of earth and they provide the largest amount of protein for humans (http://www.savethesea.org/STS%20ocean_facts.htm) but about 80% of fish are either completely collapses or depleted (http://overfishing.org/pages/why_is_overfishing_a_problem.php). The decrease in fish population and diversity does have to do with more things than just overfishing, however, overfishing is having large negative effects on the fish population because of the destructive fishing techniques, and the general overfishing of depleting species, but there are ways to help recover the fish in the sea.
The fish people buy at the grocery story are not caught by the methods most people may think. Fishing to me is a fisherman sitting on his boat with a pole and a line waiting for a fish to bit but that is not how most fish are caught today. Fishing has received the name industrial fishing because large ships with a processing, refrigeration storage and packing plants on board go out with sonar to point out where to catch the fish that sold around the world (http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/campaigns/More/safeguard-our-oceans/stop-bottom-trawling/industrial-fishing-emptying-o/). These fish are also not caught by the pole and line idea they could be caught with FADs, which is a fish attraction device, or drift nets, dredging, harpooning, and the more (http://www.fishonline.org/information/methods/). Two extremely destructive and popular forms of fishing are long line fishing and bottom trawling.
Although most humans have not been able to explore the ocean floor we know that it is just as diverse as dry land, there are plants and animals living in habitats like in your back yard (http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/dynamic/exploring.html). But when bottom trawlers fish they tare up the floor of the ocean. Bottom trawling is a form of fishing where a large net is dragged behind the back of a boat, however this is no ordinary net. These nets that are dragged along the bottom of the ocean have metal plates and wheels along the bottom of the net to collect everything in its path. "Think of it as driving a huge bulldozer through an unexplored, lush and richly populated forest and being left with a flat, featureless desert. It's like blowing up Mars before we get there” (http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/oceans/bottom-trawling/). This method of fishing is not only pulling everything up from the bottom the ocean, but it is not even used what is caught and killed; "bottom trawling operations catch 20 pounds of “bykill” for every pound of targeted species" (http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-02/s-bti021508.php). This means most of the fish caught are un wanted and thrown back into the ocean, usually dead: “many creatures end up mistakenly caught and thrown overboard dead or dying, including endangered fish and even vulnerable deep-sea corals which can live for several hundred years“ (http://www.mcbi.org/what/destructive_fishing.htm). It is said that 90% that is caught in bottom trawling is thrown back (http://www.mcbi.org/what/destructive_fishing.htm). Bottom trawling has even more problems; it causes a large stir up of the ocean sediment, to the point where the clouds of sediment can be seen from satellite imagery long after the trawlers have been there (http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-02/s-bti021508.php). Bottom trawling is just one of many destructive and abusive forms of fishing, another way to fish that also causes environmental issue is long line fishing.
Long line fishing is dragging a long line about 50 to 100 km long behind or under the back of a boat. This line will have hooks places a long it with bait to attract and catch as many fish as possible, but the intended catch would be shark, tuna or swordfish (http://www.fishonline.org/information/methods/#long_line). Long line fishing is banned in some areas like the United States along the Pacific Coast; it is banned because the negative impact it has on marine life(..). Yet long lining is still used around the world and it is a popular form of fishing. This method of fishing is a large threat to many marine life animals, not just to fish but to turtles and birds: “They are indiscriminate - they catch not only the "target", but endangered sharks, leatherback and loggerhead turtles, and seabirds, especially albatross. Over 25% of long-line catch is thrown back into the sea, usually dead” http://www.fishonline.org/information/methods/#long_line). Long Line fishing also has a direct connection to shark fining.
Shark fining is not only a wasteful form of collecting food but it is viewed by many to be cruel ( video?). Sharks are very important to the sustainability of oceans because they are the top ocean predator that controls fish and other marine life populations (http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~acdrinka/importance.html). How ever sharks are being caught for their fins, which are cut off and then the body of the shark is thrown back into the ocean. Many times the shark will still be alive when thrown back into the water (http://www.moolelo.com/shark2.html). Many sharks are caught for their fins through long line fishing (http://www.stopsharkfinning.net/long-lines.htm). “The National Marine Fisheries Service reports that in 1999, 87,576 sharks were caught on long lines in Hawaiian waters, and about 29,000 of them were released alive. And 57,286 were finned (http://www.moolelo.com/shark2.html). Long lining is not always used for the fining of sharks however when they do catch sharks they did not intend to the survival rate for the shark is not that high. (?)Overfishing has a lot to do with importer fishing techniques and fishing species that are vital to a balanced ecosystem but also sometimes fish are just fished too much in an area.
Overfishing is where fishing causes fish stocks to decrease so much that they cannot recover (http://www.marinebio.org/oceans/conservation/sustainable-fisheries.asp). This is happening everywhere around the world due to the demanded of fish because fish is extremely depended on. Over 3.4 billions people’s primary fod source is the ocean and it is said that this number could double to 7billion in the next 20 years (http://www.savethesea.org/STS%20ocean_facts.htm). Fishing has cause “52% of fish stocks are fully exploited, 20% are moderately exploited, 17% are overexploited, 7% are depleted, and 1% is recovering from depletion” (http://overfishing.org/pages/why_is_overfishing_a_problem.php).

An Essay for a photojournalist

Halie Cousineau 2/21/11 Essay for starting Photojournalism
What’s like
For those of you planning on becoming a photojournalist if you haven't heard someone tell you to stop and change your profession now, this will not be the last time because everyone says it. They say this because you won’t make any money or even have a steady job, which is most likely true, but I am not here to tell you to stop because I feel being a photojournalist isn't about making money it is about making a difference. Photojournalism is a visual way to show a story without words, letting the viewer see things, that wouldn’t normally be seen. Instead of telling a person about an issue it is a way of showing them and letting them create their own reactions and opinions. As a photojournalist I realized that there are different fields inside photojournalism itself: some photojournalists like to take pictures of people, sports, tell stories or the local news. However I will be talking about the type of photography that I like, documentary photojournalism, dealing mainly with environmental and conservation photography. I will explain that although photojournalism is not a well paying job it will pay you in a different way: your photos will make a difference, your story will not only effect you but also what you are photographing. As a photojournalist we all have our favorite story or photographer. One of mine is the example I am going to use to show you how the environment can effect a story and the photojournalist but also how the story can effect the environment.
Brent Stirton, a photojournalist, was on an assignment to photograph the conflicts between two rebel army sanctions in the Virunga National Park in the Democratic Republic of Congo to show how the conflict creates, what he thought, the most dangerous area for conservation. Yet during his assignment this story changed because of the killing of seven Virunga mountain gorillas (Stirton). These gorillas are the most endangered gorillas; there are only about 720 gorillas left in the world and they can only be found in Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Some of the main threats for the gorillas are illegal animal trading, destruction of habitat, and warfare in the area (Mountain Gorillas). Many times you will see the story you are covering will change due to events or outside forces in that environment. Stirton went from photographing Congo rebel conflicts to the killing and conservation of gorillas. This shows you how quickly a story can change for a photojournalist because of the changing environment.

As you can imagine the media world is extremely interconnected therefore once published Stirton’s story was covered in countless medias, from CNN news, to the Critter News An Animal blog. Once you start to study the techniques of photography you will learn the effectiveness of a good photo. Photography is very effective because sight is the most dominant of the senses in humans; making photos a powerful source of information (Power of Pictures). The story of the gorillas received an extensive amount of media attention, therefore being viewed by many people. It was covered twice, doubling the viewing: once during the time of the killing and a year later in the National Geographic magazine article; Who murdered the Virunga Gorillas? The media response to this issue and the large audience it was shown to shows how photojournalism can affect the environmental sustainable issues. In an interview I had with Stirton he said that he could be negative and positive about the outcome of his story. Although the gorillas are still endangered and there are major corruption issues, he looks at the bright side seeing that his story educated so many people on the topic, it raised significant amount of money and it created a consciousness about the issues in the Congo. Whether it is educating people, discovering, voicing, or solving the issues photojournalism can have affects on environmental sustainable issues. Photojournalism has effects on the environment just by telling the story but the environment is what forms the stories, changes it and changes the photographer.

The sustainability of an environment has a large effect on the story itself. This is shown in the Virunga gorillas’ story because of their fragile habitat, that is being destroyed, is what made the story happen. The Virunga National Park “contains the largest number of mammals, birds, and reptiles and has more endemic species than any other park on the African continent,” said Emmanuel de Merode, director of Wildlife (Jenkins, 2). During Stirton’s interview with NPR he also explains the importance of the habitat but the important old-growth forest trees are being cut down and burned to make charcoal. The wildlife director was also quoted saying, “follow the trail of charcoal,” de Merode said, “Charcoal is the biggest threat to the park”(Jenkins, 7). Stirton continued to research the charcoal production and was lead to find out that the former chief park warden, Honoré Mashagiro, was not only behind the charcoal production but he was also at fault for instructing the assassination of the gorillas (Jenkins, 12). “Within a week of the July killings Brent’s pictures of the murdered gorillas were splashed across the globe. Mashagiro was removed as provincial director of North Kivu”(Jenkins, 12). This shows that not only the interconnection of charcoal production has a direct effect Stirton’s photo story but the story done by Stirton also had a direct effect on the reactions of the deaths of the gorillas. Many photojournalistic stories are not just about the event but it is about the events leading to it or what caused it to happen. Stirton knew the animals were killed but the story that needed to be told was who and why.

As a photojournalist you must expect your stories to have large impact on your life. Not only will you be spending a lot of time with your subject but the subject and out of come of your story could have a mental or physical effect on you. Stirton has been working in areas around the Congo since 1984 (Stirton) and has seen some horrible events but he said seeing the rangers react so somberly to the killing of the gorillas gave him a “dawning of my own awakening as to the relationship between conservation and conflict and the spaces we are in regards to some of our resources” (Stirton). Stirton said the world is smaller than it was before with no more traditional boundaries between man and nature and it is getting harder to separate them. He also thinks environmental sustainability is “for things to endure and I include men in that.” He doesn’t see humans as something that should not be excluded from the environment but as something in it and working with it (Stirton, personal). What happened to Stirton is a great example of what happens many times to photojournalist while covering a story. Even though Stirton has been to over 130 countries covering stories on topics from genocide to children human trafficking (Stirton, Suite101), a story on the murder of gorillas can still be enlightening to a photographer.

Stirton was also put in danger while covering this story, which tends to happen a lot to photojournalist. While trying to see the gorillas Stirton had to use a road that had landmines on it to reach them (Jenkins, 5), he also was arrested by the very man who gave him permission to visit the gorillas (Stirton). Danger as a photojournalist is just something you should expect to happen. In an interview I had with Stirton he said that most of his work has some element of danger, especially because his work is usually in areas that is not governed or is corrupt. Many times an environmental issue is due to a human’s action that sometimes is trying to be covered up causing danger for the photojournalist who is uncovering it.

As shown in the photo story about the Virunga Gorillas, you can see being a photojournalist can deal very closely with environmental sustainability issues. Environmental sustainability issues have a direct effect on photojournalism because it creates our stories and morphs them while we photograph them. As a photojournalist we have major effects the environmental sustainability issues that we cover because the photographs create awareness, which hopefully then results in humans stepping up and helping out. The story itself and the time spend taking the photos can also have a dramatic affect on the photographer. This is what I find so great about the profession that you are beginning, it may have little pay but the outcome of our stories will have rippling effects.

Listen, watch or read about more of the story:

National Geographic article:
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/07/virunga/jenkins-text/5

NRP:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91835032

References

Jenkins, Mark. "Who Murdered the Virunga Gorillas?." National Geographic July 2008: 1-12. Web. 14 Feb 2011. .

"The Power of Pictures." N.p., n.d. Web. .

Stirton, Brent. Intervew. NPR, 24 June 2008. Radio. 14 Feb 2011. .

Stirton, Brent. Personal Interview by Halie Cousineau. 16 Feb. 2011.

Stirton, brent. Suite101, Dec 22, 2009. Telephone Interview by Nadine Visagie. .

"The World of the Mountain Gorilla." Mountain Gorillas. Gorilla.CD, n.d. Web. .

Links to go with my essay

National Geographic article:
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/07/virunga/jenkins-text/5


NRP:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91835032

Photojournalism/Envir. Essay

Halie Cousineau 2/14/11
Photojournalism/Envir. Essay
A Gorilla Story
Photojournalism is a visual ways to show a story without words, letting the viewers see something, usually that wouldn’t normally be seen. Instead of telling a person about an issue it is a way of showing them and letting them create their own reaction and opinions without being told. As a photojournalist I have come to realize my profession is not defined by the name but by the photographer. Some photojournalists like to take pictures of people, others photograph sports, and then there are some who prefer to tell stories or the local news through photos. I may do all of the above however, photojournalism to me is a way to document issues around the world, or document things that may never be seen or needs to be preserved in someway. A very large part of photojournalism is environmental and conservation photography. Not only does this have a large affect on the photographer and the photojournalistic topics; what we do and where we go, but the photos that come out of a story can also affect the environmental issues.
Photojournalism is a very broad topic when dealing with the environment. However, there is one story that interests me, the photo coverage of the killing of seven mountain gorillas in the Virunga National park, that is an example of how the environment can effect a story and the photojournalist; also how the story can effect the environment. The photo story that shows how environmental sustainability issues are related to photojournalism is a story about Mountain Gorillas of Virunga who are the largest of all gorillas, but they are also the most endangered. There are only about 720 gorillas left in the world and they can only be found in Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The main threats for the gorillas, besides the illegal animal trading, are the destruction of their habitat, poaching, humans diseases and civil and guerilla war far in the area (Mountain Gorillas). The Virunga gorillas have been photographed for many years, sometimes for their sheer cuteness or beauty, other times for scientific or educational purposes, but lately it has been because of horrible events like the 2007 killing of seven gorillas. This event will be my example of how photojournalism interacts with the environment.

Brent Stirton, a photojournalist, was on an assignment to photograph the conflict between two rebel army sanctions in the Virunga National Park. He saw how the conflicts create, what he thought, the most dangerous area for conservation. Yet during his assignment this story changed because of the killing of the gorillas. Many times for photojournalist or journalist the story will change due to events or outside forces in that environment (Stirton). Stirton went from photographing Congo rebel conflicts endangering rangers to the killing and conservation of an endangered species. This shows how quickly a story can change for a photojournalist because of the changing environment.
This story, once published, was then covered in countless medias. It was aired on a CNN news short multimedia clip using Stirton's photos, to being blogged about in Critter News An Animal blog. Photography is very effective because sight is the most dominant of the senses in humans; making photos a powerful source of information (Power of Pictures). This story received an extensive amount of media attention; not only was this covered during the time of the killing but it was also a feature story a year later in the National Geographic magazine in the article; Who murdered the Virunga Gorillas? National Geographic has a world wide circulation of 6,685,684 and in the United Stated the circulation is 5,200,055(Advertising Opportunities). National Geographic not only reaches a lot of people but if Stirton was not there in the Congo at the time of the murders there is a strong possibility that the story of the gorillas may have never been told. Or if the story was covered the photos of executed gorillas would have never been taken to show what happened to the gorillas. The media response to this issue and the large audience it was shown to shows how photojournalism can affect the environmental sustainable issues. In an interview I had with Stirton he said that he could be negative but then he could also be positive about the outcome of his story. Although the gorillas are still endangered and there are major corruption issues, he looks at the bright side seeing that his story educated so many people on the topic, it raised significant amount of money and it created a consciousness about the issues in the Congo. Whether it is educating people, discovering, voicing, or solving the issues photojournalism can have affects on environmental sustainable issues. Photojournalism and media in general have effects on the environment just by telling the story but the environment is what forms the stories, changes it and changes the photographer.
The sustainability of an environment has an effect on photojournalist stories. This is shown in the Virunga gorillas’ story because of their fragile habitat, that is being destroyed, is what made the story happen. The Virunga National Park in the Democratic of Congo, which “contains the largest number of mammals, birds, and reptiles and has more endemic species than any other park on the African continent,” said Emmanuel de Merode, director of Wildlife Direct, in the article Who murdered the Virunga Gorillas? During Stirton’s interview with NPR Stirton also explains the importance of the habitat: the forest in this area are old-growth forest making them very important to the sustainability of the area, but these trees are being cut down and burned to make charcoal and once the wood and land has been burned “it is gone forever.” In the article Who murdered the Virunga Gorillas? The wildlife director was quoted about the charcoal production: “Follow the trail of charcoal,” de Merode said, “Charcoal is the biggest threat to the park”(Jenkins, 7). About 25% of the old growth, hardwood forest in the southern part of the Virunga National Park has been devastated by the charcoal production (Jenkins, 7). Due to this destruction by the charcoal production not only is it taking way the gorilla’s and other animal’s habitat, Stirton also believes charcoal is the reason why the seven gorillas were killed (Stirton). Finding this information was the building blocks of Stirton’s story. Many photojournalistic stories are not just about the event but it is about the events leading to it or what caused it to happen. Stirton knew the animals were killed but the story that needed to be told was who and why.


Stirton continued to research into the charcoal production and who was behind the illegal business. In doing so Stirton was lead to find out that the former chief park warden, Honoré Mashagiro, was not only behind the charcoal production but he was also at fault for instructing the assassination of the gorillas (Jenkins 1-12). Mashagiro has now been arrested for the killing of the gorillas: “Within a week of the July killings Brent’s pictures of the murdered gorillas were splashed across the globe. Mashagiro was removed as provincial director of North Kivu”(Jenkins, 12). This shows that not only the interconnection of charcoal production has a direct effect on the sustainability of the gorillas’ habitat and lives, and the Stirton’s photo story but the story done by Stirton also had a direct effect on the reactions to the deaths or the gorillas. It created a source of education on the issues in the Virunga National Park.
Stirton has been working in this area around the Congo since 1984 (Stirton) and he has seen some horrible events: he said during an NPR interview “the value for human life is at an all time low” in the Congo. Even working is this area for over 20 years Stirton was personally affected by the story and research he did on the gorillas. He said seeing how the rangers reacted so somberly to the killing of the gorillas gave him enlightenment; “dawning of my own awakening as to the relationship between conservation and conflict and the spaces we are in regards to some of our resources” (Stirton). Through the course of the story changing and Stirton learning about the local environment, it made him realize the issues he went to the Congo to photograph “didn’t just involve humans” (Stirton). During an interview I had with Stirton he first starts off with saying the world is smaller than it was before; there are no more traditional boundaries between man and nature and it is getting harder to separate them. He said there is a “war over natural sustainably.” When he thinks of environmental sustainability he said it means, “for things to endure and I include men in that.” He doesn’t see humans as something that should be excluded from the environment but as something in it and working with it. Stirton was clear when he explained his work, that he sees environmental sustainability as a larger issue, involving the entire world and everyone and everything in it (Stirton, personal). What happened to Stirton is a great example of what happens many times to photojournalist while covering a story. Even though Stirton has been to over 130 countries covering stories on topics from genocide to children human trafficking, (Stirton, Suite101) a story on the murder of gorillas can still be moving and enlightening to a photographer.
Another direct effect of the story to Stirton was the danger he was put in for the story. Many photojournalists involve themselves in life threatening or deadly situation in order to photograph a story; lucky for Stirton it did not end in death. Stirton was given permission by the rebel leader to see the gorillas but the once crowded road they had to travel on was now deserted. Stirton knew something was wrong (Jenkins , 5) and found out after using the road that it had hidden land minds to prevent people from traveling on it. Once they did reach the forest that day the rebel group that gave them permission to see the gorillas immediately arrested them. Lucky they were not executed on the spot but they were taken into custody where things got cleared up and they were then brought to the gorillas by the rebel army (Stirton). This is just one example of a photojournalist putting their life in danger for a story. In the interview I had with Stirton I asked him about the dangers he faced in the Congo and he simply said that most of his work has some element of danger, especially because his work is usually in areas that is not governed or is corrupt. He also said when he finds a story no one has done, like the footage of the murdered gorillas, it is breaking news and “breaking news is something sensational” (Stirton, personal). Many times an environmental issue is due to a human’s action, that sometimes is trying to be covered up, causing danger for the photojournalist who is uncovering it.
As shown in the photo story about the Virunga Gorillas, photojournalism deals very closely to environmental sustainability issues. This story of the murder of the Virunga mountain gorillas is just one of many stories about an environmental sustainable issue that is covered by a photojournalist. Environmental sustainability issues have a direct effect one photojournalism because it create our stories and morphs them while we photograph them. And as a photojournalist we have major effects the environmental sustainability issues that we cover because the photographs create awareness; showing people the problem, which hopefully then results in humans stepping up and helping out. The story itself and the time spend taking the photos can also have a dramatic affect on the photographer.

References

All photos taken by Brent Stirton

"Advertising Opportunities." National Geogrpahic, 2005. Web. .

Jenkins, Mark. "Who Murdered the Virunga Gorillas?." National Geographic July 2008: 1-12. Web. 14 Feb 2011. .

"The Power of Pictures." N.p., n.d. Web. .

Stirton, Brent. Intervew. NPR, 24 June 2008. Radio. 14 Feb 2011. .

Stirton, Brent. Personal Interview by Halie Cousineau. 16 Feb. 2011.

Stirton, brent. Suite101, Dec 22, 2009. Telephone Interview by Nadine Visagie. .

"The World of the Mountain Gorilla." Mountain Gorillas. Gorilla.CD, n.d. Web. .