Mele, Christopher. "Venus Flytraps Need Protection From Poachers in North Carolina." The New
York Times 28 Nov. 2016.
In “Venus Flytraps Need Protection From Poachers in North Carolina,” Christopher Mele explains that poachers have been trafficking in thousands of Venus flytraps stolen illegally from the wild and from gardens. The Venus flytrap only grows in the wild in an area of southeastern North Carolina and northeastern South Carolina. Conservationists are worried that the continued poaching of the plant could endanger the Venus fly trap and they estimate that only 35,000 of them remain in the wild. Sergeant Brandon W. Dean of the law enforcement division of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission explains, “We’ve got something very precious in the nation here. If we don’t do something now, it’s going to be extinct.” Mele discusses the measures being taken by the state of North Carolina in an effort to limit the poaching of the plant. The theft of flytraps growing in the wild was upgraded from a misdemeanor to a felony punishable by jail time and the seizure of one plant is now considered an individual crime. However, the author points out that officials have admitted that it is too early to tell if the harsh penalties have contributed to a decrease in thefts. He also describes the difficulties in catching and convicting the poachers. Christopher Mele explains that the dense woods and bogs are difficult for officials to patrol and that it is hard to prove if Venus flytraps were harvested illegally.
This article is significant to society because it describes the dangers that the Venus flytraps are facing in the wilderness of North Carolina. For residents of the area, it informs them of the important issue that is happening in their own backyards. In this way, they can be aware of the poaching and its serious repercussions to the plant. They can also report any theft or suspicious behaviour to the authorities in order to preserve the biodiversity of their state. For readers outside of the area, this article teaches them that the Venus flytrap is in danger of becoming an endangered species. They can then avoid purchasing the plant, especially if it is being sold from a roadside or over the internet because then it was probably stolen. “Venus Flytraps Need Protection From Poachers in North Carolina” also details the fight to preserve biodiversity in species throughout the world which can help readers understand the importance of saving certain species of plants and animals from extinction.
Christopher Mele wrote an thorough and informative article about the poaching that the Venus flytraps of North Carolina are facing. Mele described the plant and it’s history within the state including the fact that it was named the official state carnivorous plant in order to provide background information for the reader and help them understand the plant. He did an excellent job of explaining how the poachers acquire the flytraps and even took it a step further to discuss why the poachers have been stealing them. He explains that some people believe it’s because of the possible health benefits of the plant and some people purchase the Venus flytrap because it is unique and fascinating. He covered many different angles of this issue, but he could have delved deeper into the motives behind the poachers and the people who are purchasing the plants. Mele also could have explained how the conservationists are approaching the issue of preserving the Venus flytrap.
Mele, Christopher. "Venus Flytraps Need Protection From Poachers in North Carolina."
ReplyDeleteThe New York Times 28 Nov. 2016.
Eva did a great job on her review of “Venus Flytraps Need Protection from Poachers in North Carolina” by Christopher Mele. I particularly enjoyed Eva’s clear and concise description of the issue at end. For example, when discussing the specifics of the issue Eva stated that “poachers have been trafficking in thousands of Venus flytraps stolen illegally from the wild and from gardens.” A real cause for concern Eva demonstrates this by saying “continued poaching of the plant could endanger the Venus fly trap and they estimate that only 35,000 of them remain in the wild.” Both this specific pieces of information about the issue enhance Eva’s review and add a sense of accuracy to the piece. A second thing upon which Eva succeeded was in her discussion of the significance of Venus Fly traps to society. By informing the reader of poaching Eva hopes the article inspires activism, so people can know what is “happening in their own backyards” and “report any theft or suspicious behaviour to the authorities in order to preserve the biodiversity of their state.” A third element in which Eva flourished was her final paragraph in which she commented on the article. She commented that “Mele described the plant and it’s history within the state including the fact that it was named the official state carnivorous plant in order to provide background information for the reader and help them understand the plant.” However, careful to not become too one sided Eva evaluated the entirety of the article and commented “that he could have delved deeper into the motives behind the poachers and the people who are purchasing the plants.” By providing such excellent analysis of her author Eva demonstrated deep understanding and analysis of her chosen review article.
However, Eva did have two areas of her review in which she could improve. Primarily, I would recommend that Eva work on her overall structure of her review. This is because I felt it seemed a bit jumbled up and jumped from significance to critique of authority, to information. In order to fix this ailment Eva should simply switch her paragraph structure in order to make it more comprehensible to those less informed on the topic at hand. Another item upon which Eva could improve is in ability to proof-read her work more carefully. Although, an overall excellent review certain errors were overlooked either by mistake or lack of knowledge and should be fixed if given the time. For example, Eva said “it’s history” in regard to the history of the Venus Flytrap when the apostrophe in “it’s” is not necessary because it is supposed to be possessive and not the conjunction for “it is.” Most likely just a typo, more carefully reading before submission would suffice to fix errors like this.
Overall, Eva did a brilliant job of creating a well-written piece that exemplifies a current Venus Flytrap poaching program occurring in the Carolinas. It was fascinating to learn that “the theft of flytraps growing in the wild was upgraded from a misdemeanor to a felony punishable by jail time and the seizure of one plant is now considered an individual crime.” Such an escalation in punishment is true indication of the seriousness of the flytrap problem. I previously had never known about such an interesting problem and find it fascinating to learn about. I hope a solution will be found as ruining diversity is truly one of the worst crimes around. From now on, I realize that even though something as small as venus flytraps seems unimportant, their much larger role in the ecosystem is essential and we cannot overlook even the smallest seemingly insignificant organisms.
Mele, Christopher. "Venus Flytraps Need Protection From Poachers in North Carolina." The New
ReplyDeleteYork Times 28 Nov. 2016.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/28/us/venus-flytraps-poaching-north-carolina.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=4&pgtype=sectionfront
I read Eva Cagliostro’s review of the New York Times article, “Venus Flytraps Need Protection From Poachers in North Carolina,” and thought that she did a very good job. I particularly liked her summary of the article and its main points. She kept her summary short and concise, which summaries are supposed to be, yet still included enough information for the reader to understand what happened in the article. In addition, I enjoyed her use of quotes in her review. She includes the quote “We’ve got something very precious in the nation here. If we don’t do something now, it’s going to be extinct,” I thought that this was a very powerful way of tying in the importance the article has to our lives. In addition, I thought that this quote emphasizes the validity of everything being said. I also liked how she gave details and specific numbers, especially when saying, “they estimate that only 35,000 of them remain in the wild”. This number helped the reader conceptualize how few of them there are left.
Although Eva did a very good job in her review, she could use some improvement. For example, she could have organized her review a little better. She brought up the importance in the first paragraph when quoting “We’ve got something very precious in the nation here. If we don’t do something now, it’s going to be extinct”. This quote should have been used in the second paragraph rather than the first, as the first was supposed to just be the summary of the article and the second was supposed to be the significance. In addition, Eva explains the actions being taken to end this decrease in population, yet then says that these methods are not very successful. Instead of ending the conversation there, she should have explained some methods that are successful, or gone into more depth regarding the failure of the other techniques. This could have strengthened her review.
I thought that the review was written very well and Eva chose a great article to talk about. I think that the topic is very interesting and different and Eva has further educated me on the topic. I never knew about this topic before reading Eva’s review and now feel knowledgeable on this topic. Overall, I really enjoyed Eva’s review and learned a lot from it.