Ava Black
Mr. Ippolito
Ap Biology
10/29/20
Einhorn, Catrin. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 29 Oct. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/10/29/climate/wolves-endangered-species-list.html?login=email.
In her article "US to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List", author Catrin Einhorn discusses the US government's recent decision to no longer provide gray wolves with federal protection. For the past 45 years gray wolves have been protected by the Endangered Species Act, however, Interior Secretary David Bernhardt claims that the gray wolves have "exceeded all conservation goals for recovery" and no longer require protection. Einhorn proceeds to explain the controversy surrounding this decision. Firstly, after reading the proposal to delist the gray wolves, Carlos Carroll, an independent biologist with the Klamath Center for Conservation Research, stated that it disregarded possible genetic variation in the species (as it adapts to climate change); instead, the proposal based its decision on the low risk of extinction the wolves are experiencing now. In addition, Adrian Treves, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison explains that the proposal is flawed because it does not formulate an accurate estimate of how many wolves will end up being killed by people. In contrast, some researchers, such as Ya-Wei Li of the Environmental Policy Innovation Center believe that since wolves are not in immediate danger, the federal government should use its resources to protect the other species that are at a far greater risk of extinction. This controversial topic then forces researchers and officials to ask the question: What is the extent of the Endangered Species Act? Should it just save animals from extinction, or should it restore them until these species are able to assume an important role in their ecosystem?
I chose to read this article because I wanted to learn more about this controversial topic and the importance of gray wolves in ecosystems. I learned that the preservation of gray wolves is extremely important because these species help to enhance the growth of trees and other vegetation by eating deer and elk. Thus, the discontinuation of federal protection on the gray wolves could end up hurting ecosystems as well as cause the wolves to decrease in population and become at risk of extinction.
This article was extremely informative and well-written. Einhorn offered opinions from both sides of the controversy as well as quotes from reliable researchers. I also liked how this author provided an explanation on the importance of gray wolves in the environment and illustrated their discussed their growth in population both prior to to the introduction of Europeans in North America and after they were placed under federal protection. This background information was necessary in order for the reader to understand the large impact of being federally protected. The only improvement I would make would be to have the author give her own opinion of the matter. Overall, this article was extremely well written and engaging.
Comment
ReplyDeleteEinhorn, Catrin. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 29 Oct. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/10/29/climate/wolves-endangered-species-list.html?login=email.
Black, Ava. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” Blogspot.Com, 30 Oct. 2020, bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/10/us-to-remove-wolves-from-protected.html. Accessed 30 Oct. 2020.
In Ava’s review of “US to Remove Wolves from Protected Species List”, Ava provides great context for the article. She writes “For the past 45 years gray wolves have been protected by the Endangered Species Act, however, Interior Secretary David Bernhardt claims that the gray wolves have "exceeded all conservation goals for recovery" and no longer require protection.”. This effectively sets up the discussion of the article and explains the significance of the removal of this species from protection. Not only this, Ava also does an effective job of summarizing the article. She explains all of the mean points of the article in logical order, clearly, and concisely. This is a very beneficial thing to do in a review because it allows the reader to better understand what she is writing about and how this relates to her own view of the article. Finally, she poses questions to the reader such as “What is the extent of the Endangered Species act?” and “Should it just save animals from extinction, or should it restore them until these species are able to assume an important role in their ecosystem?” This is a very good technique to use in a review because it allows the reader to form their own opinions after hearing all the information. It is very well done.
Although this article is very well written, Ava’s diction could be strengthened. This can be improved by either reviewing the writing before submitting to look for words to be replaced or just simply having a thesaurus pulled up to easily find stronger words. Next, Ava could have added more of her own perspective into the article. She writes a lot about the facts of the article and poses questions to the audience, but she herself never answers those questions. I think it would be beneficial to add on to the little perspective she has in her article.
In this article, I learned of the importance of gray wolves to the ecosystem and how the removal of their protection will affect their population and the overall structure of the ecosystem. I chose to review this article because I am interested in topics such as this and topics that are related to environmental science. I think it would be interesting to study environmental law and policy in college.
Erin Foley
ReplyDeleteOct. 29th, 2020
Black, Ava. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” Retrieved October 29th,
2020, from
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/10/stellar-winds-hint-at-how-planetary.ht
ml.
Einhorn, Catrin. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” The New
York Times, The New York Times, 29 Oct. 2020,
www.nytimes.com/2020/10/29/climate/wolves-endangered-species-list.html?l
ogin=email.
Ava’s review was extremely effective in drawing the reader in, providing relevant information and explaining the article’s significance to society. She opened with a solemn discussion of the threat of extinction to wolves, which very successfully peaked my interest in the situation. She offers very relevant information as she describes the current state of wolf populations, and then presents various ideas of measures should be taken to prevent their extinction. She uses verified sources and indicates their reliability, for instance “Interior Secretary David Bernhardt”, “Carlos Carroll, an independent biologist with the Klamath Center for Conservation Research”, and “Adrian Treves… professor at University…”. Providing theories given by these different sources proves her reviews reliability and importance. Finally, her explanation of the article’s significance to society was very effective. She explains that “the preservation of gray wolves is extremely important because these species help to enhance the growth of trees and other vegetation by eating deer and elk”, helping us to understand how this subject will directly affect our lives and the ecosystems we live in.
Though very well-written, Ava could’ve improved her review with a few simple tweaks. Firstly, she ended her opening paragraph with a rhetorical question, “Should [the Endangered Species Act] just save animals from extinction, or should it restore them until these species are able to assume an important role in their ecosystem?”. This leaves the reader with an unclear message. She could improve this concluding sentence by giving her own opinion on the subject, or suggesting the author’s alluded answer. Moreover, Ava could improve her review by giving a more in-depth description of how wolves impact the ecosystem. In her second paragraph, she explains that “these species help to enhance the growth of trees and other vegetation by eating deer and elk.” However, the reader may be confused by this, as it isn’t made clear that deer and elk inhibit the growth of trees and other vegetation (though it may be inferred). By clarifying this, Ava would better illustrate wolves’ importance to ecosystems.
Ava’s review left me with a new understanding of how all species play intricate roles in our ecosystems, and how we must work to preserve them. I chose to read her review because endangered/protected species are of great interest to me, as I am always eager to learn more about the state of our environment in order to be an engaged citizen. After reading it, I’ve been given the impression that endangered species are not merely limited to rhinos and seemingly far away species, but even species that live right in our country. Moreover, I’ve realized how all species directly impact our ecosystems and thus our lives. This review brought to my attention the severity of the state of our global ecosystem, and the measures that must be taken to prevent it from getting worse.
Annabelle Krause
ReplyDeleteAP Bio Current Event
10/29
Black, Ava. U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List, 1 Jan. 1970,
bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/10/us-to-remove-wolves-from-protected.html.
Ava’s analysis of the article, “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List,” was both interesting and informative. She did an especially good job of setting up the historical context on the issue. She explained the legislation, and how the wolves have been considered endangered in the past. This was essential to understanding the rest of Ava’s analysis. Without her very solid background paragraph, it would have been impossible to form my own opinion on the issue. She also did a good job of being fair and unbiased with regards to the different views on the issue. She presented each with equal merit, discussing briefly the backgrounds of the different scientists and institutions before describing their opinions on the issue. Overall, she gave a good summary of the different perspectives and truly described the issue at hand. Ava also did a good job of centering her piece by asking questions like “What is the extent of the Endangered Species Act? Should it just save animals from extinction, or should it restore them until these species are able to assume an important role in their ecosystem?” Ava answered her own questions (which is a good practice). This showed the reader what the goal of her piece was, and it allowed the reader to take away much more from the article than if she had left out these questions.
Although I feel that Ava’s piece is quite strong, she could have focused more on the actual science and biology/ecology that is involved. The ecology had a little bit of a footnote in the second paragraph, but it was not central to her piece as a whole. I think that the piece would have been elevated, especially as a science current event, if she had spent more time discussing the ecology and less time discussing the background and legislation. To this same point, Ava could have focused more on the relevance of the wolves and their status as an endangered species more. She definitely assumed that her readers had some basic understanding of how and why species are endangered, and what it would mean for the wolves to no longer be considered endangered. It would have been interesting if Ava had discussed how this would have impacted the ecosystem as a whole, and as a reader, I would have been more interested in her take on the issue.
Before reading this, I did not know that there was controversy over wolves and their status as endangered/not endangered. Now, when I hear about endangered species, I will definitely be more interested in understanding all sides of the issue. As someone who is interested in government, I found the most relevant part to be the idea that resources allocated to protect the wolves are resources not used to protect another species, which is a side of the issue I had never considered before.
Sorry, I forgot the original citation, so I am including it below.
DeleteEinhorn, Catrin. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 29 Oct. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/10/29/climate/wolves-endangered-species-list.html?login=email.
Article Citation
ReplyDeleteEinhorn, Catrin. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 29 Oct. 2020,www.nytimes.com/2020/10/29/climate/wolves-
endangered-species-list.html?login=email.
Blog Link
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/
Overall, Ava’s review of US to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List was very informative and well written. One aspect of the review that was done well was her summarization of the article and its key findings. Her writing is succinct and clear, explaining the overall point of the article in a detailed manner. For instance, she references specific experts and their viewpoints on the subject and weaves in short quotes to strengthen her synopsis. Another aspect of the review that was done well was her connection to the article’s broader significance. Ava highlights the importance of preserving grey wolves and the fact that discontinuation of federal protection could harm the ecosystem as a whole and place the species at greater risk of extinction. Ava was also constructive and clear in her critique of the article. She notes that the author effectively summarized both viewpoints on this controversial subject by incorporating quotes from experts and describing the significance of the grey wolf species. She proceeds to offer suggestions for improvement, where she writes that the author could have provided more personal interjection on the subject.
While Ava’s review was overall very well done, there was some room for improvement. For instance, in her second paragraph, she could have delved more deeply into the significance of the article by analyzing the controversy from various lenses. These could have included the political debates surrounding this issue as well as what this meant for the future of Endangered Species Act. In addition, the review could have been made stronger by exploring other sources and perspectives on the topic. By looking into how the Endangered Species Act has been applied to other animals and what different research exists, Ava could have provided a more comprehensive review of the subject.
This article was very engaging and highlighted an important environmental issue. I learned a great deal about the controversial nature of these subjects and how even legislation regarding environmental protections can be subject to debate. I was specifically drawn to this review because it dealt with an alternate aspect of biology by exploring how different species affect our world’s ecosystems and environment. Overall, this was an incredibly intriguing topic that has inspired me to look more thoroughly into how our world’s endangered species are being protected and how effective legislation is at doing so.
Spencer Dessart
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Ap Bio
October 30, 2020
Einhorn, Catrin. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 29 Oct. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/10/29/climate/wolves-endangered-species-list.html?login=email.
Black, Ava. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” Blogspot.Com, 30 Oct. 2020, bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/10/us-to-remove-wolves-from-protected.html. Accessed 30 Oct. 2020.
I decided to read Ava’s article “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” which gave an informative and enticing commentary to the subject. The first thing that I really liked in this review was Ava’s contextual commentary on the wolves. This helped to explain the current and past circumstances of the wolves throughout history. Additionally, she describes measures that can be taken to help prevent the extinction of wolves. Additionally, I liked how she used evidence from good sources such as biologist Carlos Carroll. This made everything that Ava said more reliable and relevant. Lastly, I really enjoyed how Ava showed the different ways that our society today can be affected by the extinction of wolves, and how they play an important role in preserving trees. This helps the reader connect to what is being said.
Although it was well written, one of the areas which could be improved upon is the addition of personal commentary. I think it would’ve been interesting to hear what Ava had to say about the topic after reading the article. Adding personal perspectives to the article would help give the reader something to internalize and think about. A place where this could’ve been used was at the end of the first paragraph where she asks a rhetorical question. Another area which could’ve been improved upon is that Ava could have gone deeper into the discussion of how the wolves can impact the entire ecosystem, not just human lives today. It would be interesting to see how the endangerment of the wolves can have such a huge impact on different facets of animals life, not just human life.
I would say I definitely learned a lot from this article and review. First, I was enticed by the title of the article, but I also was unaware of the current circumstances of wolves, so that was something completely new to me. Additionally, I found it interesting how the government measures to prevent the extinctino of wolves are taken from resources only focused on protecting wolves, and no other species. Overall, I thought that this was a great review and article altogether.
Milly Koenig
ReplyDeleteAP Biology Mr. Ippolito
Current Event 5
Oct. 31th, 2020
Black, Ava. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” Retrieved
October 29th, 2020, from https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/10/stellar-winds-hint-at-how-planetary.html.
Einhorn, Catrin. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” The New
York Times, The New York Times, 29 Oct. 2020,
www.nytimes.com/2020/10/29/climate/wolves-endangered-species-list.html?l
ogin=email.
Ava Black did a very effective job analyzing and explaining the importance of the article “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List”, while still keeping the reader engaged and interested. The first thing that I liked aboutAvas analysis was the way in which she set up and organized the historical context of the current issue; she explained the legal actions protecting the endangered species and this was very helpful as it provided essential context to understand the rest of the article. The context also drew me as a reader into the issue and showed that Ava has a deep understanding of the factors impacting the current situation, allowing me to later form my own opinions. Secondly, Ava was able to maintain a relatively unbiased stand on the topic as she presented the evidence and information for both sides of the argument with equal emphasis making the writing more informative and allowing the reared to form their own opinions. Additionally, Ava did a very good job selecting information to include in her review and was able to pick out important information that helps the reader follow the article and the current situation. The format of her writing was easy to follow as it flowed together nicely and overall it was a great review.
Although Avas’ writing is overall very strong, she could have focused on the science and created a clearer set up to strengthen her review. In the beginning of her writing she opens with the question “Should [the Endangered Species Act] just save animals from extinction, or should it restore them until these species are able to assume an important role in their ecosystem?”. Although this question is posed in a way that makes the reader think, it is very broad and may make people think about things that are not directly connected to the article. If she had focused this question towards the article or replaced the word ‘should’ with ‘in what ways does’ the reader would be placed on a more direct train of thought that is followed through the review. Additionally, I think that if ava spent more time explaining and discussing the ecology and science behind this issue, the writing would have been stronger. Although the background and legislation is essential to understand it would not come at the expanse of the science as this is a science current event and I think that the scientific information and numbers would lead to a deeper understanding for the reader.
Prior to reading Ava’s review, I was not very informed as to the legislation and current events involving endangered species and the controversy over where wolves fall on this spectrum. After reading this review, I understand the importance of looking from an issue from both sides and how it is essential to evaluate both sides before forming your own opinion. I also now have a better understanding of just how interconnected the ecosystems are across the world and how the loss of just one species could change everything. Emphasising just how important it is that we protect species and take the necessary measures to ensure their success.
Maya Brinster
ReplyDeleteAP Bio EF Even
November 9, 2020
Current Event #6
Einhorn, Catrin. “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List.” The New
York Times, The New York Times, 29 Oct. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/10/29/climate/wolves-endangered-species-list.html?login=email.
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/10/us-to-remove-wolves-from-protected.html#comment-form
For current event #6, I read Ava’s review of the article “U.S. to Remove Wolves From Protected Species List” by Catrin Einhorn. Ava provided a very detailed summary of the article, which is extremely helpful to readers like me who had no previous knowledge about gray wolves, the federal protection lift, or their impact on different ecosystems. Her writing is also extremely clear and concise, which is very important, as more lengthy reviews with unnecessary added words tend to lose readers attention. Ava provides information from the article to back up all of her points, which strengthens her arguments and makes her much more credible as a reviewer.
I really enjoyed reading this review, but there were a couple of areas in which Ava could improve upon in the future. It might be helpful for her to explain a few of her points a bit more. For example, when critiquing the author, she states “The only improvement I would make would be to have the author give her own opinion of the matter.” Although this is a valid point, Ava fails to explain why it might be helpful for the author to give her opinion. This explanation might be helpful to readers of her review who hadn’t read the article beforehand. I also feel as if the rhetorical questions that Ava posed at the end of her first paragraph should have been more specific, and pose questions that made readers think about the impact of the Endangered Species Act on gray wolves, not just all animals, which are the primary topic of the article. Overall, however, this review is very well-written.
Prior to reading this review, I had no knowledge about gray wolves and their impact on different ecosystems, and also didn’t understand how important the Endangered Species Act is. After reading this, I have realized how a single species can impact so many others, and how vital it is to help keep gray wolves from becoming endangered again. Like Ava, I agree that the federal protection lift can potentially be extremely harmful to many ecosystems, not just that of gray wolves.