Border Fence with Mexico Harms the Environment

Amanda Kauppila
jora_bhm@yahoo.com
English 102
Response Paper
November 19, 2008


“America’s Border Fence with Mexico Will Have Disastrous Consequences For the Environment”


Con: Against the border fence. Pro: For the Border Fence.



Con: Absolutely it will. The 670 miles of crudely built fencing plans to cut straight through the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area, a 57,000 acre refuge and one of the few remaining safe havens for animals in the American Southwest.

Pro: “Crudely” built fencing you say? How did you come to that conclusion?

Con: The most recent sections added to the fence, for instance, are made up of wire mesh that is reinforced by concrete-filled poles or by taller concrete-filled poles planted six inches apart. I might not be an expert on such things as this, but still this information does not sit well with me. Some of this fencing sounds flimsy and easy enough to damage, and then penetrate.

Pro: You only mentioned some of the fence building strategies that the government has implemented. They have also created sections of solid metal, which consists of corrugated steel that was once used during the Vietnam war in aircraft landing mats.

Con: How well will these materials truly stand the test of time, though? It is estimated that costs could range from $16.4 million to $70 million per mile depending on damage. This is not a magical unwavering material were talking about here. The elements of course will have an incalculable affect on the fence, not to mention those who attempt to cross the border. Those that brave such an endeavor are desperate, and will do anything and everything to get across into America.

Pro: So…we should let them in?

Con: I never said that. Just that the fence is a complicated and costly solution that was not very well thought out.

Pro: Any solution we present will be costly. The Mexican-American border is said to stretch 2,000 miles in length; that’s a lot of ground to cover. This fence only deals with some of the border, but it is a better alternative to the situation we had prior to its existence. Some border patrol officers have testified that the fence will give them the extra time needed to locate a person that is trying to sneak across, and apprehend them.

Con: The fence is not just costing us money, though. It is also seriously harming the ecosystem that it is now cutting into two halves. The Bush administration has (by way of Congress’ “kind” permission) waved over 30 environmental-, historical-, and cultural-protection laws and regulations in order to carry out their project. It is incredibly difficult to get laws passed that actually protect land as opposed to cutting it up and sucking it dry of its resources.

Pro: Isn’t that description a bit extreme, “sucking it dry?” The fence is not laying face-down over the entire span of land that is the conservation area. It is merely running through it.

Con: Except that this in itself will have devastating consequences on the wildlife of that area, many of whom are on the endangered species list and cannot afford to be tampered with by man any further. The San Pedro River in Arizona is one of only two major rivers flowing from Mexico into the United States. It provides a vast number of birds and small mammals with a much needed habitat, and is a watering hole for animals such as deer, mountain lions, bobcats, and jaguars. Cut across this environment with an impenetrable shield and you will prevent many of those animals from finding water to drink, and deny certain species a place in which to breed. If I must I will make myself very plain: animals will not breed with one another, and eventually die out; they will not find water to drink in a blistering hot environment….and they will die. I hope that people do not need a second lesson in biology to remember that on this earth, all life is tied together. If you kill off far too many birds (which, by the way, is happening now all over the world) through such common means as replacing their habitats with cities and leaving them homeless and left to die, suddenly you will notice a spike in the already abundant insect population. Mosquitoes, flies, and insects known to damage crops will (and are) all increase. The natural world has been at work forming its complex blueprints for successful functioning of life far longer than we have been in existence. We are already seeing the effects of our ignorance on the environment through things like global warming. Man will stop and think someday, but by then it might be too late.

Why Do People Need Religion?

Amanda Kauppila

jora_bhm@yahoo.com

English 102

Assignment #3

November 5, 2008

Religion is all around us. On bumper stickers proudly displayed on cars, on jewelry, and even on each piece of money that we own. It is estimated that 86% of the world's population believes in some form of a higher power. Why are these beliefs so popular among the masses? Why do we as human beings need religion at all?

Based on man's evolutionary history, it is probably not possible to estimate exactly where religion first began. Written language has only existed for 10,000 years, whereas man has been around for an estimated 1 1/2 million. Without a written account of man's social history, it is difficult to say when and where exactly his beliefs began. We can only use logic and the facts that have already been gathered concerning this subject.

The likeliest reason for religion's inclusion into man's personal belief system is because it was favorable to survival. Having a firm set of values and beliefs held a group of people together, which enabled them to become a stronger force against animals and invading humans. As humans evolved further, their intellect growing far beyond that of any other animal, they began

to feel the need for an understanding of life. A religious figure, or figures, satisfied this need within man to know where he had come from and where he was going with his existence.

Religion seems to fill a void within human beings that they feel they are missing and cannot possibly stand to be without. Most often you will see individuals that are emotionally drained and vulnerable (sometimes for the first time in their life and quite suddenly) turning to religion for answers. Humans are by nature frightened of the unknown and the overwhelming---death, suffering, loneliness. The easiest way out for them is to appoint an all-powerful father-figure to be their guide and protector. It is understandable why the human mind would seek this very simple, magical answer to all of its problems and doubts. Yet, what of all the other traits that make us human? What of strength, resilience, endless curiosity? Why would they need religion to hold them up and tell them everything is going to be okay when they already possess the will to see their problems through on their own? I believe that humans are naturally drawn to religion, but that they don't necessarily need it as an essential tool for survival.

My own belief system is classified as agnostic. For the most part I do not believe that a higher power exists (beyond the many wonders of science), but at the same time I remain open to being proven wrong someday. It is important to remember that when it comes to science and evidence-based theories there is always room for refinement and expansion. Man does not yet know all the hidden secrets of the universe, and perhaps he never will. What he does know is discovered through careful repetitive testing and logical reasoning. Can a higher power be trusted to exist if there is no solid evidence backing up such an idea?

I am by no means attacking religion or those that choose to believe in it through writing this. I merely wish to raise a question that perhaps has not been given a lot of thought. Perhaps it has not been explored enough due to secret fears that questioning one's own belief system will lead to a complete disproving of everything in their life that has had any meaning. I don't think that this topic has to lead to such extreme conclusions. Simply to question life, every aspect of it, is a right that each of us should have the opportunity to explore enthusiastically and with complete abandon.

Pondering Heritage

Amanda Kauppila
jora_bhm@yahoo.com
English 102
Assignment #2
November 3, 2008





Growing up I had never given considerable thought to my heritage. It felt almost as though I

had never had "cause to." Like most Americans I am what is referred to crudely as a "mutt,"

meaning my ancestors come from several different countries. Yet for as long as I can remember

my father has been reminding me of our Finnish heritage in particular. From my father's side I



1
get the German and Finnish elements of my mutt status, and from what I understand the largest
concentration is in the Finnish side (hence my last name of course). What I have always liked is

the way in which my father introduced his feelings of pride for his relatives' country of origin. He

has never been overly boastful or condescending of other cultures in relation to his own (that

wouldn't be in his nature anyway); he simply wishes to learn and explore as much as he can

about what makes him who he is. Even though he cannot speak the Finnish language beyond a

few simple phrases he still enjoys listening to music from Finland, in particular the band

Vaarttinaa. In recent years, I have begun to take more of personal interest in my heritage, the

Finnish part in particular, quite possibly in part due to my father's subtle influence.



The first thing that comes to mind when I think about Finland and my heritage is the fact that

a great number of Americans don't even know it exists (perhaps I am exaggerating here, I'm not

quite sure, but in my experience so far this seems to be true). When I am asked to spell my last

name, for example, many will look at it and guess that it is Hawaiian. It is a good guess, I have to

admit, since many words in their language begin with the letters "kau." Then when I tell them

the origin of my last name most stare blankly at me. Usually to get past this awkward moment I

tell them that Finland is near Sweden. "Oh!" they say, as though it finally makes sense. I've

grown to accept this response and even take some delight in it. Never have I been a

conservative or repressed thinker that is happy living the life of the normal "average joe." Little

things that make me different are exciting and interesting, and exploring them is twice that fun.




Upon reading into Finland and the history of its people, I have found certain facts that are of

great interest to me personally. Finland seems to have had a head start in establishing human

rights, including those of women. For example, women were given the right to vote in 1906---a

full fourteen years before the U.S. finally gave their citizens this right. Finland's history

regarding women in medicine is also very impressive. Rosina Heikel, born 1842, is known as the
2

first female doctor in Finnish history. Having had no opportunities to learn medicine in a male

dominated acedemic field, Heikel continued her medical education in the only way that she was

allowed at that time, by taking courses in physiology. After much perserverance, and often

proving herself far more qualified than many of her male counterparts, she was eventually

allowed to practice medicine. Although she was restricted to treating only female patients and

children, Heikel paved the way for many more women to follow in similar paths to her own.

Agnes Sjoberg, who was born in 1888, is known as Europe's first female veterinary surgeon.


3

After overcoming numerous obstacles, including a lengthy education in everything but veterinary
science, Sjoberg was finally allowed to attend a veterinary school populated by 300 male

students. The rector of the college gave this reason for allowing a woman into a male-dominated

field: "After all, a female veterinary surgeon is well suited to handle small domestic animals."

I am most proud of Finland's obvious liberal practices, both then and now (despite the fact

that these liberal ways had to be fought for), but also of the little things that make it what it is.

The people, the culture they create, the mythology and history, all these things and more make

this country (and for that matter every other) almost like a living breathing entity. Exploring

these things has made me feel closer to my ancestors pasts, and also closer to my past...and my

present..and I suppose to my future as well.






1. Photo by: Jorjisuka; http://www.flickr.com/

2. Photo: Rosina Heikel; http://www.helsinki.fi/

3. Photo: Agnes Sjoberg; http://www.helsinki.fi/