Species of fauna and flora are in and out of so many countries. Human trading, spreading,of these plants and animals in new regions has its effects.
The problem here is the fact that the plants that come from a strong climate like the tropics must have overcome evolutionary changes to be able to survive were their are so much others struggling to survive all together. Where in america let's say, some regions have flora and fauna that doesnt have the capability to overcome the invading species, kinda like us globally. I dont find this all that bad of a situation , but shows quite the inocence of human exploration and coexistance...lol
(//http://www.csn.ul.ie/~mikkel/photos/dandelions.jpg)
And what do farmers use for the invading species on there crops? lol
Their soil being the rich substainable soil , where THEY only want their vegges to grow, but still the indeginous plants and insects of that area will yes may invade and kill plants and just take up all the space..:)
Same thing but more on a worldwide scale is happening globally around regions where new animals , spores , plants ect. are introduced for money, to help rid of a pest, or simply without our ships planes and bodies knowing. This shows the unevitable strenght and evolutionary purposes of wildlife. The survival of the fittest.
Photo and text from:http://web.mit.edu/trex/www/trex4/hawaiiimages/ginger.jpg
We put our equipment aside to visit Kauai and stay in cabins in Koke'e State Park at the Koke'e Conservation Commission. We all volunteered ourselves to help fight invading species. We worked in the field with machetes, weed pullers, and snippers to rid the forest of strawbery guava and ginger. Some volunteers used herbicides as well. Before leaving for Hawai'i, the students did research projects on invading species and the herbicides that are used to fight them.
(//http://web.mit.edu/trex/www/trex4/hawaiiimages/ginger.jpg)
Heres an excerpt on the subject from http://www.eco-pros.com/invasive_non-native_species.htm (http://www.eco-pros.com/invasive_non-native_species.htm)
Established ecosystems have developed their own natural balance and controls over time, and the plants and animals within those systems find this balance suitable for survival, or they have been able to adapt in order to survive within those conditions. When non-native species from other ecosystems are introduced, they can upset that balance and bring harm to the established plants and animals, and the whole ecosystem. Non-native species come from somewhere else and they are not natural to the ecosystem they have been introduced to. They may be harmless and beneficial in their natural surroundings, but they can totally devastate different environments. When alien species enter into an ecosystem, they can disrupt the natural balance, reduce biodiversity, degrade habitats, alter native genetic diversity, transmit exotic diseases to native species, and further jeopardize endangered plants and animals. When there are no established natural controls, such as predators to keep the non-native harmful species in check, there can be a population explosion of the invasive non-native species causing an ecological catastrophe.
Not all non-native species are invasive and harmful. But many can completely take over and entirely change whole established ecosystems. These are the non-natives that invade an established environment; therefore, they are invasive. Invasive species may be as harmless looking as green plants or a frog. They don't have to be vicious looking to bring harm to an area. They may even be beautiful to look at. Many humans want to design their own ecosystems to fit their needs. They bring in ornamental flowering trees, non-native fish, specialty seeds, and unusual animals. This can wreak havoc on the natural species and the established habitat.
Ornamental exotic plants, flowers and trees, or animals that are brought into an ecosystem may increase the diversity of species locally; but, then the introduced species can take over, crowd out or kill the native indigenous species, and in some cases cause extinctions of particular species of plants and animals. This has happened in island ecosystems where alien species caused the total destruction of local species that existed nowhere else on the planet. Therefore, the species became extinct and the biodiversity of our planet further reduced.
Tremendous damage can occur from an insect species that bores holes in trees, or weeds that take over, or zebra mussels that clog up water systems (i.e., Great Lakes). There are many species that are not native to an area which can be very dangerous and cause harm and even death to humans (i.e., brown tree snake). A non-native species could be something that brings disease to an area or to people through introduced bacteria or viruses (i.e., Ebola), or possibly a plant that would crossbreed with other plants and cause major changes to plant life. When natural habitat or food supply is destroyed, by alien species or from other circumstances, animals have to leave to find shelter and food in an ecosystem which will sustain them. Some native animals cannot leave. Without proper habitat and food supplies, they die.
Many non-native species have been transported in the ballast water of ships and then are released into the waters in ports of call. Many more non-native species arrive in the products that are imported from other countries. Inspecting shipments of goods is overwhelming our human resources, such as in Florida where they have approximately 12,000 shipments of animals per year and only 8 inspectors. There has been an ever-increasing amount of international world trade in exotic species in exporting and importing of plants and animals (such as ornamental tropical fish, rainforest birds, exotic plants, and various species introduced for a purpose). This lines the pockets of the traders, shippers and sellers of these goods with huge profits of millions of dollars. But, who pays to manage and control the global transport of invasive species with regard to prevention of negative impacts? What and where are the controls, rules and environmental regulations to protect ecosystems, habitats and species from alien invasive species? Who pays for risk assessments prior to the importation of products and species? Who compensates those who have been negatively affected or lost their livelihood because a harmful species hitchhiked a ride in a plane wheel, a cargo container, in agricultural products, or in ships' ballast water? Those who originally gained the monetary benefits from the invasives pay virtually none of the costs for environmental protection, nor are they generally held accountable for the negative environmental impacts they cause. The general public, future generations, and the planet's environment and biodiversity end up paying dearly from the negative impacts of the exploitation of species, the loss of biodiversity in both the country of origin and the importing country, and for the environmental damage that occurs. Huge sums of money have to be expended to try and rectify the damage to species and ecosystems from the introduction of non-native species into the ecosystems. Once massive damage is done, there are cases where it is impossible to bring the ecosystem back to its "natural" state.
Non-native species don't necessarily come from far away. They may come from neighboring areas, but from different ecosystems. If you have ever crossed a border between countries, you may have passed through an inspection point where inspectors ask if you are bringing any fruit, plants or animals into the country. The reason for this is to keep non-native species out of their particular ecosystems.
And there are other Alien Species - Humans!
Did you ever think of yourself as an Alien Species? When we venture out into the wilderness to enjoy nature we are an invasive species. As "eco-tourism" has expanded worldwide, many thousands of people yearly invade pristine areas and change the natural balance of nature. Tourism has been thought to be a savior for financially poor, but biologically rich regions of the Earth. Tourists spend money; in fact, millions of dollars are spent on "eco-tourism." But, who are the major benefactors of all that money? - the tourism industry. Many of the companies associated with "eco-tourism" are located in countries far removed from the eco-regions they send vacationers to. They are not impacted by the environmental changes which occur from the human alien species they ship off and fly off to the ecologically important hotspots of our planet.
Along with tourists and related activities comes environmental destruction. Tourism brings in ships and jets carrying supplies and people, and the carriers and supplies themselves bring in more alien species (i.e., non-native plants, animals and organisms) which threaten and devastate native habitat and species. More people must also come to the tourist resort area to fill the jobs of the expanded tourism industry, such as in hotels, restaurants, and transportation fields. As more and more people take up residence, there is more construction and more pollution.
The Galapagos is one very special place on our planet where they are striving to protect the biodiversity and ecosystems from the activities of humans. 60,000 people visit the Galapagos Islands each year. The Galapagos is considered to be a laboratory of evolution - a living library of genetic information. 95% of the known species that ever existed on the Galapagos Islands are still alive today. These creatures have had to come up with some major adaptations to solve problems in order to have survived as species for this long of a period of time. How can this biological heritage be protected from 60,000 visitors a year? 60,000 alien species who want to see this remarkable place. Strict rules have been set up as to where people and their animals can live. Off-limit areas have been set aside, such as the National Park, and guides must accompany people who wish to tour the area. They are trying very hard to keep environmental damage to a minimum, but accidents can happen that can totally destroy what species have taken many lifetimes to build. Accidents like oil spills from ships bringing fuel in to accommodate the tourism industry and the additional residents working for the tourist trade.
There can be many benefits from eco-tourism, if handled in an environmentally responsible way. The millions of dollars that are generated from the tourist trade could greatly benefit the ecosystems which are impacted by the tourism industry. Funds from monies generated by tourism need to be set aside, and certain monies specified for conservation of species and restoration of habitat in those areas which incur the tourism impact. This will greatly help in our efforts to preserve biological diversity on our planet.
Strict rules for environmental compliance are good and necessary. Much more needs to be done to protect our planet and its biodiversity from the invasion of alien species.
Walk gently on our Earth, lest you be a harmful alien species.
end of excerpt.....
WhiteShadow
**
Some folks decry it as man meddling with nature, I call it hyper-evolution!
One day we'll all be plant/fungus/algae/insect/animals squishstomping all over the green and squelchy earth!
I could just leave by plane or vehicle to another environnement if my own is of danger,
I dont think fauna and flora have it so easy.
We are not to generalise nature and chose inderectly by our consent
how and were evolution is to start and end.
Human acts come with the progression
of earths evolution. But i am not a believer that the destruction of
environments is something to portrait humanity as. Hey an a big scale
for sure its not a big deal, until huge regions get affected and in turn we loose strongholds of the envirnnement and slowly well natural phenomena wipes alot of us out. And of course could just happen, without us. Instead the story could be changed with wise moves and choices especiaaly if we are able to understand our place .
The wolf wants food, we have it(sheep) all concentrated betwen wooden fences,why should'nt he jump it?Even thought weve killed most of its natural prey, screwd up the migration of the elk....
I do not want us to stop and cradle the world as it is , but atleast let it evolve in its way , the world becomes an open ground where we throw anything we please anywhere.
-WS
I have thought about this quite a lot. My interrest are south american plants and i am a recident of Sweden, a cool country. Most my plants I have indoor but I have made some experiments planting outside in city forrest. Some plants of course cant survive the winter but still have a value of ornament. Others which set small seeds, such as different kinds of grass, usually can survive.
Hi there Green2Herman,
Definetly, in an area like yours plants are very much more scarce,
and they indeed could easily be wiped out by invading plants species
from the south, but most of these southern plants would also die without
the proper environment also, they wouldnt enjoy the cold like you say!
Here in Quebec it inst all that warm all year round, many Europeen species have spread all over the province even the high north, well
leaving our grasslands and plains full of flower beds ( nice ones too!!)
Dandelions especially:Taraxacum officinale Weber
ASTERACEAE (Daisy family)
(//http://img29.photobucket.com/albums/v87/snooze4592/1218Dandelions650.jpg)
Well ayahuasca brewing plants could be harder to grow in your area,
interior growing with sufficent UV lights would be great.
-Skal WS
I think that some trees from SA probably could survive at the south of the country or even here a little more at the north if you prepare them, since the winters are much wormer now than they used to be. Maybe I should trying gerilla plant a Yopo in the city park forrest.
I would definetly enjoy seing what happens with that ,Green :D
I noticed a writing on these plants in the north, hence i'm in Canada
i could relate to the low temperatures during seasons.
Taken from:http://www.mun.ca/biology/delta/arcticf/_ca/www/sxpapa.htm
Parnassia palustris L.
Bog star.
Saxifragaceae, saxifrage family
Distribution. Northern hemisphere distribution: circumpolar; Canada, United States, Eurasia, Siberia (Iceland). Low arctic. Range in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago not yet recorded.
(//http://www.mun.ca/biology/delta/arcticf/images/sxpapac1.jpg)
Ecology and habitat. Substrates: imperfectly drained moist areas, or dry, or moderately well drained areas; calcareous; gravel, sand; with low organic content. Habitats: Similar to Parnassia kotzebuei but the flowers are much larger, with broader and longer petals and the cauline leaf inserted near the middle of the stem.
Taxon as an environmental indicator. Discovery of this species in the Arctic Archipelago could indicate climatic warming, as it occurs near Banks Island in the Anderson River delta, but has not yet been recorded in the archipelago. The northernmost record is N.W.T., Anderson River Delta, 69°42'N (Canada).
Notes. Polunin (1940), Porsild (1957, 1964) and Porsild and Cody (1980) considered this a low arctic species which occurs abundantly near the Arctic Archipelago. It should be looked for in the archipelago.
Elven et al. (2003) debated whether to split or to lump in this taxon, noting that Löve Löve (1975) split P. palustris s. l. on two species, the diploid P. palustris s. str. and the tetraploid P. obtusiflora. The diploid was further split into a subsp. palustris from Europe and Siberia to Alaska and a subsp. neogaea in Alaska and Canada. Subspecies obtusiflora was considered an 'Old World' species from northwestern Europe to Russian Far East. This treatment does not align very well with morphological differences. In northern Europe, the diploids (P. palustris subsp. palustris sensu Löve and type) are southern lowland plants that probably don't reach the Arctic here; the tetraploids (P. obtusiflora sensu Löve) occur both in the lowlands, mountains and to the north. The small-grown plants with an 'obtusiflora' morphology here are tetraploid but so are also a lot of the large-grown and large-flowered plants with a 'palustris' morphology. The North American 'neogaea' plants are diploid, according to Löve and Löve (1975). A similar morphological variation is found in Alaskan plants as in northern European ones but diploid numbers are counted both in small-grown and small-flowered arctic-alpine and large-flowered boreal plants.
Taraskina in Yurtsev (1984) related the 'obtusiflora' name to subsp. palustris whereas a northern Fennoscandian var. tenuis Wahlenb. (1912), Fl. Lapp. 74, was included in subsp. neogaea. This is also difficult to reconcile with morphological and cytological data.
Hultén and Fries (1986) recognised two subspecies of P. palustris, a mainly Eurasian subsp. palustris that reached westernmost Alaska and a nearly circumpolar subsp. neogaea from Iceland throughout Eurasia and N America to Labrador. They included the 'obtusiflora' entity in their subsp. neogaea.
These three treatments are incompatible. In view of the problems, the species is here retained in a collective sense. That is also the view of HultgÃ¥rd (1987), Symb. Bot. Upsal. 28, 1: 1â€"128, who has studied the complex extensively. It is also supported by other biosystematic studies from Erlandsson (1942) to Gornall and Wentworth (1993). (Elven)
large-flowered boreal plants.
(//http://www.mun.ca/biology/delta/arcticf/images/sxpapaf1.jpg)
---------------------------------
end of excerpt
-WS