Reference no: EM133773577

Assignment:

Part 1: Environmentalist Self-Reflections

• What challenges do you think would have collaborating and communicating with them?
• What are some strategies for how could "build a bridge" with groups with different orientations?
• How would approach a communication challenge with a classmate who has different attributes and values than yourself?

Part 2: Connecting to IAPs

Select two of the listed focal issues to discuss in this response including either marine conservation in the sea of cortex Mexico, agroforestry in the amazon rainforest south America, mineral for tech products in central Africa, wetland habitat restoration on the gulf coast USA, or green energy wind/solar projects in Australia.

• What are two IAP groups (one for each issue selected) that you and your classmates might encounter in your work as environmentalists?
• What wildlife orientation do you think they would have? Why?
• What challenges or obstacles might your classmate encounter trying to work with these IAPs?

Environmentalist Self-Reflection:

Based on the views I have on wildlife and related topics; I resonate most with the pluralist stance. I was raised by two survival-driven parents, who's top priorities were to ensure the safety of their children, to teach them how to honor love itself and the souls we share it with, and to defend ourselves against the varying threats that would surely come our way in life. My mother and father thought it best to be prepared for the worst while remaining hopeful for the best. This being so, I can see how the pluralist title fits me most accurately. I have developed a "healthy fear" of the unknown, be it a wild animal or a stranger, yet I also share the sentiment of an optimist who believes that people are inherently good, and that they can make decisions that benefit themselves while not harming others.

I come from a southern Baptist family of fishermen and deer hunters. Each year my grandfather and older cousins would go out fishing and bring their catches back to the family home for the younger cousins like me to scale and clean in preparation of another one of my grandmother's legendary fish fries. Fishing and hunting were never introduced to me as something "sinful," shameful, or against God's will. It never occurred to me that biodiversity could be lost, that overfishing could occur, or that hunting for food could be considered unethical. It was simply our means of survival.

I believe pluralists in environmental roles are common. These are the people who realize that fishing and hunting will likely be done until the end of days, but there are parameters we can put in place to ensure that the natural flow of life is not disrupted by man's practices and customs. This ability to view a problem from more than one perspective is beneficial in environmental decision-making.

Noticing Trends:

The states Texas and Wyoming rest at the moderate to high end of the pluralist percentage ranking among the states surveyed. Both states allow fishing and hunting of wildlife. It is likely that the common consensus among the residents of these states is that the right to hunt should be protected, and so should wildlife. Each state has its own guidelines and laws around hunting and fishing to better honor the traditions and customs of humankind and wildlife rights. It is likely that Wyoming is in the lead for pluralist percentage with a total of 30.8% because of the more favorable habitat the state has to offer, ranking it among the topmost diversity-rich states in the country, whereas Texas has more dry and arid conditions, housing only a limited number of wildlife species in comparison to states like Wyoming. More people strive to hunt in Wyoming than in Texas, so it would make sense for the majority to side in favor of both utilitarian and mutualistic values vs taking no stance at all like the distant group, resulting in an overall pluralist territory.

Cultural differences between countries make for a mixture of wildlife orientations globally. It is important that people feel culturally accepted and respected when being asked to support controversial ideology. Since factors such as religion, faith, social status, and climate play a role in how individuals perceive wildlife issues, it is also important to tailor conservation efforts to each region according to the needs of all interested and affected parties and all wildlife, both protected and non-protected species alike.