Ellis Orozco
English 4
December 18, 2008
How did you improve your lead-in to make it more interesting?
According to the feedback I got from my classmates I got the sense that they thought my lead-in was good at grabbing the audience and was interesting. I decided to leave it as is. The only thing I changed was making it a little more condensed.
How did you revise your thesis to make it more focused?
My thesis only needed more facts to support it. I feel that was the main reason that it seemed weak. I looked over it again and again trying to figure out what I could add or take away to make it better. I ended up just leaving it as is, but I added more facts in the body to make it more convincing and strong.
How did you improve the organization of your essay so that it made more sense logically and flowed better?
I had to read and re-read my essay numerous times to try and discover ways to make my essay flow more logically and with ease. I ended up moving one of my body paragraphs to the end because I felt it did a better job at summarizing the essay. As opposed to where I had it, which I felt only confused the reader.
How did you improve your use of transitions to help connect ideas for your reader?
With regards to my transitions I didn’t really pay that much attention, at first, because I try to make my paragraphs link naturally. This however, wasn’t a good system because I found myself just writing one paragraph then another, then I tried to read through it and it didn’t flow very smoothly. So, I took away some of the sentences that I had at the beginning of new paragraphs then tweaked them slightly so that everything was smooth and natural.
How did your improve your use of example? Why did you choose the examples you did? Why is this important to helping your audience understand your points?
In my original essay I had some really good examples, but I didn’t elaborate enough on them for it to be perfect. With this in mind, I went back and did a little more research so that my examples were well researched and detailed. I also added some material from a book I just read(Feed). This allowed me to add some good material that was relevant to the prompt. It is important to add well researched examples because you are trying to talk about a subject that not many people know about so you are their teacher in a sense.
Where in your essay did you expand on your analysis and explanations? How did you keep your audience in mind as you added more explanation? I expanded on practically every body paragraph by adding more examples and concrete details. I beefed up my conclusion by restating my thesis to remind the reader the purpose of writing the essay. To make sure my audience would be able to understand what I was saying I automatically assumed my audience didn’t know anything. I explained everything in detail.
How did you improve your outside sources? Why is it important to smoothly incorporate outside material instead of just dropping it in?
I found out through my many drafts that by simply dropping quotes and facts into an essay it doesn’t make it better just slightly more confusing and unclear. I found that if you have fewer more meaningful quotes it is better than a bunch that aren’t directly correlated. I added sentences that lead up to the quotes so that it sounds a lot more natural coming out.
Where in your essay did you improve on word choice or grammar? Why is this important to creating an effective essay?
I had too many examples to highlight where I changed my grammar and word choice. I read over my essay so many times and with each time I read it I discovered another word misspelled or placed. I had to do some tweaking to the essay in order to make the words fit and sound a lot nicer.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Power Of Words
Ellis Orozco
English 4
December 18th, 2008
The Power Of Words
The freedom of speech, our first amendment right, is held so near and dear to many Americans. It allows us to speak freely of each other and of those from other countries. According to Haid Bosmajian, many people don’t realize the true power behind words and the context in which they are used. He believes that they are quite oftenly used to dehumanize a certain enemy we may be at war with, so that the killings will seem less cruel and heartless. He states that there are many different means of using words to dehumanize people; the most popular by the use of metaphors or “jokes.” After further consideration of the point Bosmajian is trying to make, I realized he was right. For example, regarding this war we are fighting in Iraq, President Bush often refers to Al-Queda as “evil” which in a sense may be correct. However, when he constantly reiterates that phrase, he instills this image in the minds of many Americans that they are “evil” or a threat and that something needs to be done. It is shocking how much power and weight words carry. They are, and have been, the tools used by dictators, presidents and even the common people; sometimes with irrevocable consequences.
There are many cases throughout history in which words have been used to manipulate large populations of people can convince them to give in to what leaders want them to believe. When the Spaniards came to America and saw the Indians, they immediately began labeling them as savages or barbarians. The Spaniards did this because they were trying to conquer land. By labeling the Indians savages, there is this immediate negative reaction from the rest of the world. A collective mindset is created which makes them believe it’s ok to kill the Indians because they are just savages. People from Spain and other countries become convinced the Indians aren’t civilized like them, or they don’t have feelings like they do. By using metaphors to compare people to something horrible, Bosmijian believes leaders or dictators are able to affect, “people’s conceptual systems and though process, influencing how they perceive others and determine their political views and behavior.” This can be related to a smaller form of brain washing because leaders are able to thwart people’s opinion about others with words. For example, to seek support of Americans, President Reagan constantly referred to the Soviet Union as an “evil empire” threatening Americans lives. The Soviets were “not good” and didn’t care about anyone but themselves. Reagan promoted the idea that Americans want to be the guys who promote good. So, by putting a stop to this “Soviet cancer,” Americans are the good guys and are bettering the world.
This reminds me of a book I read called Feed. The basic premise of the book is that there are these kids that become so obsessed with trying to be “hip” or “cool” that they are willing to harm themselves and completely change their image into someone they are not. One of the main characters tries to heighten the kids’ awareness of how the media was trying to get them to conform to the image they want. Her comments are oftenly thrown to the side because people view her as crazy for trying to fight against “the Feed” and advertisers. The Feed allows people to access the Internet with far greater ease and it gives people the ability to store large amounts of information, so you can access it later. Many of the other kids are so obsessed with the “good” the Feed can do that they fail to realize that the advertisers behind the Feed who provide them with helpful hints are really trying to get the teens to buy their products. This creates an unhealthy and unseen bond between the kids and advertisers. Now, the advertisers know they can manipulate the teens to buy any product produced by any given corporation. This led them to become not “better people, but better consumers.” This quote really stuck with me because after further consideration I realized that advertisers did indeed take away their (and our) individualism and replaced it with this mindless need to buy the next big product whether it be an iPod or cell phone to boost our own egos. Take for example the iPod, Apple’s biggest success. Ipods are portrayed as these incredible products that “everyone” is buying and that you should buy one of them because it will allow you to associate yourself with this group of “cool” kids that own this hot product. When Apple began putting the iTouch on the market it was one of the first few touch screen products. Many other corporations took note of this and realized it was a huge sell. Now, Verizon Wireless (cell phone company) has a cell phone that uses touch screen technology. In addition, there is now a computer monitor that uses this very technology. Advertisers take note of products that sell in big numbers then they create “new” products that incorporate the tactics that allowed the other products to be so successful. They then use words like this product is “new” or “improved” so they get into people’s minds and make them think, “well, if the first touch screen products were good, imagine how great these new and improved ones are.” This leads people into this false notion that they are buying a “new” hot product when really advertisers are re-selling a previously hot product.
Americans don’t necessarily realize how much advertisements and T.V in general govern our lives. For most of us, it has influenced how we dress, and interact with others. This is because advertisers know how to manipulate simple words to their benefit. They can get inside of us and create an unnecessary want for something. It is because they are able to play with words that they have gained such a hold over us. Consumers need to analyze advertisements carefully to learn the true intent of advertisers. We need to be able to realize when we are being lured by these seductive or “weasel” words. Weasel words get their name from what weasels do to eggs, which is sucking out the yolk and leaving the shell. When we refer to “weasel” words we mean words that are hollow or carry no true meaning. For instance, when advertisers say their product will keep you virtually safe from intruders, or their pill will keep you “virtually one-hundred percent safe from becoming pregnant.” They completely change the meaning of the word, and change it to fit their needs. This is yet another example of how advertisers are able to manipulate language to sell their product.
I find it appalling that our own leaders are willing to dehumanize someone just to seek the support of the American people. It is incredible how simple words like “evil” or “cancer,” when put into different contexts, carries completely different meanings. It is scary how manipulative people can be, just by the words they chose to use. As we develop a higher level education and get exposed to new material we learn new ways to express ourselves, whether it be verbally or in written form. As we develop this higher level of vocabulary we have to make sure we are thoroughly thinking things through for we have seen what happens when words get taken out of one context and placed into another.
English 4
December 18th, 2008
The Power Of Words
The freedom of speech, our first amendment right, is held so near and dear to many Americans. It allows us to speak freely of each other and of those from other countries. According to Haid Bosmajian, many people don’t realize the true power behind words and the context in which they are used. He believes that they are quite oftenly used to dehumanize a certain enemy we may be at war with, so that the killings will seem less cruel and heartless. He states that there are many different means of using words to dehumanize people; the most popular by the use of metaphors or “jokes.” After further consideration of the point Bosmajian is trying to make, I realized he was right. For example, regarding this war we are fighting in Iraq, President Bush often refers to Al-Queda as “evil” which in a sense may be correct. However, when he constantly reiterates that phrase, he instills this image in the minds of many Americans that they are “evil” or a threat and that something needs to be done. It is shocking how much power and weight words carry. They are, and have been, the tools used by dictators, presidents and even the common people; sometimes with irrevocable consequences.
There are many cases throughout history in which words have been used to manipulate large populations of people can convince them to give in to what leaders want them to believe. When the Spaniards came to America and saw the Indians, they immediately began labeling them as savages or barbarians. The Spaniards did this because they were trying to conquer land. By labeling the Indians savages, there is this immediate negative reaction from the rest of the world. A collective mindset is created which makes them believe it’s ok to kill the Indians because they are just savages. People from Spain and other countries become convinced the Indians aren’t civilized like them, or they don’t have feelings like they do. By using metaphors to compare people to something horrible, Bosmijian believes leaders or dictators are able to affect, “people’s conceptual systems and though process, influencing how they perceive others and determine their political views and behavior.” This can be related to a smaller form of brain washing because leaders are able to thwart people’s opinion about others with words. For example, to seek support of Americans, President Reagan constantly referred to the Soviet Union as an “evil empire” threatening Americans lives. The Soviets were “not good” and didn’t care about anyone but themselves. Reagan promoted the idea that Americans want to be the guys who promote good. So, by putting a stop to this “Soviet cancer,” Americans are the good guys and are bettering the world.
This reminds me of a book I read called Feed. The basic premise of the book is that there are these kids that become so obsessed with trying to be “hip” or “cool” that they are willing to harm themselves and completely change their image into someone they are not. One of the main characters tries to heighten the kids’ awareness of how the media was trying to get them to conform to the image they want. Her comments are oftenly thrown to the side because people view her as crazy for trying to fight against “the Feed” and advertisers. The Feed allows people to access the Internet with far greater ease and it gives people the ability to store large amounts of information, so you can access it later. Many of the other kids are so obsessed with the “good” the Feed can do that they fail to realize that the advertisers behind the Feed who provide them with helpful hints are really trying to get the teens to buy their products. This creates an unhealthy and unseen bond between the kids and advertisers. Now, the advertisers know they can manipulate the teens to buy any product produced by any given corporation. This led them to become not “better people, but better consumers.” This quote really stuck with me because after further consideration I realized that advertisers did indeed take away their (and our) individualism and replaced it with this mindless need to buy the next big product whether it be an iPod or cell phone to boost our own egos. Take for example the iPod, Apple’s biggest success. Ipods are portrayed as these incredible products that “everyone” is buying and that you should buy one of them because it will allow you to associate yourself with this group of “cool” kids that own this hot product. When Apple began putting the iTouch on the market it was one of the first few touch screen products. Many other corporations took note of this and realized it was a huge sell. Now, Verizon Wireless (cell phone company) has a cell phone that uses touch screen technology. In addition, there is now a computer monitor that uses this very technology. Advertisers take note of products that sell in big numbers then they create “new” products that incorporate the tactics that allowed the other products to be so successful. They then use words like this product is “new” or “improved” so they get into people’s minds and make them think, “well, if the first touch screen products were good, imagine how great these new and improved ones are.” This leads people into this false notion that they are buying a “new” hot product when really advertisers are re-selling a previously hot product.
Americans don’t necessarily realize how much advertisements and T.V in general govern our lives. For most of us, it has influenced how we dress, and interact with others. This is because advertisers know how to manipulate simple words to their benefit. They can get inside of us and create an unnecessary want for something. It is because they are able to play with words that they have gained such a hold over us. Consumers need to analyze advertisements carefully to learn the true intent of advertisers. We need to be able to realize when we are being lured by these seductive or “weasel” words. Weasel words get their name from what weasels do to eggs, which is sucking out the yolk and leaving the shell. When we refer to “weasel” words we mean words that are hollow or carry no true meaning. For instance, when advertisers say their product will keep you virtually safe from intruders, or their pill will keep you “virtually one-hundred percent safe from becoming pregnant.” They completely change the meaning of the word, and change it to fit their needs. This is yet another example of how advertisers are able to manipulate language to sell their product.
I find it appalling that our own leaders are willing to dehumanize someone just to seek the support of the American people. It is incredible how simple words like “evil” or “cancer,” when put into different contexts, carries completely different meanings. It is scary how manipulative people can be, just by the words they chose to use. As we develop a higher level education and get exposed to new material we learn new ways to express ourselves, whether it be verbally or in written form. As we develop this higher level of vocabulary we have to make sure we are thoroughly thinking things through for we have seen what happens when words get taken out of one context and placed into another.
FEED Response (2 page reflection)
Ellis Orozco
English 4
December 15, 2008
Feed Response
Feed is a story about love, and the influence the media has over people. It is a story about a girl who lives outside the “norm” she, unlike every other teen, is obsessed with knowledge and trying to exploit how the media tries to get people to conform to their idea of what is cool. The author, did a good job at getting the message across that teens are so obsessed with becoming the next best thing that they don’t realize that they are being manipulated to become what big corporations want them to be. There is a quote in the book that goes, “the media makes us better consumers, not people.” This couldn’t be truer. I too like many teens have fallen into the trap that advertisers set up, that being that if you buy their product you will be “cool” or “hip.”
Feed has in a sense opened my eyes and reassured an assumption I already had. That the media is constantly trying to get everyone, teens in particular, (because they are the easiest to manipulate) to give in to what they want. To get them to buy an iPod or cell phone that will make them a “cool” person or part of the norm. That by listening to a specific type of music you will be able to “fit in” with a specific group of kids. The media has completely taken away individuality. It has kept people from truly being who they want to be because they see all these other people buying a product so they want to too.
The basic message behind Feed is don’t be like the many people who have become obsessed with being the next best thing. Just because a product is promoted more than another doesn’t necessarily make it better. I think the author M. T Anderson wants us to be just smart buyers. Don’t be afraid to buy something just because it may make you look weird or it may make you and outcast. Don’t be afraid to break away from the norm. Live life the way you want to not the way others do.
I would highly recommend this book to people of all ages. It is a fascinating read about what happens when people give up their individualism to be “cool.” This book does a good job at exploiting the harm that comes when people become obsessed with their appearance and how others will perceive them.
One character that I really liked was Violet, I could in a sense relate to her because throughout the book she was trying so hard to fit in and be normal like Titus’s friends even though she was not like them. I feel as though at times I try to hard to fit in with groups of people. Feed has inspired me to be the person I want to and to not be afraid to do what I feel is right and not what society feels is right. I am inspired to be an individual not someone who conforms to what others expect.
English 4
December 15, 2008
Feed Response
Feed is a story about love, and the influence the media has over people. It is a story about a girl who lives outside the “norm” she, unlike every other teen, is obsessed with knowledge and trying to exploit how the media tries to get people to conform to their idea of what is cool. The author, did a good job at getting the message across that teens are so obsessed with becoming the next best thing that they don’t realize that they are being manipulated to become what big corporations want them to be. There is a quote in the book that goes, “the media makes us better consumers, not people.” This couldn’t be truer. I too like many teens have fallen into the trap that advertisers set up, that being that if you buy their product you will be “cool” or “hip.”
Feed has in a sense opened my eyes and reassured an assumption I already had. That the media is constantly trying to get everyone, teens in particular, (because they are the easiest to manipulate) to give in to what they want. To get them to buy an iPod or cell phone that will make them a “cool” person or part of the norm. That by listening to a specific type of music you will be able to “fit in” with a specific group of kids. The media has completely taken away individuality. It has kept people from truly being who they want to be because they see all these other people buying a product so they want to too.
The basic message behind Feed is don’t be like the many people who have become obsessed with being the next best thing. Just because a product is promoted more than another doesn’t necessarily make it better. I think the author M. T Anderson wants us to be just smart buyers. Don’t be afraid to buy something just because it may make you look weird or it may make you and outcast. Don’t be afraid to break away from the norm. Live life the way you want to not the way others do.
I would highly recommend this book to people of all ages. It is a fascinating read about what happens when people give up their individualism to be “cool.” This book does a good job at exploiting the harm that comes when people become obsessed with their appearance and how others will perceive them.
One character that I really liked was Violet, I could in a sense relate to her because throughout the book she was trying so hard to fit in and be normal like Titus’s friends even though she was not like them. I feel as though at times I try to hard to fit in with groups of people. Feed has inspired me to be the person I want to and to not be afraid to do what I feel is right and not what society feels is right. I am inspired to be an individual not someone who conforms to what others expect.
1984 Ending
Ellis Orozco
Literary Questions October 13th
I was very dissatisfied with the ending of this novel. I was expecting Winston to escape, find Julia and together they would lead their own resistance against the government and take down Big Brother. I was hoping for the last few pages that O’Brian was going to set Winston free and tell him the secret to taking down Big Brother, Winston changed from being a skeptical person with regards to the government, For example. He would question it and he’d be able to spot the flaws in the system. To at the end of the book he does a complete spin around and ends up giving in to Big Brother where he becomes one of the people who just believe what is said and doesn’t take the time to think critically about things. This novel is considered a dystopian novel because it is exactly the opposite of what a utopia would be. For example, in utopia’s it’s supposed to be this happy place where things are all harmonious. Then in 1984, there is no true happiness the citizens are forced to believe what the government feeds to them; there is no sense of freedom.
Literary Questions October 13th
I was very dissatisfied with the ending of this novel. I was expecting Winston to escape, find Julia and together they would lead their own resistance against the government and take down Big Brother. I was hoping for the last few pages that O’Brian was going to set Winston free and tell him the secret to taking down Big Brother, Winston changed from being a skeptical person with regards to the government, For example. He would question it and he’d be able to spot the flaws in the system. To at the end of the book he does a complete spin around and ends up giving in to Big Brother where he becomes one of the people who just believe what is said and doesn’t take the time to think critically about things. This novel is considered a dystopian novel because it is exactly the opposite of what a utopia would be. For example, in utopia’s it’s supposed to be this happy place where things are all harmonious. Then in 1984, there is no true happiness the citizens are forced to believe what the government feeds to them; there is no sense of freedom.
1984
Ellis Orozco
Literary Response Answers: Sept. 29,2008
Winston’s world Oceania is a sick place in the sense that the Government has taking complete control over their citizen’s thoughts, rights and opinions. The government plays such a huge influence that they can make things that happened in history be forgotten and have the citizens believe it. The have the ability to take away the rights that we nowadays take for granted. They literally brainwash their citizens into hailing the power of Big Brother whether the people want to or not. They are forced to be cautious of every word they say because it could be recorded by cameras within their houses and then handed over to the thought police. The thought police then come to their houses and take them away, what happens next is not entirely sure just that they “disappear”, that all records of them being there are erased. In a sense this is similar to our world because in 1984 Big Brother shields his citizens from the truth because the papers, books or any other form of media get censored. This is much like nowadays where our media is censored, for example the news is prohibited to publish certain stories based on presidential demand or through people working for the pres. So far it seems as though Winston is a bit of an odd ball. He tends to go against the grain and be the one who is different from the norm. In a sense I admire Winston for having the courage to break the law of trying to keep records of the Big Brother era by means of a diary. On the other hand, I am sickened by the fact that he and O’Brian are at the two minute hate and they instead of speaking out and saying they dislike Big Brother they give in and become one of the people who “worship” Big Brother. So far I dislike the fact that the government officials in 1984 (thought Police, Big Brother) have literally a constant eye on their citizens in their homes, even though most people go too their home for peace, solitude, and privacy, by means of the cameras and recording equipment mounted in the houses. Other than that I am thoroughly enjoying 1984.
Literary Response Answers: Sept. 29,2008
Winston’s world Oceania is a sick place in the sense that the Government has taking complete control over their citizen’s thoughts, rights and opinions. The government plays such a huge influence that they can make things that happened in history be forgotten and have the citizens believe it. The have the ability to take away the rights that we nowadays take for granted. They literally brainwash their citizens into hailing the power of Big Brother whether the people want to or not. They are forced to be cautious of every word they say because it could be recorded by cameras within their houses and then handed over to the thought police. The thought police then come to their houses and take them away, what happens next is not entirely sure just that they “disappear”, that all records of them being there are erased. In a sense this is similar to our world because in 1984 Big Brother shields his citizens from the truth because the papers, books or any other form of media get censored. This is much like nowadays where our media is censored, for example the news is prohibited to publish certain stories based on presidential demand or through people working for the pres. So far it seems as though Winston is a bit of an odd ball. He tends to go against the grain and be the one who is different from the norm. In a sense I admire Winston for having the courage to break the law of trying to keep records of the Big Brother era by means of a diary. On the other hand, I am sickened by the fact that he and O’Brian are at the two minute hate and they instead of speaking out and saying they dislike Big Brother they give in and become one of the people who “worship” Big Brother. So far I dislike the fact that the government officials in 1984 (thought Police, Big Brother) have literally a constant eye on their citizens in their homes, even though most people go too their home for peace, solitude, and privacy, by means of the cameras and recording equipment mounted in the houses. Other than that I am thoroughly enjoying 1984.
Essay Three
Ellis Orozco
December 11, 2008
Saving Sharks
Saving Sharks
Sharks are one of the most feared creatures in the ocean. They are one of the biggest predators in the ocean and a big reason many American’s refuse to dive into the blue wonder of the sea. Yet they are incredibly vulnerable. According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, about one billion pounds of shark per year are fished (Handwerk). In addition, many sharks get tangled up in fishing nets that are carelessly left behind by fishers. They are also fished in places like the United States and Costa Rica for their and fins (which are shipped to China) and then returned to the ocean finless. This leads to a slow, painful death because other sharks will feast upon them or they end up dying due to starvation because they can’t swim. Many people don’t want to help the sharks because they are most likely a) scared that they will be eaten by them. Which is a foolish reason not to help because you run a greater risk of being hit by lightning or getting into a crash while drive to and from the beach.
The over fishing of shark for their fins and meat first began in 1986 when tuna and swordfish supplies started to plummet. In a panic, fishers resorted to fishing for shark. As a result, between 1986-1987, the amount of shark fished in Florida (which is only one state where shark is fished) doubled. Another contributing factor was the high demand coming from The Republic of China because they use it in a soup. It is considered a delicacy in China and sells for a near ten dollars per pound. Hong Kong consumes three million kilograms of shark per year which roughly equals about six million six hundred thousand pounds of shark. That is a lot of shark. Types of sharks most often fished for their fins include, but are no limited to sandbar, bull, hammerhead, blacktip, porbeagle, mako, thresher, and blue. It is said that due to this live-fining about 100-200 million shark die per year. This inhumane act has led to the near extinction of mako, elephant fish, lemon shark, hammerheads and great whites. This is extremely disturbing due to the fact that sharks have a very long gestation period, roughly about 22 months. Many people aren’t aware that once a species is close to extinction it could take decades to revive it. This revival takes a coordinated effort many individuals, as well as time, to increase a species chance for survival.
Sharks are crucial to the oceanic environment and to our own. They consume all sick and or diseased fish. So, in a sense protect other fishes from disease. They also help with population control. For example, there was a case in Australia where the number of lobster spiked up largely. This was because the number of Hammerhead shark in the area had greatly decreased thus leading to an increase in lobster because that it what they normally consume. Finally, sharks have opened many new door in the field of science. Scientist have long studied shark to try to solve some of lives many problems. For exaple, sharks can’t get cancer. Scientist are currently studying how this happens. Then they are going to try to apply it to humans. They can’t achieve this if we keep killing sharks off at this alarming rate.
Now, I want to focus specifically on China. They consume about 85 percent of the total world shark business. Dried food sellers can be found proudly displaying the shark fins in China. In China, when you serve shark fin soup to your visitors, it is viewed as though you are very wealthy and or powerful. It is a sign of status. Shark’s fin soup is said to be served at banquets, weddings and other get-togethers. On top of this they are purposefully asking the fishers to get the fins from rare or endangered sharks because it makes you seem more exotic because you can afford to eat a soup that is made with a shark not everyone knows about. What is worse is the fact that the shark fin itself has no flavor whatsoever it is just the gelatinous taste of the cartilage that people want. So we are technically killing off millions of sharks for something that carries no flavor whatsoever and is just quite simply a gelatinous feel that people like. I believe our scientists and those of China, working together, can quite easily find an artificial substance that could replace the shark fins. It is very sad to know that the government of Costa Rica went through the trouble to enact a law that doesn’t allow fishers to get within three-mile radius of a specific island that is known to have sharks and yet they won’t enforce it.
Currently, fishers can take the fins of sharks if the fin weighs five percent of the total body weight, it has been proposed a few times that they up that percent to 6.5 percent. I wanted to write a letter to Congress asking them to up this percent for how much the fin must weight in proportion to the body weight and enforce this law once it is passed. With any luck I am hoping that Costa Rica will follow our example. This can lead to a reduction in the amount of shark live-finned and tossed back into the ocean.
In addition to the letter I want to write I was thinking about starting a non-profit whose many goal and purpose is to inform the public about what sort of cruelty goes into the fishing of shark for their fins or the consequences of not managing where you lay down fishing and not picking them up. I simply want to provide people with facts and hope that they chose to do the right thing in my eyes. Which is simply taking an active role in saving the sharks from being finned for a “luxury” food.
Works Cited
Confidential Reporter. "China Confidential." 30 June, 2005. 5 December 2008
http://chinaconfidential.blogspot.com/2005/06/disney-shark-fin-debate-highlights.html.
Handwerk, Brian. "Sharks Falling Prey To Humans' Appetites." National
Geographic. June 3, 2003. 7 Dec 2008 http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/06/0603_020603_shark1.html.
"Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act." NOAA
Fisheries. December 19, 1996. 7 Dec 2008 http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/magact/mag3a.html#s309.
"Shark Trade and Environment Database." TED Case Studies. January 11, 1997.
Trade Environment Database. 7 Dec 2008 http://www.american.edu/ted/SHARK.HTM.
Workman, Daniel. "Illegal Shark Fin Fishing." Suite101. 9 April 2007. 11 Dec
2008 http://world-trade-organization.suite101.com/article.cfm/illegal_shark_fin_fishing.
December 11, 2008
Saving Sharks
Saving Sharks
Sharks are one of the most feared creatures in the ocean. They are one of the biggest predators in the ocean and a big reason many American’s refuse to dive into the blue wonder of the sea. Yet they are incredibly vulnerable. According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, about one billion pounds of shark per year are fished (Handwerk). In addition, many sharks get tangled up in fishing nets that are carelessly left behind by fishers. They are also fished in places like the United States and Costa Rica for their and fins (which are shipped to China) and then returned to the ocean finless. This leads to a slow, painful death because other sharks will feast upon them or they end up dying due to starvation because they can’t swim. Many people don’t want to help the sharks because they are most likely a) scared that they will be eaten by them. Which is a foolish reason not to help because you run a greater risk of being hit by lightning or getting into a crash while drive to and from the beach.
The over fishing of shark for their fins and meat first began in 1986 when tuna and swordfish supplies started to plummet. In a panic, fishers resorted to fishing for shark. As a result, between 1986-1987, the amount of shark fished in Florida (which is only one state where shark is fished) doubled. Another contributing factor was the high demand coming from The Republic of China because they use it in a soup. It is considered a delicacy in China and sells for a near ten dollars per pound. Hong Kong consumes three million kilograms of shark per year which roughly equals about six million six hundred thousand pounds of shark. That is a lot of shark. Types of sharks most often fished for their fins include, but are no limited to sandbar, bull, hammerhead, blacktip, porbeagle, mako, thresher, and blue. It is said that due to this live-fining about 100-200 million shark die per year. This inhumane act has led to the near extinction of mako, elephant fish, lemon shark, hammerheads and great whites. This is extremely disturbing due to the fact that sharks have a very long gestation period, roughly about 22 months. Many people aren’t aware that once a species is close to extinction it could take decades to revive it. This revival takes a coordinated effort many individuals, as well as time, to increase a species chance for survival.
Sharks are crucial to the oceanic environment and to our own. They consume all sick and or diseased fish. So, in a sense protect other fishes from disease. They also help with population control. For example, there was a case in Australia where the number of lobster spiked up largely. This was because the number of Hammerhead shark in the area had greatly decreased thus leading to an increase in lobster because that it what they normally consume. Finally, sharks have opened many new door in the field of science. Scientist have long studied shark to try to solve some of lives many problems. For exaple, sharks can’t get cancer. Scientist are currently studying how this happens. Then they are going to try to apply it to humans. They can’t achieve this if we keep killing sharks off at this alarming rate.
Now, I want to focus specifically on China. They consume about 85 percent of the total world shark business. Dried food sellers can be found proudly displaying the shark fins in China. In China, when you serve shark fin soup to your visitors, it is viewed as though you are very wealthy and or powerful. It is a sign of status. Shark’s fin soup is said to be served at banquets, weddings and other get-togethers. On top of this they are purposefully asking the fishers to get the fins from rare or endangered sharks because it makes you seem more exotic because you can afford to eat a soup that is made with a shark not everyone knows about. What is worse is the fact that the shark fin itself has no flavor whatsoever it is just the gelatinous taste of the cartilage that people want. So we are technically killing off millions of sharks for something that carries no flavor whatsoever and is just quite simply a gelatinous feel that people like. I believe our scientists and those of China, working together, can quite easily find an artificial substance that could replace the shark fins. It is very sad to know that the government of Costa Rica went through the trouble to enact a law that doesn’t allow fishers to get within three-mile radius of a specific island that is known to have sharks and yet they won’t enforce it.
Currently, fishers can take the fins of sharks if the fin weighs five percent of the total body weight, it has been proposed a few times that they up that percent to 6.5 percent. I wanted to write a letter to Congress asking them to up this percent for how much the fin must weight in proportion to the body weight and enforce this law once it is passed. With any luck I am hoping that Costa Rica will follow our example. This can lead to a reduction in the amount of shark live-finned and tossed back into the ocean.
In addition to the letter I want to write I was thinking about starting a non-profit whose many goal and purpose is to inform the public about what sort of cruelty goes into the fishing of shark for their fins or the consequences of not managing where you lay down fishing and not picking them up. I simply want to provide people with facts and hope that they chose to do the right thing in my eyes. Which is simply taking an active role in saving the sharks from being finned for a “luxury” food.
Works Cited
Confidential Reporter. "China Confidential." 30 June, 2005. 5 December 2008
http://chinaconfidential.blogspot.com/2005/06/disney-shark-fin-debate-highlights.html.
Handwerk, Brian. "Sharks Falling Prey To Humans' Appetites." National
Geographic. June 3, 2003. 7 Dec 2008 http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/06/0603_020603_shark1.html.
"Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act." NOAA
Fisheries. December 19, 1996. 7 Dec 2008 http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/magact/mag3a.html#s309.
"Shark Trade and Environment Database." TED Case Studies. January 11, 1997.
Trade Environment Database. 7 Dec 2008 http://www.american.edu/ted/SHARK.HTM.
Workman, Daniel. "Illegal Shark Fin Fishing." Suite101. 9 April 2007. 11 Dec
2008 http://world-trade-organization.suite101.com/article.cfm/illegal_shark_fin_fishing.
Pamphlet
Pros
• Can relay less heavily on foreign oil
• The oil obtained can be used for emergency reserves during critical oil shortages
• It would only take two years to establish the platforms offshore
• Drilling would stimulate the oil economy and supplement American reserves
Cons
• The oil gained offshore would not be enough to affect the global oil economy and lower gasoline prices
• Would disrupt undersea life, killing marine animals
• Offshore rigs produce chemicals when drilling that could stay in the ocean for up to forty years
• Drilling would delay alternative energy research and development
“3/11/05 Arctic Refuge: A vote to include language in the Senate Budget resolution that counted revenue from oil and gas leasing and drilling in the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge.”
Obama: Voted Green
McCain: Voted anti-green
McCain: McCain believes that if America drills offshore it can reduce its need for foreign oil.
Obama: Obama believes that oil companies should either drill in the sixty-nine million acres available or completely abandon the concept of drilling. He believes that drilling for offshore oil will not free the nation from its energy crisis.
Ellis Orozco, Jon-Luc Clark, Nick Santiago, Mark Hargrove
• Can relay less heavily on foreign oil
• The oil obtained can be used for emergency reserves during critical oil shortages
• It would only take two years to establish the platforms offshore
• Drilling would stimulate the oil economy and supplement American reserves
Cons
• The oil gained offshore would not be enough to affect the global oil economy and lower gasoline prices
• Would disrupt undersea life, killing marine animals
• Offshore rigs produce chemicals when drilling that could stay in the ocean for up to forty years
• Drilling would delay alternative energy research and development
“3/11/05 Arctic Refuge: A vote to include language in the Senate Budget resolution that counted revenue from oil and gas leasing and drilling in the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge.”
Obama: Voted Green
McCain: Voted anti-green
McCain: McCain believes that if America drills offshore it can reduce its need for foreign oil.
Obama: Obama believes that oil companies should either drill in the sixty-nine million acres available or completely abandon the concept of drilling. He believes that drilling for offshore oil will not free the nation from its energy crisis.
Ellis Orozco, Jon-Luc Clark, Nick Santiago, Mark Hargrove
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)