|
|
The tremendous watershed area that impacts a thin, 200 mile long strip of salt marshes-half
of Georgia, all of South Carolina and one third of North Carolina makes for a logistical
nightmare in terms of trying to protect them. Because of the very small area that they
occupy, these marshes have a direct effect on only a very small number of people. This
fact puts them at a very distinct disadvantage in terms of politics. It is very hard to
make people understand why they should want to protect salt marshes. Imagine, for example,
trying to convince members of a small farming community in northwest South Carolina that
they should stop using certain fertilizers and pesticides-which help their crops tremendously
and contribute to their financial well being-for the sake of a few salt marshes that they
have never seen, hundreds of miles away, off the coast of another state. Who can really
blame them? Their local economy may depend on their agriculture, which in turn depends
on chemical fertilizers and pesticides-can we expect people to sacrifice their livelihood
for the sake of distant, yet important ecosystems? That is merely one example of the human threat to salt marshes as it exists today. Our impact on salt marshes is likely to increase greatly in the near future, mainly due to the impact of expected population increase and movement. By next year, 75% of the United States population is expected to live within 50 miles of the coast; these fragile habitats were never meant to exist in such populated circumstances. Ironically, the increase in costal population is likely to destroy the very beauty that people originally sought from the coast. (graphic: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/mapGallery/images/density90.jpg )
| |
|
