Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
how do glaciated landscapes have value, how are glaciated lanscapes…
how do glaciated landscapes have value
social/cultural value
in ANWR the Gwich’in live there bringing cultural value to the glacier, rely on the porcupine caribou herd for clothing/food and see the caribou as sacred, live of the land
it is vital that we keep their culture alive and protect them as there aren't many like it anymore. Some people want to exploit their homes for mining and drilling for resources which may wipe out the caribou and therefore the indigenous people
environmental value
Greenland ice sheet and biodiversity with the animals it has
the Greenland ice sheet holds a home for many species such as the seals. With global warming the ice sheets are melting and causing the baby seals to have no where to give birth as they must find a safe, stable place. Polar bears are also not being able to live on the ice sheet due to rapid melting causing them to have to find dry land in places such as Russia where they are at a larger threat to people
albedo affect too??
evaluation
The most important one is the economic value as there are lots of benefits from using glacial lanscapes and can bring a huge amount of revenue to the country such as 150-300 billion US dollars however this is only on a national/local scale as it is only impacting one country
the second most important value is environmental value as if we don't conserve the value then we will lose our environment very quickly leading to the loss of all value glaciers hold
economic value
HEP in Switzerland, 60% Switzerlands energy comes from HEP, however because of global warming the Alps can lose 90% of meltwater
HEP is a mode of economical gain through the use of technology to create energy from meltwater in glaciers. HEP is a low costing energy resource which is less harmful to the environment.
natural gas and resources found in ANWR
exploiting ANWR for resources means that the US economy will be boosted by 5.1 billion barrels which could lead to 1.45 billion barrels per day. this will therefore add to a huge economic growth and the US will be more energy secure. however this will lead to massive environmental impacts which could wipe out the caribou and the indigenous people. this means it is also a social issue as the indigenous people will lose their spiritual culture of living of the land
how are glaciated lanscapes managed today
national
ANWR
national parks around Alaska are government owned
ANWR has allowed mining to happen there due to the large demand which is not good management as it is no longer protected from large companies wanting to exploit that land
will boost US oil production by 5.1 billion barrels more, tens of thousands of jobs made
Yosemite national park
issues: tourism has brought pollution, invasive species, wildfires and traffic congestion
stake holder s have acknowledged these and have promoted visitors to be educated and reduce the cars they bring to stop conjestion and overcrowding
partially successful as they are cautious of tourism and allow them to come visit whilst also educating people on how to be mindful about the ecosystem and how to help preserve it. however, they could have estopped this much earlier
Yosemite has indegious people who live there and consider the taboo religious and this is being destroyed by tourist ruining landscapes
international
ANTARCTICA
the antarctic treaty 1959 which has 88% worlds population signed and agreed
how is it protecting? - promotes freedom of scientific info, prohibits military activity, nuclear tests, no government owns this land, stops companies from mining
arguably the most successful management strategy as no government owns it which allows no dispute about land and ownership and it allows us to preserve landscape however it doesn't account for climate change
conclusion: I believe that international management is far more efficient as it allows everyone to contribute to what should and shouldn't happen unlike in national management such as yosemite where stakeholders care more about money than preservation.
conclusion: significance of key elements or points, short VS long term, and International/national and regional scale
how are glacial landscapes at threat
tourism
lahars
climate change