Pisay Forum

Pisay-CVC is at a crossroads... It's a bifurcated contest between status quo and hope... But of course, there need not be any dilemma... The problem is as clear as day... So should be the solution. And the Faculty, in their nomination letter (PisayDirekNominationsFaculty.doc), have hinted at possibly, the only right way to go...

Integrated Pest Management

How does integrated pest management support sustainability and biodiversity conservation?

My Answer:

Integrated Pest Management (IPM), properly defined, refers to an “approach which first assesses the pest situation, evaluates the merits of pest management options and then implements a system of complementary management actions within a defined area. The objective of IPM is to mitigate pest damage while protecting human health, the environment and economic viability.”

For an integrated pest management to effectively support prospective thrusts and undertakings on ecological (read: agricultural) sustainability and biodiversity conservation, it must be able to define important components that will provide structure to the planning and implementation of the IPM.

The Minnesota Department of Agriculture has defined six components to their IPM: planning, setting action thresholds, monitoring and detection, proper identification, action/implementation, and evaluation of results.

The component of planning takes on a proactive stance. Elemental to this component is the idea of being clear about specific objectives that shall provide framework to the conceptualization of an IPM. These objectives are anchored upon available data on the history of the pests and the structure of the site. With these considerations being made part of the planning, effective pest management may be resorted to in both the short term and the long term implementation of an IPM and education or expert advice may be sought where needed.

The setting of action thresholds takes on the premise that the implementation of an IPM is not without risk. Action thresholds must be based on realistic triggers that can serve as bases for management action in case of actual damages. Such action thresholds must define both the nature and extent of unacceptable damage – like aesthetics, economics, health considerations, nuisance, and other such elements that may be deemed constitutive of unacceptable damage determined from both personal and social values. It must be noted however that action thresholds vary relative to the dynamics of certain pests and the situation of their habitat. For which reason, the identification of realistic triggers must be made reflective of this dynamics and the factors that figure in the equation.

The IPM component of monitoring and detection has the objective of providing meaningful assessment of the site and the pests that inhabit it and being able to make recommendations on the nature of the pest and the extent of its influence over the place. Early detection of pests, their distribution patterns and their number will certainly help in initiating timely management decisions.

Proper identification is another important component of an IPM. Through this component, biology of the pest is noted and profiled. Without doubt, improper identification may lead to misdirected pest management efforts and may result to ineffective pest control and significant yield loss. Proper identification of pests has the objective of gathering information about the pests’ life cycle, their habits, and their physiology and with the end-in-view of identifying their weak links which serve as possible points of control and regulation.

The praxis of an IPM comes in the component of action and implementation. In this component, decisions as to which management option (biological control, cultural control, chemical control, or genetic control) is to be implemented, is reached. It is important however to note that any management option will have its “good” and “bad” effects on both humans and the environment. On this account therefore, decisions and actions on an IPM’s implementation have to be a case in which the benefits are calculated to far-outweigh the risks.

The last component of an IPM includes the evaluation of results. In this component, data that were gathered throughout the entire duration of the IPM’s implementation will be evaluated on account of its strengths and weaknesses. Results must be able to show in what aspects the IPM succeeded and in what aspects it failed. These results should be able to provide a proactive basis for future planning of IPM’s.

In summary, Integrated Pest Management is a system or a program whose objective is the mitigation of the impact of pests over a certain agricultural domain. It is designed to provide insights as to the nature of the pest, its ecological influence, and its mode of control. With these information about the pest, it is surmised that calibrated decision may be used to rid the domain of the pest but that, such decision should be of very limited harm to the other components of the environment that are rendered beneficial and to human health as well. On this account, integrated pest management is rendered supportive of sustainability – if by sustainability is meant the carrying out of a system that works in favor of the beneficial components and that works against the pests that are the subject of an IPM, and conservation of biodiversity – if by conservation is meant the protection of the natural microbial flora and fauna of a particular domain allowed only by the mitigation of the influence of pests whose proliferation harms the other ecological components.

Mining Disaster

Lafayette Mining, an Australian company, in its information campaign proposes a profitable and
environmentally-clean mining operation in Rapu-Rapu, Albay (http://www.rapurapu.20m.com/mining.html). But environmentalists opposed the proposal. In fact, those who strongly opposed claimed that “gold mining in Rapu-Rapu will eventually destroy this fragile island ecosystem, flora and fauna, water resources, aquatic and marine life, corals, seagrasses, mangroves, fishes, and finally human life” (http://www.rapurapu.20m.com/mining.html). Using the concepts on resources and conditions, is the claim justifiable? Support your answer.

My Answer:

A claim is said to be justifiable if and when it is capable of being shown as reasonable or “merited according to accepted standards”. The claim by environmentalists opposed to the operations of Lafayette Mining that “gold mining in Rapu-Rapu will eventually destroy this fragile island ecosystem, flora and fauna, water resources, aquatic and marine life, corals, seagrasses, mangroves, fishes, and finally human life”, should therefore show that their claim holds ground in reason and can be merited from accepted ecological standards.

The facts are as clear as day. Lafayette Mining was previously fined by the DENR the sum of PhP 10.7 million in penalty for “spilling its mine tailings not once but twice. This is in clear violation of Republic Act 9275 or otherwise known as the Clean Water Act. DENR reported that “the water pollution raps against Lafayette, which operates a polymetallic mining project covering three barangays in Rapu-rapu, Albay, stemmed from two incidents of spillage of mine tailings that occurred on October 11 and 31, 2005, that resulted in fishkills”. It also bears mentioning that the fishkills were attributed by inspectors of the Regional Mines and Geosciences Bureau in Albay to cyanide contamination. Recently, there was another report of spilling to which Lafayette Mining reacted vigorously.

Lafayette Mining in its website denied categorically any and all allegations pertaining to a reported “third toxic spill at the mine” towards the end of July this year. It asserted that it cannot do so since a Temporary Lifting Order issued by government regulatory agencies is in effect to set for the company, a three-stage, 30-day trial period that will monitor its environment management systems. As such, any incident to this effect should have been detected first by the monitoring body. But alas, no such spilling was detected, monitored and reported by the authorities to make the claim “official”. The company even found an ally in Sorsogon’s Governor Lee who issued in his press statement dated August 12, 2006, not only a scathing admonition of the advocacy espoused by environmental activists but even more so, an accusing finger directed at the activists for advertently contaminating the bodies of water and making it appear that Lafayette Mining has not complied with the requirements set forth by the DENR. At this point, there is no doubt that the issue has already been muddled by politics and money, reducing the environmentalists’ claim to the level of “hearsay”. But this is not without good reason and sinister motivation.

Lafayette is not loosening up its hold on Rapu-rapu Island because it knows the vastness of resources embedded in this place. It reported that “the Rapu-rapu mineral resource currently supports an eight-year mine life producing approximately 10,000 tonnes of copper in concentrates, 14,000 tonnes in zinc concentrates, 50,000 ounces of gold, and 600,000 ounces of silver annually”. And obviously, the politicians know very well what Lafayette knows about the place. For which reason, they are not loosening up their hold on Lafayette mining.

As the environmentalists’ claim has already been obfuscated with counter-claims from Lafayette, the validity of the argument stipulating environmental hazards appurtenant to the mining’s operation, can now only find validity from studies that show the same projected hazards stemming out from similarly situated and circumstanced mining operations.

Where then does the evil lurk in all these? The earth’s crust is a rich resource of minerals. These minerals come from ore deposits which are of two components: the ore mineral containing the desired metal, and waste material called gangue. Tailings and gangue are what remain from mining operations. And they are of no economic worth. But sometimes, to cope with operations cost, even these tailings are reprocessed for further extraction of precious metals. Damage to the environment starts with the process of extraction. For, regardless of whatever extraction type may be operated on, harmful substances like cyanide will still have to be resorted to, processed after use, then released to the environment. In heap leaching for instance, the ore is crushed into small chunks and irrigated with solution containing cyanide which serves in leaching out the precious metal from the ore. The role of cyanide in heap leaching is best described by the following equation:

During the extraction phase, the gold ions form complex ions with the cyanide:

Recovery of the gold is readily achieved with a redox-reaction:

In other extraction processes, gold cyanidation is simply replaced with sulfur extracting solutions. Contaminants are still used and they still pose very real hazards. It must be pointed out that in the greater scheme of things, resources go through cycles and depending on what conditions are ripe to effect random combinations of these resources, the contaminants that were supplied to the mining operations will have to end somewhere. Most often, they end up in bodies of water. Or even where so ever they end up, once they get incorporated in the environs of living systems, they stay there for the whole duration of their residence time. Chances are, they get assimilated in living systems which are devoid of any built-in mechanism for metabolizing harmful substances. As such, they just linger for a while in the organism until such time that bioaccumulation piles them up in magnified concentrations resulting to death. Ecologically, death taking its toll on a significant number of organisms in a population, effectively reduces, if not terminates, the fitness of affected species thereby diminishing their capacity for perpetuating their kind.

That spilling has happened twice in a row either by operational negligence or technical aberrations, the sword of Damocles still hangs over the head of Rapu-rapu’s residents. And they can only hope that such accident or incident never happens again. But as they say, hope springs eternal – especially to those who hope even against hope.

GenSci Forum

Hi Freshies... I have here some articles that I think will help you understand better the many concepts that we have covered thus far in general science. You can start clicking here for additional readings on the four fundamental forces... I've also included links on Newton's Three Laws of Motion... also, start reading on Levers...
--------
Hi... I've just posted Competency No. 4... It's your reviewer for Wednesday's Long Test... Check it out on this blog.

Biology Forum

Hey Sophies... I have added here some links to our previous lectures in Embryology. For more info about fertilization, click here... also, find here some important files on the segmentation of the fertilized ovum, the neural groove and tube, the primitive segments, the development of the cavities, and the different stages in embryonic growth... I hope these links will better help you appreciate the intricate processes of biological systems...
--------
the endoderm is the innermost germ layer in the developing embryo that will soon differentiate to form the different visceral organs that make up the gastro-intestinal tract... it also provides the basis for the embryonic differentiation of the cardio-pulmonary organs...
--------
For access to the powerpoint lectures on embryology, click here...
--------
Genetics is the branch of biology that deals with the study of heredity and variation...
--------
I have uploaded a powerpoint presentation on the Human Genome at Mikology Correspondence under Sir Miko's uploads...