Essay #1 Final Draft

Death From Above

Imagine yourself living in a small rural community in the wilds of the Alaskan bush. Subsistence hunting is vital for survival of the community. Moose and caribou herds that roam freely throughout Alaska are the foundations of many subsistence diets. Wolves are one of the primary predators that prey on caribou and moose herds. As the wolf population increases, so the herd populations decrease. On August 26, 2008 Alaskans were given to vote in favor of or against a measure designed to prohibit the shooting of wolves with use of aircraft. The measure was rejected, and we now hear loud cries against aerial hunting. Although aerial hunting is frowned upon, it is not as cruel as some of the news media would have Alaskans believe because it is an effective form of predator control, it provides a clear line of sight, and it decreases the need for poisons on the ground.

This brings to question: How is it not cruel? Popular media campaigns seem to demonize hunters using aircraft to track and pursue wolves. Supporters of the PAW Act (Protect America’s Wildlife) would have the general public believe that private hunters are irresponsible, and are not capable of supporting state guidelines. Although Alaskans have voted before on the issue at state level and passed the initiatives that prohibit private hunters from utilizing aircraft, the state legislature has overturned the decision each time. The Anchorage Daily News reports that, “most opposition to the hunts is built around an affection for wolves by proponents.” Something these groups fail to realize is that aerial sport hunting was made federally criminal in 1972 with the Federal Airborne Hunting Act. So if not for sport, then why does aerial hunting still exist? Aerial hunting exists in Alaska as a very effective means of predator control.

In an effort to protect the wild herds, locals require wolf hunting rights, regulated both through local and state government. There are many places in Alaska where it is not feasible to track and hunt wolves on the ground, places like the Brooks Range, the Wrangell Mountains, and the Alaska Range. In similar locations it is also not feasible to wait for the nearest state park official to arrive and organize the hunt. It is not unusual for state personnel to be days and even weeks late to remote villages and communities. Allowing local private hunters to utilize aircraft for tracking and hunting wolves in these places gives the local government a way to see and follow found wolf packs. They can then relay the collected wolf pack data to state officials. When the communities’ livelihood is in jeopardy because of wolves they must take their opportunity while in the air to eradicate the predators menacing their food source. In locations that are otherwise inaccessible, shooters can both locate the predators and achieve a clear line of sight on their targets, making for a clean shot. But is a clean shot humane? There is little chance of taking a wolf painlessly while shooting from a bounding, bouncing snow machine. There is little chance of taking a wolf painlessly while hiking days through rough mountains and inhospitable tundra. One’s line of sight to the target should be steady and unobstructed. In most ground or standard hunting situations there is a substantial chance of missing the target altogether or only wounding it. A missed target means that caribou and moose will die. When a wolf is wounded, it will still attack if only more ferociously. A mortally wounded wolf that chooses to flee will spend the last moments of its life in excruciating pain. But, a bird’s eye view from a steady flying plane allows for a simply great shot, affording little chance of missing the target, and little chance of wounding rather than killing it.

There are some people, still, who protest hunting as a whole. Those people should live a year in the bush, among the native residents. Hunting is necessary for survival, and aerial hunting of wolves as a means of predator control is the most humane means to protect wild herds from depletion due to wolf attacks. After we have exhausted ourselves with unsuccessful ground hunts, and have been banned from using aircraft, there is only one other alternative for predator control. Using poisons on the ground is the alternative we are left with. This method allows wolves to die in an apparent natural way because they would come upon the poisons in their natural feeding places. But poisons are indiscriminate. Poisons have a far reaching effect from the wolves themselves, to other animals that were not the intended targets. One must consider the effects of poisons on plant life, as well as subterranean creatures. Poisons too are capable of leeching into the water table.

Hunting wolves is a necessary measure in Alaska. Utilizing aircraft is the state's way of conducting effective predator control. They conduct the hunts legally and in a way that is the most humane to the animals. There is only a single shot to put the animal down, and there is no worry about the far reaching effects of poisons. The news media and lobbyist groups that find Alaska's current legal measures inhumane are out of touch with the reality of life in the bush.

Workshop for Nbfroth

POSITION ESSAY WORKSHOP QUESTIONS
1. Thesis: "Although people are affected by their environment and some things are predisposed by DNA, those things alone do not determine if someone will become a productive member of society because it is free will, their disillusion of reality and that person's value on consequences that determine if they will become law abiding citizens."

A. Restate the thesis in your own words. If the thesis is a question and not an assertion, make it an assertion. Make sure the words “although” and "because" are in it. Although people blame Nature vs. Nurture for their bad days, it is more a question of individual mentality that paves the path towards our roles in society because every person makes their own choices, they believe what they want to believe, and they determine their own assessment of risk.

B. Does the thesis state the author's position on a controversial topic? Yes
Is it at the end of the first paragraph? Yes


2. Reasons:
List below the author's reasons for holding his or her position.

Are they listed in the thesis, or in the body of the essay? Yes

They should be listed in the thesis, and expanded upon in the body of the essay.
A. free will
B. disillusion of reality
C. value on consequences

3. Audience:
Who is the author's audience? General Public

Do they already agree with the author, or is the author writing to the opposition? Writing to the opposition

How can you tell? debunks nature vs. nurture debate as a whole

Give specific examples.

"Although one can argue that the Manson kids fell under the enchantment of Charles Manson and politics made Nixon a crook it was neither nature nor nurture that made them."

"No one truly views their world how it is really."

"The reason they fell for Charles Manson’s words were not that they were genetically weak minded as some experts like believe or looking for that missing something from childhood; they believed in some way they had been wronged in life and did not have what others did, when in fact they had what others did and in some cases more."

4. Counterargument:

List the counterarguments (arguments of the author’s oppositions) used in the essay (there should be at least three). The counter argument is Nature vs. Nurture (those saying "nature" made them do it, and those saying it was from a lack of nurturing during their childhood that made them do it.

Does the author adequately address these arguments? mostly, is a pretty big subject for a short paper, they write multi-volumed books about this debate, but for its shortness there is a good amount of quality examples.

Do you think there are other arguments that could be addressed? yes
Do you see any logical fallacies? no

A. I like statistics, and this seems like a good piece to use statistics on
B. Maybe something like: typcial demographic of most American jails (# of whites, blacks, hispanics, etc.)
C. would be good support for your second paragraph/set up for your body paragraphs

5. Title: What to Blame First the Egg or the Nest?


Does the essay have an interesting title? If not, help author come up with one. yes

6. Introduction:

Is there a catchy lead sentence? Yes

What is it? We have all met the jerk or shallow princess.

If there isn't one, what would you suggest?

7. Conclusion: "Free will, disillusion of reality and value of consequence all play into the individual choice to obey the law more so than genetics or upbringing."

How does the author conclude the essay? very well, ties it up by bringing the ultimate goal of debunking "nature vs. nurture" to a close.

What do you think of it? very well rounded at the end.

8. Flow/Transitions: there were a number of mechanical errors that made it read a little bumpy. While setting up the broader aspects of your essay in the second paragraph it might be a good place to introduce Nixon and the Manson Family as your examples. That may make the transitions between the two in your main paragraphs a little more understandable.

Does each paragraph expand upon the thesis? yes

Do the paragraphs flow? yes

Which paragraphs have bumpy transitions? third paragraph, when bringing in Nixon. Might be good to use both Nixon, and the Family, in each paragraph (it doesn't feel necessary for the introduction paragraph though).

Week 3, Response 3

Mark Fiore's animated short is a review of the Republican Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees view of the economic status of our country. It seems unlikely that he is a supported of Senator McCain or Governor Palin. What seems most probable is that Fiore would prefer the other side to win the White House race. He was demonstrating his opinion about McCain and Palin's knowledge of complex economic problems that every American is having to deal with. His opinion of these two seems very low.

A good guess would be that he does not believe Senator McCain or Governor Palin do not have qualified experience to solve our current economic issues. He supports his arguement very well with the use of McCain and Palin's own words. It's just too bad an informed opinion cannot be gained from the use of 6 quotables. Although the cartoons intent is very clear, it still only appeals to one subset of people, non-Republicans.

Fiore repeatedly uses quotes from McCain that have him saying, "...the fundamentals of our ecomony are strong." Mixing this quote with images of banking institution collapse and housing foreclosures embues the audience with an imbalanced system. But, the fundamentals are strong. Although they will be the ones to bail us out, it wasn't politicians who created the current state of our economy, but business practices that did not adhere to our countries economic fundamentals. As a point of criticism, greed does not have a party affiliation, and this hiccuough was created by greed.

Week 3, Response 2

In high school English classes across America students are preparing for their A.P. writing exams. These A.P. exams (Advanced Placement) are also known as C.L.E.P. exams (College Level Examination Program). Our excerpt from Anne Lamott's Bird by Bird read like the A.P. examination pieces. Just like those exams, Bird by Bird is an attempt by the author to address writing problems faced by millions of people across the country.

In lieu of an onslaught of technical writing guidelines, Lamott uses a much more casual writing style to humanize the writing experience. Her message to each reader is that a well written first draft might be nothing more than a word list of associated ideas and details, and that what is important is to get as many of the ideas down on paper as one possibly can. The second draft then builds context for the details. Although my rough draft techniques tend to vary widely, I can attest that Lamott's described method does work. The problem I occasionally face when using her technique is a loss of focus in a "free association" kind of way. I then end up with what feels like wasted hours of writing gibberish. Perhaps if I had Lamott's occupation the hours wouldn't feel wasted, but I don't get paid for idle or wasteful hours.

However, since I am paying for this class I find Bird by Bird to be a thoughtful and insightful article designed to make writer's of all levels feel a little better about getting started. Sometimes, as Lamott points out, getting started can be the most difficult part of writing.

Essay #1 Rough Draft -- Death From Above (working title)

On August 26, 2008 Alaskans were given to vote in favor of or against a measure designed to prohibit the shooting of wolves with use of aircraft. The measure was passed, but still we hear cries against aerial hunting. Although aerial hunting is frowned upon, it is not as cruel as some of the news media would have Alaskans believe because it provides a clear line of sight, it is an effective form of predator control, and it decreases the need for poisons on the ground.

This brings to question: How is it not cruel? Popular media campaigns seem to demonize hunters using aircraft to track and pursue wolves. Something these groups fail to realize is that aerial sport hunting was made federally criminal in 1979. So if not for sport, then why does aerial hunting still exist? Aerial hunting exists in Alaska as a very effective means of predator control.

Imagine yourself living in a small rural community in the wilds of the Alaskan bush. Subsistence hunting is vital for survival of the community. Moose and caribou herds that roam freely throughout Alaska are the foundations of many subsistence diets. Wolves are one of the primary predators that prey on caribou and moose herds. As the wolf population increases, so the herd populations decrease. In an effort to protect the wild herds locals require wolf hunting rights, regulated both through local government and state governement. There are many places in Alaska where it is not feasible to track and hunt wolves on the ground, places like the Brooks Range, the Wrangell Mountains, and the Alaska Range. Utilizing aircraft to track and hunt wolves in these places allows the state to see and follow found wolf packs. In locations that are otherwise inaccessible, shooters can achieve a clear line of sight on their targets, making for a clean shot.

But is a clean shot humane? There are some people who protest hunting as a whole. Those people should live a year in the bush, among the native residents. Hunting is necessary for survival, and aerial hunting of wolves as a means of predator control is the most humane means to protect wild herds from depletion due to wolf attacks. Using poisons on the ground is the alternative we are left with. This method allows wolves to die in an apparent natural way because they would come upon the poisons in their natural feeding places. But poisons are indiscriminate. Poisons have a far reaching effect from the wolves themselves, to other animals that were not the intended targets. One must consider the effects of poisons on plant life, as well as subterranean creatures. Poisons too are capable of leeching into the water table.

Hunting wolves is a necessary measure in Alaska. Utilizing aircraft is the state's way of conducting effective predator control. They conduct the hunts legally and in a way that is the most humane to the animals. There is only a single shot to put the animal down, and there is no worry about the far reaching effects of poisons. The news media and lobbyist groups that find Alaska's current legal measures inhumane are out of touch with the reality of life in the bush.

Response #1

The writer of the New York Times article, Seven Years Later, Ground Zero, must be from New York. As a person who does not drive or walk by the site every day I have only conglomerate memories of the World Trade Center towers on fire, and twisted mountains of rubble. Those are my lasting impressions of 9/11. I do not get to see any daily progress on the new construction. Though the writer’s frustration at the slow pace of development is understandable, I personally feel that the writer just wanted to be heard whining, as well as be given the distinction of having been printed in the illustrious New York Times: “All the news that’s fit to print.”

Though it seemed like the author might have some valid arguments against “the bureaucratic lawyers,” as he (or she) says, there was no worthy solution except to hand the whole thing back over to the officiating bureaucrats (in this case Mayor Bloomberg of New York City, Gov. David Paterson of New York and New Jersey’s governor, Jon Corzine). Then, in the final paragraph of the article, the author calls to “push” the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey into building the project more quickly. No thank you, I would rather the workers didn’t skip every other third rivet because the locals are tired of looking at a construction site. The writer was speaking to New Yorkers, but they failed to realize that the World Trade Center is not theirs alone.

Back to School at 28 y.o. -- Assignment #1

As winter ended, and the great thawing process known as Spring began, I started to feel relieved. But, tangled up with my relief was a sense that I hadn't completed something. My name is Adam Weber. I began going to college in 1998 at Colorado State University. I have not been enrolled in a college or university since 2000. I have multiple "final" educational goals, and this class is, for me, a fundamental step in achieving those goals.

I live in Anaktuvuk Pass, and hold a permanent working position at the Nunamiut School as a teacher aide. I am enrolled in an Associates Degree program that will, in time, lead me to my teaching certification. Working for the local school in an auxiliary position (albeit permanent) provides me with ample free time outside of work. I have lived in Anaktuvuk Pass since July, 2007. I began working part-time at my neighbor's house doing home construction projects when I first moved here. After starting work with the school in September, 2007, I was asked by the principal to work for Ilisagvik College's G.E.D. Outreach program. I have spent one year in the village with these three jobs, and I feel confident that I will be a productive part-time university student. I will be keeping all three of my regular jobs, but I also know how long and slow the upcoming winter nights will be.

I Was Backdated?!

I'm Adam in Anaktuvuk Pass. An English translation of this Nunamiut Inupiat village name might read like, "the place of caribou droppings." I'm 28 years old, and it is a twisted trail that has lead me knee deep in the sh*t.

All facts here are the truth - to the best of my memory. Fred Madison, a character in David Lynch's movie, Lost Highway,had an interesting perspective about memory; saying, "I like to remember things my way, not necessarily the way they happened." It is a strange idea, but it's ideas like this that help keep me centered and positive.

Born in Anchorage, I grew up in the lower 48: Land of fast times, big cities, hot rods, and Rock shows. I've watched Juliette Lewis on stage with the Liques in NOLA. I was bitten in the back of my head at Bane in Pensecola. Thirty miles north of Columbus, Ohio, I almost died in an 85 m.p.h. car crash with a drunk driver. I served three years in the Air Force. I got to go all the way to Biloxi, Mississippi!! Biloxi is a giant hundred degree swamp with a beach. The beach was nice, the water was polluted. Hurricane Katrina came while I was stationed there. It's hard for me to talk about Katrina, the hurricane's impact was worse and more widespread than what you saw on television.

Tragedy and travesty aside, I also have interests in books, movies, and music. My favorite band is Nine Inch Nails, and I've seen them play twice. I own all four movies in George A. Romero's ...Dead series. I've read Don Quixote, The Divine Comedy, Canterbury Tales, and The Seven Pillars of Wisdom, but I prefer Ayn Rand or Stephen King. I'm wired, and on the net; I have kept a Livejournal blog for six years and a Myspace account for five. These things don't make me special though, my lazy left eye makes me special (j/k).