California’s overpopulation crisis: Environment and economy

David.fejeran. (2020, February 27). California’s overpopulation crisis: Environment and economy, feature by student contributor Kayla Solis. Retrieved from http://summit.rocky.edu/californias-overpopulation-crisis-environment-and-economy-feature-by-student-contributor-kayla-solis/

 

California is known as the Golden State because of the glimmering shine from its grasslands, but it has lost 99 percent of its native grasslands. There are other similar trends such as a 95 percent loss in coastal redwoods. This is because of the high population that seems to keep increasing, in fact, it’s 40 million-plus residents have to compete for resources and many people suffer overcrowding. This hasn’t just impacted humans, it has taken a bigger toll on the plant and animal life of California. In fact, one-third of all birds in the state (139 to 391) were at risk of vanishing in because of ‘stressors.’” As California continues to increase in size due to overpopulation, more settlements will be established; which will take a toll on the wellbeing of both humans and wildlife.

 

I think that overpopulation is a problem that we should be looking at in order to find a solution to environmental impacts. However, I usually looked at overpopulation in less developed regions like Africa and India. Yet, the effects of overpopulation are starting to come out here in my own backyard. The article relates to environmental science as the impact on the land due to human development and pollution is heavily increased because of overpopulation; which puts the native animals and landscape at risk. It also provided some harrowing statistics, such as 99 percent of native grasslands and 80 percent of coastal wetlands being lost to development and other environmental impacts. Overpopulation isn’t the cause of these impacts, but it’s speeding up the rate of these impacts.  

One thought on “California’s overpopulation crisis: Environment and economy

  1. I think you’re last sentence is especially accurate. Overpopulation accelerates env. problems already in motion. So are we doomed to destroy the env. with more people? I don’t think we are necessarily. But all 40 million of us are going to live in big suburban households with big backyards. Can you envision the future neighborhood… high density housing on transportation hubs? Even here in the Bay Area, just because there are lots of people doesn’t mean we need to cut down old growth forests and pave over the wetlands. So, what will it take to be able to have a future with a growing population that doesn’t overly tax biodiversity?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *