Conservation Practices

Wetland Conservation practices

Pros

Cons

It helps with flood impact

mitigation by slowing stormwater
runoff. It improves water quality
by removing sediment, nitrogen,
phosphorus, and other pollutants
from the surface water.

The space requirement in locations that are

highly developed is a potential. Without the
proper space this conservation effort is
minimal.

It provides habitats for fish and

wildlife. Groundwater recharge
will assist in ensuring that
groundwater is available for the
future.

Wetland restoration also requires a degree of

expertise, especially in locations where
wetland re-colonisation has to be
encouraged by transplanting wetland plants.
Some wetland habitats will be more
difficult to recreate than others and will
require greater expertise.

It allows the area to be used for

recreational uses for hunting,
fishing, hiking, that not only adds
to the quality of life, but also has a
significant economic impact on
the state.
Timber and food production in
properly managed wetlands can
provide wood products, plants,
and animals for human and
livestock consumption.
Water Well
Pros

Cons

In addition to just conserving potable water, The downside to recycled water

grey-water is sometimes better for the is that some systems are very

vegetation. Grey-water usually contains expensive. The law requires a

detergents that have nitrogen or phosphorus, complex and costly system.
which are nutrients that plants need.
GreywaterAction.org says that reusing
greywater keeps it out of the sewer or septic
system. This reduces the chance that it will
end up in local streams, lakes and ponds.

If the area is small and the water

flow is low, the juice is not worth
the squeeze. The water well may
also require more maintenance
than a regular sewer or septic
system.

It also increases the life and capacity of The climate may also be
septic systems since usage decreases. unsuitable for recycling. It is
Recycling water saves money as well.
possible that the water well is
only able to be used in warmer
months.
Another factor is that the soil
may be too permeable or not
permeable enough to install a
water well and it may need costly
adjustments.
Stream Habitat restoration
Pros

Cons

Stream habitat restoration can provide The methods used to fix these issues
bank stabilization long-term.
such as putting rocks or planting
trees are not as aesthetically pleasing
as a grassy slope or other native
vegetation.
Riffles and small pools can be installed to
enhance fish and wildlife habitats that
have been lost due to erosion and
impaired water quality.

The methods used also can decrease

the amount of fish in a habitat and
increase the amount of runoff
pollution that goes into a stream. This
is due to the fact that there is no
longer any buffer to stop or slow
down the flow from land to stream.

The water quality in the area improves by

limiting the amount of sediment and
other pollutants that can flow into the
stream. This is achieved by planting and
maintaining natural buffers. Also, since
natural materials are used, the impact on
the changing area both during and after
construction is minimal.

When a channel is lined with

concrete it increases the velocity of
water flow. This can cause erosion
problems downstream where the
channel is still in its natural state.

Pest Management
Pros

Cons

Balanced Ecosystem

Complex

One of the biggest benefits that can be

achieved through the use of Integrated
Pest Management is a more balanced
ecosystem. Ecosystems can easily be
disturbed by pests, but also can be
affected by the pesticides used to kill
those pests. This means that Integrated
Pest Management can be used as an
alternative to help ecosystems remain
intact and allow species to develop
without change. Maintaining the
ecosystem is the main goal of Integrated
Pest Management.

The of the downside to Integrated Pest

Management is that the techniques
used are extremely complex and not
easy for everyone to implement. A
high level of understanding is required
for these types of techniques to be
used, and is not always possible given
the high pest control needs. There is a
lot of effort and understanding that is
required to make an Integrated Pest
Management strategy work, and
sometimes it is not the most realistic
approach to pest control.

Agricultural Benefits

Monitoring is Costly

Another pro that can be gained through

the implementation of Integrated Pest
Management is within the realm of
agriculture. This management allows for
more low-cost and effective control
options for dealing with pests. This can
be the cost effective solution for those
that are producing crops.

The most essential part of Integrated

Pest
Management
(IPM)
is
monitoring. This is the only way to
ensure that the implemented strategy is
working. But this part of IPM is very
time
consuming
and
costly.
Monitoring systems have to be
examined at all times and constantly
evaluated. Therefore it is not a feasible
solution to all pest problems. It can
work in certain situations, but not all
pest problems can be monitored this
closely as this method requires.

Benefits to the Public

Integrated Pest Management has the
ability to offer benefits to the public as
a whole. People will be able to lessen
the risk of exposure to toxins that are
used to control pests. If Integrated Pest
Management is adopted, the use of
pesticides will lower dramatically,
therefore the pests will be controlled in
alternative ways that are not as harmful
to the general public.
Invasive Species Management
Pros

Cons

It has Mechanical control. This

method of removing species from
that ecosystem works because it
removes species quickly and easily
from their invasive environment.

Mechanical control can be costly,

especially in areas that dont have the
necessary funds or resources to support
this method. Mechanical control also takes
a long time.

Another method is Biological

control. This method involves
isolating and later releasing a new
species into an environment that
may be affected by the invasive
species, it is meant to help dwindle
the population of the invasive
species.

Biological control can go wrong, by

introducing a new species into a new
habitat it can take over. A good example of
this is the Cane Toad that was introduced
to control the population of the Cane
Beetle, but not did it only eat the beetle,
but also other native wildlife.

Chemical Control is a fast and easy

way to bring about change. It
usually refers to spraying pesticide
or herbicide over the affected area. It
is less costly, and prevents invasive
species from ruining the new
ecosystem.

Chemical control can have an impact of an

environment other than its own. Chemical
from herbicides and pesticide tend to
spread from the area they are used,
therefore contaminating the area around it.
This contamination can affect the
organisms that live in the newly
contaminated area caused by the spread of
the previous one.