Environmental Hazards of Sprawl

A two-story home with red shutters and a white picket fence has always been the American dream for families all across the nation. This dream seemed to come to life in a big way in the 1950's when people moved from the urban cities and started to migrate into the surrounding suburbs. In these picture perfect neighborhoods, children could play in the yard or the driveway safely and families had the space and privacy they never could have in city dwellings. Things seemed to be great and more and more people moved out of the city in search of that family friendly lifestyle. However, as people headed for the suburbs, the city was abandoned and left to crumble. The idea of sprawl seems to be great in that families each have their own little piece of land to live on in the suburbs, but with the low-density large land area living comes great negative consequences. One such result of sprawl has been its detrimental impact on the environment. Urban sprawl creates many problems for both wildlife and plant life and destroys vital natural resources needed for the survival of all.

One major disadvantage of sprawl can be seen almost immediately after development begins to start in a suburban area. When homes are built on what was once a forest, it destroys the homes for the hundreds of thousands of animals that lived in those woods. Cutting down trees and clearing out land naturally gives animals no place to go. These animals then have to find a new place to live or else get killed trying to survive in the suburbs. When animals have no place to go, some species get killed off because they have no way of surviving outside of the forest. This is bad for the ecosystem because that species shaped the way the land ran. Without the species there, whatever function they could have done, such as eating leaves to clear out the forest to keep it from becoming too dense, will not be done anymore. In addition to shaping the way a forest looked, that species might have fed on a smaller species, thus controlling the population, and keeping it from becoming too big. Populations of animals become thrown off and the delicate balance of nature is way off key. "Around lakeshores, those effects [of sprawl] can include loss of ground-nesting birds, green frogs, wood turtles, and loss of habitat for fish as lakeshore residents clear away aquatic vegetation and woody debris" (Ecological).

One such example of this has been the recent observation that the goose population of Canada and the United States has gotten to be out of control. When trees were cut down to make way for homes, the geese lost the natural habitat that they were familiar with. When residents first moved into these new suburban areas geese were under control and their population was not too high. However, people started to make little nests for the geese and left pools or tubs of water out for them as well. "Many citizens put up nests and tubs and put out water. Instead of doing their normal migration, the geese started living in urban areas" (Porter). When the geese saw these accommodations made for them, naturally they became attracted to this kind of habitat and started to move into the suburbs, instead of migrating as they naturally do. Another problem with them was that all of their natural predators were nowhere to be found because of the deforestation in the areas where the geese resided. With the combination of a ready made home, and a lack of predators, the goose population was free to multiply and now is greater than it ever was before. Obviously abundance in one population and a lack of another population tends to throw the ecosystem off. It changes the patterns that nature intended and has bad consequences for everyone that lives in the area.

In addition to the creating an overpopulation of species, such as what is happening with the geese, sprawl also endangers species and drives them near extinction. Environmental groups estimate that about 1,200 species are at risk for becoming extinct due to deforestation. "The National Wildlife Federation, Smart Growth America and NatureServe projected that over the next 25 years, more than 22,000 acres of natural resources and habitat will be lost to development in 35 of the largest and most rapidly growing metropolitan areas" (Associated Press). In these metropolitan cities, about 553 of the 1,200 species are only found in these areas. This means that as the natural habitats are destroyed, the number of animals living in these areas will also be destroyed. "'The bottom line is that these species are at risk of extinction due to habitat destruction,' said John Kostyack, a National Wildlife Federation attorney and report co-author. 'And in these metro areas, the leading cause of habitat destruction is sprawl - development of homes and office buildings and roads in outlying forests and farm fields'" (Associated Press). When more and more animals become extinct, it will completely alter nature. The natural diversity that exists within the wildlife found in nature will be destroyed, which will cause problems for all other animals that do survive. Without certain species there, the key functions that they once performed will no longer be done. This will cause certain other animals to be thrown off balance, and further drive more species to extinction. In the natural forests, every animal relies on thousands of other animals in order to live in harmony. Once one animal species is out of the picture, other animals will soon follow. "The building of roads, homes, and businesses, along with a change in the overall land use, can fragment areas and pose a threat to biodiversity in animal populations as their habitats are diminished, blocking feeding areas and altering migration patterns" (Environmental).

Although some areas have completely destroyed the forests to make way for development, others have chosen to leave some of the forest intact and build around it or just through it. Although this may seem like a good solution over just getting rid of the woods completely, it has been shown to cause just as serious of a problem as deforestation has. "Forest Fragmentation" is the name given to this kind of practice. Areas with larges forests are chopped up into smaller and smaller areas as roads and walkways are paved through them to accommodate for the growing human population. This causes a once large forest to be divided into two smaller forests. As more development occurs, more fragmentation occurs and pretty soon the forests are being diminished into halves, thirds, fourths and so on until there is practically nothing left at all. "Nine national forests and grasslands are projected to experience substantial increases in housing density on at least 25 percent of adjacent private land" (USDA). On another note, if forests are not completely destroyed, the areas left intact are so small they cannot provide for the populations that once existed in a larger area. Obviously, this is no better than chopping down the whole forest in the first place. Animals are still left with no place to go and species become extinct. "Increased fragmentation due to urban development poses a threat to biodiversity primarily in animal populations, as their habitats are chopped up (fragmented) into smaller and smaller pieces" (Barry).

Sprawl has also changed the natural movement of water that we drink and rely upon for our everyday usage. In nature, water that rains down or is used by animals and humans is filtered into the ground, where it gets purified and set into the water table to be used again. In this way, our resources are recycled and stay abundant. This kind of land area is called a wetland. However, with more and more natural land being developed and built upon, it is becoming harder and harder for water to get absorbed into the ground. This has drastically altered the quality of water and has had some severe impacts on people living in these developed areas. Polluted water that has been used is no longer able to get recycled into the ground because there are streets and sidewalks blocking the natural absorption. "In cities and suburbs, however, pavement and other covered surfaces are not able to absorb rain or runoff. Water gathers on the surface and runs off into the waterways, carrying pollutants - such as gas, oils, and fertilizers - along the way" (Environmental). Obviously this is also dangerous for the wildlife living in these bodies of water. Water that is polluted is not a healthy environment for marine life that depends on water to live in. It also makes it dangerous for people to drink or swim in these bodies of water. "Runoff from such impervious surfaces is the largest uncontrolled source of water pollution in the nation according to the Environmental Protection Agency" (Johnson). Because less water is being absorbed and filtered into the water table, there is less fresh water for people to consume. In addition to a lesser amount of available water, home built on natural wetlands will also be susceptible to flooding. If the water from the environment naturally sinks back into the land, there is no flooding that will take place. However, as mentioned earlier, obstacles such as pavement and gravel prevent the water from returning to the earth. This causes a slow buildup of water and when heavy rains come down, the homes in these areas become flooded. Flooding is a serious problem because it causes a lot of financial loss as homes are destroyed. In addition to that, it destroys the homes of many species, giving them no where to turn as is commonly seen with deforestation. It creates negative side affects for everyone and everything living in the community.

Although the idea of a suburban paradise seems both inviting and tempting, people have to ask themselves if it is really worth the risk of dramatically altering our environment. Sprawl has some advantages to living in the city such as wide open spaces and better neighborhoods, but it also has some negative side effects as well. All of America was at one time just forests and plains. As more and more people immigrated here, cities sprang up to give all these people homes. This development naturally destroyed some forests, but all the land outside of the city was left intact for wildlife to live on and water to recharge. When people started to move outside of the city and developed homes in the suburbs, more and more land was taken away from animals. That is when the idea of sprawl began and with this phenomenon came the disastrous outcome for both animals and water quality. It is clearly evident that this kind of lifestyle is damaging for our world. People must stop and look at what is happening around them and see that deforestation, forest fragmentation, and loss of quality water is both harmful and wrong. Now that people are aware of the harmful effects of sprawl, developers and communities should look for ways to stop these trends and try to reverse some of the damage in order to make this world a peaceful place where all species can exist peacefully and harmoniously.

Works Cited

Associated Press. "Groups: Urban Sprawl Threatens Species." MSNBC. 11 January 2005. 15 November 2007. < http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6814251>.

Barry, Patrick L. "Urban Sprawl: the Big Picture." Science @ NASA. 11 October 2002. 28 November 2007. < http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/11oct_sprawl.htm>.

Ecological Society of America. "Housing: Location Key with Environmentally Friendly Cluster Developments." ScienceDaily 26 October 2007. 28 November 2007 .

Environmental Literacy Council. "Urban Sprawl." Environmental Literacy Council. 7 November 2007. 28 November 2007. .

Johnson, William A. "Sprawl Development and Watershed Quality." City of Rochester, NY. 28 October 1998. 15 November 2007. .

Porter, Sara. "GeesePeace Helps 'Down' Size Geese Population." The Current Online. 18 February 2002. 15 November 2007. .

USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. "Housing Development on the Rise Near National Forests." ScienceDaily 27 October 2007. 16 November 2007 .