Recently, in my Environmental Science class, we've been studying the effect of bio-waste

dumping and agricultural runoff on bodies of water. The nutrients from this dumping, combined with the
runoff of fertilizer from the nearby agriculture leads to the process of eutrophication, depleting the oxygen
in the water, and killing many larger organisms. The dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico is one of the most
topical examples of eutrophication in the United States. While in most cases, there would be no need to
prove the existence of the dead zone, my theoretical friend is skeptical. He seems to think that the above
average growth of algae could only correspond with an above average prosperity of the total biodiversity
and health of the ecosystem. Because of his stubborn nature, my friend sticks to his argument that if any
sort of non-predator life is flourishing, its only natural for all other species to prosper as well. The idea of
competition for resources doesn't elude him, but he does neglect to understand the idea that oxygen could
be one of those resources.
I understand and believe in the validity of eutrophication because my teacher provided examples
and explanations. My teacher, Mr. Davey, gave us multiple case studies and supporting data. With every
statistic he explained why it supported the fact that nitrate pollution has caused a dead zone. The best way
to teach my friend about eutrophication would be to mirror the efforts of my skillful and highly qualified
teacher. Of course, him being a good friend of mine, I have the privilege of being a bit more forceful in
his education.
I would begin by explaining how the changes in Agricultural practices are the primary causes of
the process. Because of agricultural practices like monoculture and the formation of monopolies, use of
chemical fertilizer has jumped, and is still on the rise. The nutrients in the fertilizer, especially nitrates,
runoff into the Mississippi-Atchafalaya River Basin, which deposits them in the Gulf of Mexico. At this
point, my friend is impatient and questions this. He seems to think that maybe the chemicals are just toxic
to the aquatic life, but still asks, Arent fertilizers supposed to help plants grow? How could more
nutrients be bad for an ecosystem? I tell him to shut up because Im not a real teacher so I can do that,
but I also explain that it is not chemical toxicity that causes the dead zone, but instead the effect of the
consequential algae blooms. By depositing nitrates into the gulf, its scarcity is no longer a limiting factor
to algae growth. Hes still puzzled, Algae is good isnt it? Fish can eat it! This is the point where I have
to explain that oxygen too, becomes a limiting factor. The increase in nitrates eliminates it as a limiting
factor, increasing algae growth, but when bacteria eat this algae, quite a bit of the water columns oxygen
supply is used up, and the total dissolved oxygen becomes a much more serious limiting factor. Without
oxygen in the water, the fish die just as we would without it. The gulf has been plagued with hypoxia.
Water in much of the gulf has less than 2 milligrams of dissolved oxygen per liter, in areas even as deep
as 60 meters. Id show him a couple graphs and tables, proving the direct relationship of nitrate
concentration and algae growth, and then the consequential inverse relationship with dissolved oxygen
and aquatic life.
This process is most fascinating because of the massive web of cause and effect. In the case of the
Gulfs dead zone, the immediate causes involve quite a bit of biology; preceding that, a quite a bit of
chemistry involved in the fertilizers; preceding that, one could assess the economic factors involved in
agribusinesss decision to use such high quantities of fertilizer, which you could trace back to the
development of agribusiness monopolies and even the historical government policies that initiated the
development of those monopolies. The most immediate effects are biological, destroying fish populations,
but that directly affect the fishing industry west of the Mississippi delta, hurting the areas economy, and
initiating government action or policies, that, if successful (or embarrassingly unsuccessful), will again
become part of popular history. The most interesting things to learn about are those that influence real
change in the world, be it for a good or bad.