Book 2

Title of the Book (in italics when typed, underlined when written)	Ocean Pollution: Effects on Living Resources and Humans
Author(s) or Editor	Carl J. Sindermann
Publisher	CRC Press Inc.
Year of Publication	1996
City of Publication	Boca Raton
Mode of Access (Print if you read the actual book, Electronic if you found it online, or through your kindle/nook/ereader):	Electronic
Eddition if indicated:	N/A

FIVE FACTS FROM THE SOURCE (Embedded):

In the introduction, Sindermann states that "reasonable evidence exists to demonstrate that pollution of coastal waters of the world is increasing" (1).

Sindermann also analyzes sources to come to the conclusion that, "it is obvious that pollutants and other man made changes constitute only one of the total array of factors- physical, chemical, and biological- that impinge on fish populations" (10).

Sindermann also believes that the problem is growing by saying, "there has been a gradual increase in the extent of polluted coastline/estuarine waters" (20).

Furthermore, Sindermann states that, "sublethal effects of pollutants may take many forms- physiological, biochemical, behavioral, and psychological" (20).

Summary of Source (Three-Four Sentences of the Who, What, Where, Why, and How in your own words. NO OPINION):

This book provides a factual scientific point of view of the problem of marine pollution. It looks at statical evidence suggesting the harm that humans are causing to the environment. In addition, it discusses the effects that this pollution is having on wildlife, from diseases to adaptations.


Credibility of Source:
Author or Editor: Who is the author? What training have they had? If there is no author, examine the editor.
Attachment: Does the author or editor have anything to gain from writing this, or is it simply informative?


The author gains nothing from writing this article.


Bias: Do you detect a bias (a favoring of either side) in the author's writing?

There is no bias.


References: Does the author cite references in the writing? If so, do these add or take away from the credibility?

The author uses research and facts which add to the author's credibility. 

Use of Source: How will you use this source in your project?

I will use this source to provide factual evidence and a scientific point of view in my paper.

Book 1

Title of the Book (in italics when typed, underlined when written)	Library of the Oceans: the Future of the Ocean
Author(s) or Editor	Ellen Dupont
Publisher	Grolier Educational
Year of Publication	1998
City of Publication	Danbury
Mode of Access (Print if you read the actual book, Electronic if you found it online, or through your kindle/nook/ereader):	Print
Eddition if indicated:	N/A

FIVE FACTS FROM THE SOURCE (Embedded):

In the opening of the book it is stated that, "the oceans are on of the world's richest resources, providing not only food but also medicines, energy, fuel, and minerals. Yet even the seas have their limits. As humans greedily exploit the oceans' riches, they threaten to ruin this vital source of life for ever." (6).

The book's first chapter opens by stating that, "Overfishing has dramatically reduced stocks of some important food fish; pollution has destroyed marine life, infected human food, and killed people" (8)

This book provides a stance which believes that "fishing methods have grown so advanced and catches so large that the ery existence of some marine species is threatened" (22).

The book goes on to provide an alarming fact that "the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization [reports], about 70 percent of global fish stocks are dangerously low" (24).

In one of the most alarming instinces of humans taking advantage of the ocean's natural resources, the book also states "young fur seals are clubbed to death in the Pribilof islands of Alaska" (25).

Summary of Source (Three-Four Sentences of the Who, What, Where, Why, and How in your own words. NO OPINION):

This book analyzes the different effects that humans are having on the oceans. It descrbies different changes happening from whales becoming endangered to overfishing. It provides details of what humans are doing to cause each of these things and why.

Credibility of Source:
Author or Editor: Who is the author? What training have they had? If there is no author, examine the editor.

The editor, Ellen Dupont, was in charge of accumulating all the information in this work.

Attachment: Does the author or editor have anything to gain from writing this, or is it simply informative? 


The editor has nothing to gain from this, except for keeping her job. 


Bias: Do you detect a bias (a favoring of either side) in the author's writing? 

There is no bias. 


References: Does the author cite references in the writing? If so, do these add or take away from the credibility?

There are no references. 

Use of Source: How will you use this source in your project?

I plan to use this source to provide historical and factual evidence in my paper and presentation.

Interview

Interviewer: Fionn Gilliland
Interviewee: Monica Figueroa, President of Heal L.A.

1. What does the growing amount of pollution in the ocean mean to you?


Response: The growing amount of pollution in the ocean breaks my heart. Not only does it directly affect me today, but it also affects all marine life as well as all future generations. Everything is interconnected on this planet, the fact that this is a growing problem and only a few people are trying to fix it is truly depressing.

2. In what ways are you involved with this growing problem?


Response: I have actually started a club on campus (Heal L.A.), we spend every other saturday morning of each month cleaning the beach. In the past 18 months we have picked up over 8000 pieces of trash.

3. What first hand experience do you have with the problem?


Response:  As a California resident I love spending my summer at the beach, but over the years I have noticed that the amount of trash on the beach has increased. Frankly, swimming with trash is not very fun.

4. How long have you felt this was a problem?


Response: I've felt that this has been a problem for about three years now.

5. How long have you been working on fixing this problem?


Response: I founded Heal L.A. about 18 months ago, so 18 months.

6. Do you think this is a serious problem or is it something that we can wait until later to deal with?


Response: This is definitely something that can't wait. The problem has gone untouched for so long that if we want to make a change, we need to work fast, before it's too late. The pollution in the ocean is associated with other ecosystems as well. Especially with trash that isn't biodegradable.

7. What are your thoughts on how to improve this problem?


Response: Well i think that people should be a little more responsible with their waste. Trying to reduce their waste production, or simply buying "green" could really make a difference. If every person on this planet, picked up one piece of random trash a day, we would be living in a much more sanitary world.

8. What are your thoughts on why people think this is not a serious problem?


Response: Most people don't think that pollution in the ocean doesn't affect them. The ugly truth is, that it affects everyone. All of that trash has to go somewhere, all of those chemical compounds have to end up somewhere else. Whether its trash washing up on the shore or an increase in the sanitary conditions of this planet, pollution affects everyone. People need to start looking at the bigger picture, not just with themselves in it but with future generations of both animals and humans. This world doesn't belong to one given species, we have to respect that.

online source 5

“Specific Page Title or Article Title”	"Effects of Oil Spills on Marine Life"
Primary Contributor to the Website (if given) (author, editor, producer, etc)	Jennifer Kennedy
Title of the Entire Website (not www. )	Marine Life
Publisher or Sponsoring Organization of the website (if given)	About
Date Page was Last Revised	N/A
Date You Read It	15 February 2012
<URL address> (ALL of it)	http://marinelife.about.com/od/conservation/tp/effectsofoilspills.htm

FIVE FACTS FROM THE SOURCE (Embedded): EX: The article cites Maria Nikolajeva, a professor of at Cambridge, as saying that Bella does not "in any way promote independent thinking or personal development" in women, instead portraying a woman "meek and willing to do anything for her vampire boyfriend" (POV).

While talking about the effects of oil spills on marine life, the author says, "When a bird gets coated with oil, the feathers lose their insulating ability and the bird could die from hypothermia" describing one of the main ways that oil spills kill marine birds.

The author describes particularly effects saying, "effects include ulcers and damage to red blood cells, kidneys, livers, and the immune system" describing how the animals can die a painful death from living in a habitat contaminated by oil.

Furthermore, the article says that the oil might not even get the chance to poison the animals because, "oil can weigh down feathers and fur, making it difficult for animals to escape from predators,"

In addition to killing many animals in the ecosystems, oil systems further harm the population due to the fact that "oil can also cause disruption of reproductive hormones and behavioral changes that lead to reduced reproduction rates or affect the care of the young."

Summary of Source (Three-Four Sentences of the Who, What, Where, Why, and How in your own words. NO OPINION):

The article describes the effects of oil spills on marine life. It uses specific examples such as the BP oil spill. It also goes into detail describe specific effects on animals such as poisoning and reproductive harm.

Credibility of Source:
Author or Site: Who is the author? What training have they had? If there is no author, examine the site. What is the purpose of the site? Who funds the site?

The author has worked in the field for 14 years. She also has a BS in natural resources from Cornell.

Attachment: Does the author or site have anything to gain from writing this, or is it simply informative? For example, is it a cigarette business posting an article about the benefit of cigarettes, or is it a scientific community unaffiliated with the cigarette business?

The author has no personal gain from this article, she wrote it to inform readers of the harmful effects of oil spills.

Bias: Do you detect a bias (a favoring of either side) in the author's writing?

There is no bias, the author states only factual information on what happens to animals as a result of oil spills.

References: Does the author cite references in the writing? If so, do these add or take away from the credibility?

The author does not cite references, but provides links for further research.

Use of Source: How will you use this source in your project?

I plan to use this source to describe in more detail the effects of oil spills as one specific type of pollution in the ocean.

online source 4

“Specific Page Title or Article Title”	"Human's Impact on the Oceans"
Primary Contributor to the Website (if given) (author, editor, producer, etc)	N/A
Title of the Entire Website (not www. )	Marine Science
Publisher or Sponsoring Organization of the website (if given)	N/A
Date Page was Last Revised	19 August 2006
Date You Read It	15 February 2012
<URL address> (ALL of it)	http://www.marinebio.net/marinescience/06future/olhum.htm

FIVE FACTS FROM THE SOURCE (Embedded):

The article states that "Beaches all over the world become littered with the trash produced by mankind - much of which is disposed of at sea and then floats all over the world in the currents," condemning the dumping of trash in the ocean, as it can destroy ecosystems thousands of miles away.

One of the worst forms of pollution in the ocean is brought to attention when the article says "Oil spills initially may kill large numbers of marine life ," showing the horrible effects that oil spills can have on ocean environments.

The article also bring attention to a less well known ocean pollutant, "Pesticides, coming from runoff of agricultural land into the ocean damages marine organisms" describing the effects that chemicals can have on the marine life.

In addition, the article talks about a more recent form of pollution in the ocean, "Several studies have shown that the noise produced by boats interferes with many species of marine life" informing the reader of various ways that noise in the ocean is harming marine wildlife.

Also, the article believes that humans are destroying natural marine habitats and, "leaving the marine creatures without a suitable habitat in which to live," which is harming the populations of certain marine animals.

Summary of Source (Three-Four Sentences of the Who, What, Where, Why, and How in your own words. NO OPINION):

The article describes the various ways in which humans are harming or destroying the oceans. It gives examples such as sewage, litter, oil spills, and habitat destruction. It also gives specific examples of places such as Morro Bay that are being affected by humans.

Credibility of Source:
Author or Site: Who is the author? What training have they had? If there is no author, examine the site. What is the purpose of the site? Who funds the site?

The site's specific purpose is to provide facts about marine science. It is a nonprofit organization whose goal is to spread awareness about the oceans.

Attachment: Does the author or site have anything to gain from writing this, or is it simply informative? For example, is it a cigarette business posting an article about the benefit of cigarettes, or is it a scientific community unaffiliated with the cigarette business?

The article is purely informative and the site gains nothing from writing it.

Bias: Do you detect a bias (a favoring of either side) in the author's writing?

The article does not have a bias, because it reports only facts about what is happening.

References: Does the author cite references in the writing? If so, do these add or take away from the credibility?

They do not cite references, but they do cite events that have happened that have had an effect on the ocean. This adds to their credibility because the events that are cited are good supporting evidence.

Use of Source: How will you use this source in your project?

I plan to use this source to provide evidence of specific ways in which the oceans have been damaged by pollution, using the events in the article as evidence.

Online source 3

“Specific Page Title or Article Title”	"Pollution in Freshwater Ecosystems"
Primary Contributor to the Website (if given) (author, editor, producer, etc)	N/A
Title of the Entire Website (not www. )	Biology Online
Publisher or Sponsoring Organization of the website (if given)	N/A
Date Page was Last Revised	January 1, 2000
Date You Read It	February 3, 2012
<URL address> (ALL of it)	http://www.biology-online.org/6/17_pollution.htm

FIVE FACTS FROM THE SOURCE (Embedded):

The article is opened by stating "As with all ecosystems, the existence and operations of human society inevitably have an effect on the way of life in a freshwater community," arguing that humans will always have an effect on ecosystems.

The article continues to say, "For each action that man takes in this lifestyle, there is a resultant effect on the ecosystem," stating that almost everything we do affects the ecosystem, not just the widely publicized polluters.

By stating, "we are upsetting the fine balance of the ecosystem as a whole, which then has a knock on effect on other organisms living in that particular ecosystem." the article is trying to persuade readers to be more conscious with their actions and the consequences they may have on wildlife.

The article argues that "human action results in a response from the ecosystem, either physically or chemically, which in the long run affects the lives of organisms that live in these communities" implying that even if we can physically see any damage, there could still be damage being caused by human pollution.

Summary of Source (Three-Four Sentences of the Who, What, Where, Why, and How in your own words. NO OPINION):

This article examines the effect that hmans have on ecosystems. It provides examples of human behavior that causes detrimental effects on organisms living in ecosystems, particularly in freshwater ecosystems. It goes on to say that humans should be more considerate with how they expose of their waste and treat the environment.

Credibility of Source:
Author or Site: Who is the author? What training have they had? If there is no author, examine the site. What is the purpose of the site? Who funds the site?

The site is an imformational biology site. It has no personal gain from the article, and its main goal is to be educational.

Attachment: Does the author or site have anything to gain from writing this, or is it simply informative? For example, is it a cigarette business posting an article about the benefit of cigarettes, or is it a scientific community unaffiliated with the cigarette business?

This article is purely informative. The website has no benefit from this article except for educating readers.

Bias: Do you detect a bias (a favoring of either side) in the author's writing?

There is no bias, the article provides facts on what is happening to the ecosystem and why.

References: Does the author cite references in the writing? If so, do these add or take away from the credibility?


There are no references. This slightly takes away from the arguments since there is no evidence to support the claims.


Use of Source: How will you use this source in your project?

I will use this source to provide facts and evidence of how pollution is negatively affecting our ecosystem, particularly in freshwater ecosystems.

online source 2

“Specific Page Title or Article Title”	"How Does Pollution Affect all Living Things"
Primary Contributor to the Website (if given) (author, editor, producer, etc)	Bethany Wieman
Title of the Entire Website (not www. )	National Geographic Student Expeditions
Publisher or Sponsoring Organization of the website (if given)	National Geographic
Date Page was Last Revised	N/A
Date You Read It	February 3, 2012
<URL address> (ALL of it)	http://greenliving.nationalgeographic.com/pollution-affect-living-things-including-humans-2193.html

FIVE FACTS FROM THE SOURCE (Embedded):

Wieman states that "contaminants can have dire effects on entire ecosystems, making life more difficult for humans, plants and animals," bringing to attention the fact that pollution is not only affecting the ecosystem, but also humans.

The article describes the chain effect of contaminants by stating "Some toxins, like mercury, settle onto plants and into water sources that are then consumed by animals. The health effects of these poisons are then magnified up the food chain," describing how toxins that affect animals will affect everything all the way up to humans.

While talking about pollutions effect on water systems, she says that water "is easily contaminated by agricultural runoff, mining activities, waste treatment plants and improperly disposed-of industrial waste," which provides examples of the most common ways that freshwater ecosystems are damaged.

The article goes on to describe how litter affects the environment by saying "Street litter washes into storm drains, into our waterways and ultimately ends up in the ocean," and describes how ocean animals die because of litter in their habitats.

Furthermore, Wieman provides evidence of pollution in plants by saying, "Plants grown in contaminated soil take up the hazardous substances through their roots. Humans or animals that ingest these plants may get sick," describing the negative effects of polluted soil.

Summary of Source (Three-Four Sentences of the Who, What, Where, Why, and How in your own words. NO OPINION):

Wieman explains the different kinda of pollution that society creates in the environment. She describes the effect that each kind of polution has and gives a description of each kind. She states where the pollution usually comes from and cites sources to back up her claims.

Credibility of Source:
Author or Site: Who is the author? What training have they had? If there is no author, examine the site. What is the purpose of the site? Who funds the site?

Wieman is a writer for the media. She is experienced at providing facts without personal opinion.

Attachment: Does the author or site have anything to gain from writing this, or is it simply informative? For example, is it a cigarette business posting an article about the benefit of cigarettes, or is it a scientific community unaffiliated with the cigarette business?

The author does not seem to have anything to gain from writing this, it seems to be very factualy and does not provide any personal gain to the author.

Bias: Do you detect a bias (a favoring of either side) in the author's writing?

There is no bias, the author provides factualy information and does not talk from an opinionated standpoint.

References: Does the author cite references in the writing? If so, do these add or take away from the credibility?


The author cites 6 different sources to back up her claims ranging from the EPA to the American Journal of Epidemiology.


Use of Source: How will you use this source in your project?

I plan on using this source to distinguish the different causes and effects from different sources of pollution and what each does to the ecosystem.