Let’s Save Planet Earth’s Species Before It Is Too Late, Starting With South Africa's Wildlife.

South Africa is a country known for its exotic animals and beautiful safaris. However, from the beginning of the 20^th century, their wild-lands have been notorious for seeing a rise in illegal hunting activity, or poaching for ivory. This form of violence has created a ripple effect that has plummeted much of the wild animal count in the region. Popular animals like the tiger, African elephant, and African rhino are some key species experiencing a critical drop in population from the beginning of the century due to the rise in poaching activity. According to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s red list of threatened species, the tiger is listed under the endangered category while the African elephant and African rhino are considered critically endangered.

Credits: Earth Times

            In 2012, according to DoSomething.org, 668 African rhinos were documented to have been poached in South Africa, with tusks completed removed. By January 2013, that number had risen to 946, bringing the average count to two rhino slaughters per day. Sadly, by the end of 2014, that same number had reached 1,215 deaths.

But because of thoughtful organizations like The African Rhino Specialist Group (an international committee for the protection of African rhinos) now, combating poaching activity and the rapid decline in wildlife has become easier. Conservationists have luckily been able to sustain and initiate growing numbers in rhinos as of 2017, according to savetherhinos.org. 

Credits: True Activist

The African elephant in South Africa may prove to be in a more dire situation long term, however, with a total documented number of 100,000 kills per year in the 1980s, according to WWF Global. This violence has caused, in some regions of the world, a whopping 80% loss in elephant herds in the wild, and represents the total international loss of this particular breed of elephant on the African continent.

Credits: www.tusk.org

According to the National Geographic, much of the income made through illegal ivory poaching and selling is being reinforced in the market by youngsters from low to middle income level families who use ivory purchases as a means to project an image of wealth. Many a time, the ramifications of illegal trade often become down-played or at least thought of to be less concerning or as impactful as they truly are by people who mindlessly take part in this viciously cruel industry. 

Credits: https://bringbackbigcats.wordpress.com/

Similar to the animals being poached for ivory, tigers in Africa have also been in a rapid decline since 2010. According to PoachingFacts.com, 50 tigers were killed for their fur in 2016. Although tiger poaching statistics seem not as drastic in number as elephant or rhino instances, there are merely 3,890 tigers left in the wild which makes 50 kills a truly significant loss. 

Much of what is considered to be quality fashion nowadays are high prices, novelty items, and limited editions that seek to display vanity. Ivory has been thought of for decades as prestigious and rare. The concern with humans classifying ivory to be highly desired materialistically is the heinous butchering of wild animals that must occur for that specific commercial gain.

 The most important misconception that must soon begin to turn itself around is that there is next to no prestige in the violent slaughtering of innocent animals. This conscious awareness must be brought to the attention and understanding of all humans. Activists who care about these animals should do more to teach the public of the harmful effects that the buying of ivory and fur can do to the already dying population of these majestic animals in the wild. According to One Green Planet, the planet's ecosystem is extremely sensitive and the food chain is being drastically altered because of past poaching activities in certain regions. 
No innocent animal that belongs to the life of this planet should be slaughtered for materialistic human satisfaction anymore.  

The injustice of college meal plans

Are college and university meal plans being fair to hard-working, hungry students? Some say no. Full time undergraduates are having to succumb to quick fixes of harmful carbs and sugars, because sadly, there is an abundance of the unhealthy, the deep-fried, the sweet, the savoury, and the fluffy, as opposed to high-fibre, non-GMO foods in countless college cafeterias nationwide. 

Credits: www.uncyclopedia.wikia.com

According to the Chef Ann Foundation, a college student’s diet tends to be a common area that suffers first and foremost when thrust in a college environment. Students begin to experience the triumphs and failures of coping with class schedules, practice hours, and the calling of extracurricular activities. 
In many ways, making smart and often times appropriate decisions in terms of food choice might be a rigorous task.
Furthermore, students are having to, despite pre-paying their meal plans, fight high prices, low portions, long lines, and receive less than they initially invest in. Food is essential to life, so healthy food must be essential to a healthy life. Restaurants, cafeterias and fast food chains of tomorrow must make it a priority to push this epidemic in another direction.
University of the Cumberlands is also no stranger to any of this injustice. Students at UC are given three meal swipes per day and a choice between only two (three for dinner) dining locations on campus. Surely there must be a way to expand that number, so that almost 2,000 in-house residents have more variety when needing to fuel their bodies and minds.
Maria Ochoa is a UC junior, tennis player, Californian native, and vegan who describes the difficulty of staying healthy while competing in college level sports. “Food options are somewhat limited because there aren’t many vegans here,” says Ochoa. “Rarely there will be pasta and marinara sauce without any meat. There is always the salad bar, but trying to replenish my body as an athlete with processed junk food everywhere isn’t going to be as effective as what organic foods could do.”According to the San Francisco Gate, organic food is grown without the extra synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, and are generally thought to be safe to consume for everybody. But processed food can often times come in both the non-organic and organic form, by way of greens and vegetables even. 
This process allows manufacturing companies to save on production costs, by using preservatives in foods to keep them from expiring, and sadly, cafeterias all across the nation are accepting these altered foods with open arms because, economically, they have no choice but to do so.

Credits: granted4u.wordpress.com

---------------------------------------------

 The solution to this problem is simple, and would fix long lines and the need for easy, ready-made foods. UC has the ability to connect with the local community, farmers, churches, and local restaurants to either bring in healthy food, or ask for the help of the community by expanding the student meal plan to include local restaurants or food chains. The problem is a lack of communication and care for the health and wellness of UC’s student body. 

More can and must be done to properly feed a nation’s growing generation.However, smaller schools with farming degrees like Warren Wilson College in Swannanoa, North Carolina have begun to plant their own meals to feed the entire student population, according to Livability.com. Despite WWC only having 850 students to UC’s 2,000 and growing, I’d still urge health fanatics and lovers of pure food alike to reason that being located in one of North America’s finest states for soil should surely count for something when asking the question of how to satisfactorily feed vegan students like Maria in Kentucky.
Apart from limiting food options for students with a different food-culture, UC's system of selling and supplying food through the student meal plan is also an aspect of student living that needs some upgrading. Students are required to eat in three specific time frames that count for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Any meals uncalled for within these set times get deducted from the daily allowance of three swipes, or three portions. 
UC sophomore and Brazilian native Leonardo Couto disagrees with this system saying, "This semester is hard for me, I have class [on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays] from 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. and [the cafeteria] closes at 1:30 p.m., so I always have to miss lunch." 

Do Guns Serve a Purpose?

Gun control in the United States has been a never-ending battle of ideals, freedoms, and virtues. The dilemma of gun safety has somewhat divided this great country in half. Some have claimed it their liberty and right to own and administer a registered firearm for recreational or self-defense purposes, while others believe guns to be a dangerous and potentially life threatening weapon (and should by no means be tolerated for public purchase or use). 

Credits: New York Daily News

Unfortunately for the gun-control predicament, recreational hunting is a deeply rooted tradition in America’s history. 

Those who oppose guns typically do not hunt game in this country. But regions well-known for their pride in the hunting culture, states like Georgia, South Carolina, Texas, Kentucky, and Kansas according to WideOpenSpaces.com, have predominantly favored this sport. Recreational hunting truly is a pastime that a significant number of Americans have come to live by and identify with. In many ways, traditional America has turned the practice into a self-justified means to keeping guns. But perhaps limiting firearms to only public safety officials purely for protection purposes, and stripping hunting families of their right to shoot, would prove equivalent to snatching a pacifier out of a baby’s mouth.The most concerning question is whether or not the public should be given the opportunity to buy, load, and fire guns in the first place. Many agree that possessing firearms, or at least having the ability to purchase one if need be, is a form of self-defense, an act of freedom untouchable by the Second Amendment Rights. Could the term “self-defence” be perhaps loosely used, though?

Credits: www.history.com

According to The Injury Control Research Center at The Harvard School of Public Health, many more Americans use firearms to “intimidate rather than for self-defence purposes.” The term ‘self-defence’, according to HSPH’s 2015 study on gun threats, is invalid by the sheer inconsistency of hard facts (meaning any fool could shoot a gun and say it was because he felt threatened or scared). 
Furthermore, let’s imagine a world where public safety officials were the only authorities allowed to possess and use firearms, while psychopathic criminals made do instead with butcher knives in attempts to massacre 40 school children and their teachers. Deaths by firearms would more or less diminish over-night, if this were the case.

Photo from Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting, December 2012 - credits: ABC7 News.

Let’s also imagine that in this perfectly safe world, as soon as the psychopath enters the school building and stabs a child, 10 teachers will more than likely tackle him to the ground, grab his knife, and perhaps become badly injured, but there is still a chance of survival. 
If, however, the psychopath is given the access and freedom under the constitution to wake up one morning and enter a school building with a Remington 870, the number of lives he decides to take will depend upon how many rounds he brought with him that day.
The big question is however, what is the nation’s priority? Yes, the truth is hundreds of thousands of Americans will be affected if this great country ever bans guns from public use. 
In hindsight though, concern for the one stabbed child and the injured teacher in hospital would be a softer burden to bear than having to know that 10, 20, or perhaps 30 lives were stolen from a shooting (similar to the Sandy Hook Elementary School nightmare that occurred back in December, 2012, where 20 children and six adults were fatally killed, according to CNN). 
All we need is a chance, and the chance gets ripped from our grasps when guns are permitted, in spite of one’s intent. Humanity does not need a reason to inflict more pain upon one another and mask it behind the label of “self-defense.”

Credits: www.guns.com

The real problem at hand that should be highlighted most of all, is the sheer loss of lives by way of firearms in the last decade alone. 
According to the Smartgunlaws.org, there are at least nine lives under the age of 21 taken by a firearm every day in the U.S. 

Furthermore, in 2013, over 3,000 people under the age of 21 died from gunshot wounds; over 2,300 of those cases being homicide, and around 150 being unintentional shootings. With these horrific statistics in mind, can it be safe to presume that ridding the country of recreational firearms, and seriously limiting the public’s freedom to easily purchase a lethal weapon, would be the safer route to travel towards America’s growing future? A safe future? 
The Taylor family is just one out of the many exasperated examples as to why guns should be prohibited. A tragedy that occurred on January 13, 2017, when according to WBIR news, a mother shot and killed her husband and two daughters in their Whitley County, Kentucky home. The woman, Courtney Taylor, then proceeded to shoot at the police before being wounded in the arm and shoulder area with four bullets to take her down.

Credits: CBS News

“When I heard I was devastated,” said Haley Mahan, “I couldn’t wrap my head around why it happened.”Mahan was a friend of Jollie Taylor, the late 18-year-old who was a victim of her mother’s heinous crimes, and still remembers her friend’s smile. 
“We were so surprised; we always knew Courtney as a loving mother to her kids.”According to Marketplace.org, getting your hands on a firearm is as easy as answering a four-page, yes-no questionnaire and flashing a gun license. There really is almost no barrier between America’s ability to revert back to the days of the infamous American Outlaw Curly Bill Brocius, when the thin line between Industrialised America and the Wild West is a person’s justified views on violence and their decision to act upon it.Take away guns, and take away an evil person’s ability to commit a sinful act from afar.