What's the most thrilling/magical/enchanting engagement you've had with the non-human world?
And part II, is "saving nature" something we should concern ourselves with? Why, or why not?

When I first read this question, I was surprised about how hard I had to think about my "non-human" experiences with nature. It's unfortunate that most of these experiences are so "enchanting" because they're so rare in our lifetimes. I am lucky enough to have had many opportunities to experience some really spectacular scenes in my life so far. One of the most memorable for me however was my time spent in the Rainforest in Ecuador. I spent two weeks in the cloud forest on an ecological reserve in Maquipucuna, Ecuador. This protected area was thousands of hectares in diameter and was only inhabited by small communities few and far between. I traveled there with a class of fellow students studying eco-tourism and bio-engineering. In order to get to where we were staying, we had to hike through the rainforest for 10 wet, muddy, and muscle-tiring hours, and it was one of the best experiences of my life. The species and things I saw that day were uncomparable to anything else. I saw a glowing round worm that was up to a meter long, a leaf the size of door, bird and plant species that I didn't even think existed -- it was all incredible!. Being throw into a natural environment where you are by no means the dominating species is quite humbling. From spotting Tucans on the highest tree branch, waking up early to the symphony of birds and the flitting up hummingbirds, showering and washing your clothes outdoors, bathing in the river, hand-picking coffee beans, and planting trees on the forest path, it's hard to not feel connected to the world around you. This experience truly was a defining moment in my life. The kind where you reflect on the things that are most important and where you really begin to understand the meaning of an "ecosystem" filled with thousands of species of plants and animals.

So do I think we should concern ourselves with "saving" nature? Absolutely. But, like Bill McKibben, I do also think we need to be realistic about the loss we've already incurred and the loss we will incur in the coming years. Environmental change will take a long time even if we're on the right track. And since we haven't found that path quite yet, it will be even longer. I wish that we could just put a big net around everything we want to protect, but the truth is that the world's ecosystems are still organisms that are affected by everything around them, good and bad. As much as I would like to think that we are going to make swift changes to our lifestyles, I know that isn't true. So what do we decide to protect and how? I think that what we need to worry about is not necessarily individual species (although the token ones do pull on our heart strings) but the health of ecosystems as a whole. What can we do to make sure this ecosystem isn't degraded to the point where it is affecting our climate and global temperatures? I truly believe that everybody needs to start looking at the BIGGER picture. I hope that one day, a child 100 years from now can trudge through the Rainforest and spot a colorful Tucan, but realistically, I know it's not about that one species, protecting the "natural environment" is about slowly replacing our toxic habits with better ones. All animals are creatures of habit, and as such, we hate change. Change for anyone is very difficult, so it's hard for me to imagine everybody being willing to change what they feel they are entitled to. The only way people will change is if they are forced to change through infrastructure. How long that will take is very difficult to predict.