This is the Environment Show. It's about our stewardship of the Earth and the beauty
and mystery of life in all its forms. The Environment Show's and National Production
may possible by the W. Alton Jones Foundation, the Packard Foundation, the Turner Foundation,
the JM Kaplan Fund and Heming's Motor News, the Bible of the Collector Carhabi,
1-800-C-A-R-H-E-R-E. Your host is Peter Burley.
Coming up on this week's Environment Show, El Nino, the warming of the South Pacific Ocean,
is occurring faster and earlier that in any time since 1982, it will affect our weather.
We talk green about seafood and your eating habits. Can we eat fish without being poisoned
or destroying the world's fish stocks? And the Earth calendar, Beluga Whales, have just
dawned shiny new white suits in Alaska. These stories and more coming up on this week's Environment Show.
On occasion, the surface temperature of the South Pacific Ocean increases substantially.
When this happens, it affects the weather here in the United States and all over the world.
When the sea water warms, an effect is created called an El Nino. Normally, this phenomenon
begins with a fall in the winter. But right now, an El Nino is forming which is stronger
and earlier than any since 1982. Dr. Jerry Bell is at the Climate Prediction Center of
the National Weather Service, and he studies the El Nino phenomenon.
Generally, during an El Nino, we see abnormally warm waters in the tropical Pacific, extending
from the Dateline to the South American coast, which is approximately 1-4 of the globe
in terms of distance. Now, take us through the process. You have this warming that occurs.
You call it an El Nino, and what happens both to the atmosphere and then to the climate?
Well, the next thing that happens is that tropical thunderstorm activity gets disrupted.
Thunderstorms like warm, just like if you're in the Midwest or somewhere a hot muggy day,
you fire up thunderstorms. Well, it's the same kind of thing in the tropics. The thunderstorms,
we get very, very deep and extensive thunderstorm activity where the warm ocean waters. The El Nino
basically reflects a change in where the waters are warmest. Therefore, we have a change in
where the tropical thunderstorm activity is. Normally, Indonesia has heavy thunderstorm
activity. During an El Nino, it's substantially reduced, and that activity is shifted well
eastward. That's the direct effect of the El Nino on the atmosphere, and that effect is
in the tropics. But what happens now is that the jet stream, which ultimately drives our weather
patterns, is partly structured the way it is because of this tropical thunderstorm activity.
Therefore, by altering the thunderstorm activity, you alter the jet stream. By altering the jet
stream, you then alter the global weather patterns because they are driven by the jet stream.
Bell says the impacts are then felt here. The El Nino affects the entire global circulation.
Over the United States, the impacts tend to be most pronounced in the winter and spring,
and that's because that's when the El Nino's tend to be strongest. Now, we're in an event now
where it's particularly strong right now, but that's not, that isn't typical. Normally,
during the winter time in the U.S., you tend to see warmer than normal temperatures throughout
southern Alaska, western Canada, cooler and wetter than normal conditions across the southern
tier of the United States. So, it would be heavier winter time rainfall and so on, down in the
southeast and Gulf Coast states. California, if they're going to have heavy rainfall or very heavy
abnormally heavy rainfall, they tend to be during an El Nino. The northern tier of the U.S.
oftentimes will be warmer than normal, although there's a little bit of variability from one event
to the next. So much, much of the North America is really influenced by the El Nino.
Dr. Bell says that El Nino generally diminishes the hurricane season in the Atlantic. Although
this year, it'll be hard to predict because of the early formation of El Nino. El Nino's
have primary impact on the entire southern half of the globe, but he says long range weather forecasting
all over is facilitated during the 12 to 18 months that an El Nino lasts.
We like when there's an El Nino because it tends to set up preferred circulation patterns,
so we get a better handle. It's basically a forcing mechanism to force certain circulation
patterns and jet stream patterns and storm cracks and rainfall and temperature and so on.
So our long range predictive skill improves substantially during an El Nino.
Long range weather forecasting plays an important role in many endeavors, such as managing dams
for mitigation of floods or storing water for droughts. But Bell says the presence of an El Nino
can have a huge impact if you're thinking about sailing your yacht from South America to Australia
or some other Pacific Island. While prevailing winds blow you westward across the Pacific,
during an El Nino, the winds blow in an opposite direction, which might prevent you from even getting
started. Scientists are now collecting reams of data about El Nino's from buoys in the Pacific.
They relay temperature winds and atmospheric pressure on a constant basis by a satellite,
recognizing the El Nino phenomenon, which has been recurring regularly for hundreds of thousands
of years, is very new to science. What causes it is not own. Again, Jerry Bell.
There was a fellow named Sir Gilbert Walker in the early 1900s who
recognized some patterns of rainfall over South America with changes in the ocean temperatures,
and he had bits and pieces of what's now become known as the El Nino. But it really wasn't until
the late 60s, fellow named Birknees in 69, put together a lot of the ocean, the gigantic
and atmospheric features into coherent description of what we could be El Nino phenomenon.
The whole couple of ocean atmosphere description, he was the first one to really pin that down.
And then things were, there's so much data and it's so complicated that it really awaited
substantive study, really awaited some high-speed computers. And it turns out that those
started coming online about the time of the major 82-83 El Nino.
Bell says one thing that's clear to him is that underwater volcanoes and any global warming
due to greenhouse gas emissions are not causes of El Nino's. Monthly status reports and El Nino
forecasts are published on the web through the National Oceanic and Atlospheric Administration.
Their most recent forecast says that we'll see weather, cooler weather for the southern half
of the United States from November through March. And the northern part of the country from
Washington state east to the western Great Lakes will experience warmer than normal temperatures.
We're talking green and I'm your host Peter Burley. Today we're talking about seafood and fish
and what you can eat and what you should stay away from. Many of the world's fisheries are overfished
and fish is not reproducing as it might since much of our habitat for fish is being destroyed.
Whether it be salmon streams in Alaska or wetlands on the Gulf Coast of the United States.
Also within the last week of the Environmental Protection Agency is put out a record number
of fish advisories. Cautioning fishers not to eat fish which they catch from various
streams and water bodies is a result of a chemical contaminants which the fish store in their bodies.
So we want to hear from you. Our number is 1-888-49-green and I have two guests with me.
One is Jack Sobel. He's the director of the ecosystem protection program at the Center for
Marine Conservation which is an environmental organization in Washington DC. And he leads the
Center's research and advocacy efforts to develop and strengthen marine protected areas.
Also with me is Dr. Amy Kyle. She's a research scientist in environmental health policy at the
School of Public Health at the University of California in Berkeley. And she's now working as a
Switzer Environmental Leadership Fellow at the Natural Resources Defense Council in San Francisco
where she's completing a national review of chemical contaminants in fish. So Jack let me start with
you. If I go to the market and want to buy some fish is there anything I can buy without
encouraging the overfishing which is eliminating fish stocks around the world.
Well certainly anything that you eat is going to lead to harvest. However some species are more
vulnerable to over exploitation and some species have already been more over harvested than others.
Now keeping track for a public for an individual it is difficult sometimes to keep track of all the
things out there in the marketplace. Some of the things that we can't give some guidance on
certain species that people should be concerned and careful about. Certainly organisms like sharks
which have life histories that make them very vulnerable are particularly prone to over exploitation
and so just as a general guiding rule organisms that have that. Stay away from sharks,
super. That you need to be careful about. There's also organisms like our reef fish which
similarly many of those have life histories that make them prone to over exploitation.
And again for someone who walks into a fish market how do we know what's a reef fish?
Fish such as groopers and snappers. Now that doesn't mean we're not suggesting that we don't eat
those fish or that we don't stop exploitation but they are things they are fish that are
sensitive to over exploitation and that we should be careful both in our consuming habits and also
as concerned consumers and citizens should be contacting management agencies and ensuring proper
management plans. Well let's get back to that but Amy Kyle when I go and buy a fish or for those
that are fisher people. Catch one. How do I know that it's not contaminated with toxic chemicals
like PCBs and the like? Well it's a good question and it's interesting that Jack is talking about sharks
because sharks are one of two species of commercial fish for which the federal food and drug
administration has issued a warning to people particularly women who are pregnant or may become
pregnant advising them to limit their consumption of shark and also of swordfish because those are
big fish that eat at the top of the food chain and tend to become contaminated with mercury.
So they get the mercury that is in everything that was in everything that everybody else
eat before they ate it? Exactly because it persists in their bodies for quite a while as it will
then in ours if we eat them. So shark and swordfish are the two species where we have an official warning
from the federal government that these especially as I say for women because it's developing
fetuses and small children who are most vulnerable to the effects of mercury that we might want to
stay away from. Now other big fish like that like tuna for example also tend to accumulate mercury
so that might be one that again if you were concerned about that you might want to keep your
consumption of that limited. Beyond that it's hard to know because it depends on where the fish
comes from. Fish from work contaminated areas tend to be more contaminated and the harsh reality
is that it's hard to find that out. So about the best you can do in the market is to see if you can
find out where the fish came from and whether it came from someplace that sounds like it might be
contaminated. Jack we hear so much about over consumption and over fishing will my grandchildren be
able to eat ocean caught fish or is this going to be a thing of the past because we fish them all out.
I don't have a crystal ball and I think that there will probably continue to be ocean fishing
and your grandchildren will probably continue to eat ocean caught fish. However they will be reduced
to numbers from what they may be reduced to numbers from what they are today and the diversity
of what's out there is certainly being reduced currently and so the options if we don't manage
our resource better than we are currently managing the options for what they can eat and what
fishermen can continue to catch and make money on will likely be reduced. Before we go to the phones
I have an email message which came to us and it's from Louise and Dallas and she says I've heard more
fish on the marketer being supplied from fish farms. Can't the farms ensure that we'll have an
adequate supply in the future? Well from our perspective aquaculture is not a panacea for
the problems of over fishing and although they can supply some of the market demand they can't
supply all of it and in many cases aquaculture is also not without its own environmental risk.
There have been problems for instance with salmon aquaculture and the introduction of disease
organisms and the escape of exotic species to areas where they're not native. There's also
been problems with shrimp aquaculture in terms of destruction of mangrove and other habitats
and pollution associated with that habitat degradation. So none of it is a very happy picture as I
hear you both speak. Let's go to the phones. Our number is 1-888-49-green and Eric from Wisconsin
you're talking green on the environment show. Welcome. Eric are you there?
Yes, yes, Peter. Okay, you're talking green on the environment show. I understand you have a
question or a comment on the fish. Yes it is. I've got a question in involving these chemicals
that we've got going into the lakes as far as the consumption of visor is concerned. Do they
consider total risk from all the chemicals that are going into these fish? Where are these chemicals
coming from basically and how is this best prevent it rather than having to give up eating fish?
What can we do to stop the advisories from happening? That's a good question. Amy, what do you think?
No, I think that is the question is that we can't just keep warning people. We need to actually
solve this problem and we need to just say no now to continuing to release these persistent toxic
substances in the environment. But with regard to this question, in the Great Lakes states, the
contaminants come both from air deposition and also from local, both so-called point sources,
such as wastewater discharges and also from nonpoint sources such as runoff from the
ground itself. They come from all three of those types of sources and some of the contaminants
of fish also get into the sediments and then are re-released to fish. But Eric has raised a
question about looking at the total impact and I presume by that Eric you're talking about what
happens when the combination of these chemicals get into the fish and then into you. Right, you know,
they list these advisories for one chemical at a time and I'm just wondering what the risk is
from all the chemicals that are in the fish? The whole chemical stew. Amy, is that, does that get
considered when they do the advisories or not? Not really. People don't really know how to do that
very well and it's an important question as well because also you have other sources of some of
these contaminants besides just what's in the fish. So when you think about you yourself, you know,
you may be catching a risqué for dioxin from fish as well as from meat as well as from milk and so
thinking about that holistically is an important challenge for public policy. I guess the question
Eric, if you're in a great like this region, is does the chemical mix in one like give a separate
bouquet if you like to the taste of the fish, then the chemicals in another like? If you had any
experience on whether all these things have different tastes? Well, no, not really because it doesn't
seem that any of these things are things that you can taste in the fish. Okay, well thanks for your
call and I'd like to raise with you Jack the whole question of overfishing. Okay, we have this
situation in which nations have supported the creation of fishing fleets. Everybody's out there,
more and more hardware, fancy and faster equipment, chasing fewer and fewer fish.
This has got to end in disaster, doesn't it? Well, certainly, I mean, you raise the issue of
subsidies to fishing fleets and that's certainly a big problem. We spend more money on subsidizing
our fleet and the value of the catch that they make and certainly, you know, from a strictly
economic point of view, let alone a conservation point of view, that's something that doesn't make sense.
We are making some progress in terms of there's been the passage of international treaty that's
trying to get a handle on international fisheries and last year the Center for Marine Conservation
and others were very successful in reauthorizing the Magnuson Fisheries Conservation Act,
which certainly provides a framework for protecting our domestic fisheries. And again, for people
who are not familiar with that, that provides that councils, separate councils up and down the
coastlines will establish catch limits for certain kinds of fish. That is correct.
And some of the new aspects of the reauthorization, which was one of the few stronger pieces of
conservation legislation that came out of that Congress, is that it starts to also get at the
issues of protecting essential fish habitat, which we all know habitat is important for maintaining
these fisheries in addition to setting catch limits and protecting stocks that way. And the
other element that's very important is some measures in terms of bycatch, reducing bycatch,
which is the intention of catching. And that's something to catch when you were after something else.
That's correct. And it can either be from harvesting species that you're not targeting,
which is a big problem. It can also be from catching undersized fish, fish, which you then have to
return to the ocean because you're not allowed to catch them. In both cases, it's basically a wasteful
process. And anything that we can do to reduce or eliminate that bycatch will be valuable to
fishermen and long run and to consumers as well as from a conservation perspective.
In our short time that's left, can either of you give our listeners any guidelines, is to what they
can do to make sure that they are eating the right thing?
Well, I would say that first of all, very clearly I'm a fish eater. I like eating fish, not
opposed to catching a fish. And I think the best thing that a consumer can do is be educated,
both about the health risks that are associated with particular species, and also with the conservation
concerns of what's being caught. Amy Kyle, on the health side, what is really safe if anything?
Well, again, like Jack said, it varies a lot depending on where you are. And it is good to eat fish.
Fish is a healthy sort of food. So I don't discourage people from eating fish, but I think it's
important to make sure that if you're eating a lot of fish from one area, particularly, which
usually happens with people who catch their own, that you check and make sure that fish is not
contaminated. And then for eating fish in the market, you eat a variety of different kinds.
Well, thank you. I'm afraid our time is up. My guests have been Jack Sobel from the Center for
Marine Conservation and Amy Kyle from the School of Public Health at the University of California
and Berkeley. We've been talking green. Our number is 1-888-49-green. We want to hear from you. I'm your host,
Peter Burley.
And now it's time for the Earth Calendar. As we broadcast,
Baluga Whales found in the coastal waters of Alaska have just changed their clothes. Sometimes
reaching 16 feet in length, they are... Well dressed in their new shiny white skins and looking for
something to eat. That is Kathy Frost, marine mammals biologist for the Alaska Department of Fish
and Game. The reason Baluga Whales are sporting new shiny white skins is they've just finished
shedding their old ones as well as giving birth. At this time of year, June and July, they come close
to shore to capitalize on some of the food resources that show up there like Red Salmon and Bristol Bay.
They also come to have their calves and that happens about 4th of July weekend and then they do
something most people don't know about. Baluga's mold or shed their skin once a year. And that
also happens in late June, early July. What is the process by which a Baluga sheds its skin?
Well, what they seem to do is come into shallow, near-shore areas that have nice, scratchy
bottoms, things like rocks or stones or gravel. And often they look for warm water areas and areas
with a little bit of fresh water outflow. And what we think happens is they come in and that
fresh water helps the skin slough. They rub in the bottom to rub the old skin off a lot like your
dog rolls outside when it's trying to shed its fur and then the warm water promotes faster skin growth
so the new skin can come in. So do they scrape it off in chunks, which is we do when we get a sunburn?
Is that what it looks like? It comes off in little long thin strips.
Full, less than a half an inch wide and anything from an inch long because sometimes two or three
inches long. It's simply a replacement of the skin. If you look at a Baluga whale in Alaska
in May or June, the skin is really quite yellow and warm. There's a lot of little nips and scratches
and talk marks and the skin looks old and well used. And what happens in June, July is basically
a replacement of that skin. It gets rid of the old beat up layer and grows a fresh new shiny
white layer. And they're nursing they're young at the same time. This is going on I guess.
Yep, they sure are. Cavin happens in a lot of areas of the state around the end of June and the
early part of July. Baluga calves stay with their moms a lot longer than for example, a seal pup does.
Baluga calf may be with its mother up to a couple of years.
Frost says the striking white color is not the only thing that distinguishes the Baluga.
Balugas were called cicanaries by the early hoilers and that's because they're so vocal.
I think most of us don't think about whales making lots of noise and Balugas do. They
chip and chirp and grunt and groan and click and and make all sorts of noises.
I not so that if you're sitting on the beach near a large group of Balugas, there's there's
just a real cacophony of sound. Frost says management of Balugas is a success story.
Populations are stable and they're hunted only by Eskimos for a subsistence food.
The Eskimos and the marine biologists have taught each other a lot about the beast.
So next time you're making small talk and have run out of things to say ask your friends to name
a singer who eats octopus and shrimp and puts on a new white suit each summer.
Thanks for listening. This is the Environment Show and I'm Peter Burley.
Still ahead. Canadian fishermen blockaded a US ferry last week. It was the latest move in a bitter fight
between the US and Canada over declining stocks of salmon. Our ear to the ground finds out how
Alabama's get rid of used motor oil safely. We go birding with folks who are trying to save the
threatened grasshopper sparrow and all of our birds. Author Christopher Manis finds the love of
air between animals and humans started long before burgers got their binoculars and walk in
Jim Stoltz finds the power in the earth in an old Christmas Carol which became a union song.
These stories still ahead on the Environment Show.
A full-scale fish war has broken out of the North Pacific. Tensions have been escalating since
negotiations between the US and Canada broke off last month. Both sides operate their salmon
fisheries based on a treaty which expired earlier this year. Without that agreement,
the situation has become a free for all. Both countries are overfishing and many say already
depleted fish populations are in danger of crashing. The Environment Show's Thomas Lale has more.
Last week Canadian fishermen ended a three-day blockade of an Alaskan-bound ferry with 300 passengers
on board. Alaska says it will sue for damages and may end the ferry service an important link
between the two countries. Canada claims Alaskans are taking salmon that's rightfully theirs and
British Columbia's premiere has threatened to cancel a lease for a US military installation.
All this because salmon populations have been declining at the same time the fishing fleet has
gotten larger and more sophisticated. A salmon treaty exists between the US and Canada but it's
now expired. It's based on an equivalency principle that means each country has the right to fish
those salmon created within that country's boundaries. Those fish that originate in US
streams are US property. Those fish that originate in Canadian streams like Wyser Canadian property.
However, these fish migrate widely and they migrate from Canada into Alaska and they migrate from
the northwest into British Columbia. So some counting mechanism has to be done in terms of the
fishing fleet. Each fleet will catch a certain number of fish from the other country.
The equivalency principle in the treaty is that for each fish that the Canadians lose that are
harvested in Alaska waters they should be entitled to a US fish migrating into their waters from
the lower 48 in the Pacific Northwest particularly the Columbia River produces almost all of the
North migrating fish. Glenn Spain is the Northwest Regional Director for the US-based Pacific
Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations. He says divving up the multi-million dollar salmon
bounty has become a problem because US rivers especially the Columbia River in Washington
are only producing 2 to 3 percent of their original runs of salmon and he says he knows why.
The problem is the dams. The Pacific salmon treaty is becoming more and more inequitable
because the fish that are intended to replace the ones that Canadians lose in Alaska are not coming
out of the Columbia and they're not surviving at sea. With the Elmenio upcoming and past Elmenio
events it's been even worse. It's exacerbated the problem. We have stressed these river systems to
the point where they can no longer produce the fish that they need to produce in order to make the
treaty work. There are about 2,700 dams on the Columbia River alone. Spain says they account for
up to 95 percent of all human cause salmon deaths and Platte McGinn is with the World Watch Institute.
She says all parties share the blame for the current situation and without the treaty
fishermen are over harvesting salmon which may have dire consequences for the future.
Right now there's been a complete breakdown in talks and so people are going out and fishing
without any limits whatsoever. In a year where the reports of forecasted stocks have been
extremely low you've got a really dangerous situation where people are basically operating with
no law or limits on them and meanwhile the salmon stocks in extreme danger as they always have been
with forecasts for a worsening situation. As these tensions rise chances are that
there's either there's going to have to be a breakthrough in with the talks. Otherwise you know we
can expect a severe crisis. Canadians claim US fishermen have taken 35 million more salmon than they
have since 1985 and just this month the US State Department admitted US fishermen unintentionally caught
three to four times. There are a lot of amount of sockeye salmon this season. In response to this
Canadian officials are writing a plan to up their catch of salmon. It's called the Canada first
fishing strategy and would take 1.5 million salmon from US fishermen but quantifying what is fair
for each country is complicated. There are competing statistics from federal, regional, tribal,
state and provincial governments and and Platte McGinn of World Watch says there are too many
fishermen out there. It's a mess she blames on the federal government. In the short term I think
there will be a resolution but this longer term issue which is just being faced across the globe
which is the overcapacity of the world's fishing fleets that has yet to be resolved and I don't
think it will be until governments face up to some of these difficult choices and by that I mean
that for years they've encouraged people to go out and fish and they've made loans available
and subsidized fleets and whatnot and now we've got to help these same people who rely on this
industry to move on to something else because there's no way the fishery can support this number of
people. The US and Canada signed the salmon treaty 12 years ago. It was written to avoid situations
like the one that now exists and this is just the hottest conflict at the moment. Around the world
fish populations decimated by habitat destruction and overfishing have sparked controversy in places
like the Baltic and North seas, Indonesia, Malaysia, India and other countries. For the Environment Show
I'm Thomas Lally.
I'm Linda Anderson and this is Ear to the Ground with stories about people affecting change
in the environment. This week recycling by the barrel, project rose, recycled oil saves energy.
Founder and director of project rose Dr. Gary April will tell you that what began in 1977 as a
program to help conserve energy has evolved into a program that focuses on keeping the environment
clean, one court of motor oil at a time. Starting from the ground up, April says project rose began
with a $5,000 grant from the state of Alabama. He says placing two 55 gallon drums at a pair of
service stations in Tuscaloosa gave do-it-yourself oil changers a place to dispose of their used motor oil.
The biggest problem with do-it-yourself oil changers is the fact that you have to crawl under your
car and collect the used oil and once you collect the used oil what do you do with it? And most of
the time people either throw it in the sewer or they'll dig a hole in their backyard or they'll
go along a fence line in their around their home and they'll just pour the oil out into the ground.
That is environmentally harmful. It gets into water systems through surface water runoff.
In fact, according to Sherry Powell also of project rose, oil from a single oil change can
contaminate 1 million gallons of fresh water, a year supply for 50 people. And as Gary April used
oil constitutes the largest single source of oil pollution in our nation streams and rivers.
According to April, educating the public about the hazards of used oil has been key to project rose.
Today he says 20 years after the program began there are over 400 service stations,
auto part stores, car dealerships and quick-loop facilities throughout Alabama that voluntarily serve
as used oil collection sites. It's that kind of a network to get everybody feeling as though they're
contributing that that has enabled this program to grow in our state and around the nation.
April, who heads the Chemical Engineering Department at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa,
where the program operates from, says he's been contacted by 13 foreign countries and every state
in the nation about how to start similar programs. Many states he says have far exceeded expectations.
Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee have all enacted legislation which provides much larger support
for recycling in general but used oil recycling in particular. And so they are farther advanced in
terms of what they're doing in their state with regard to reaching a much broader population.
Supported by the Alabama Department of Economics and Community Affairs, project rose has also
adopted many spin-off programs. Corporate rose, Marina rose and a farm management program.
Used oil doesn't have to be a liability, April says. It's only dirty and can be cleaned and used
again and again. He says most of the oil collected from project rose goes to a refiner where it's turned
into low-grade fuel oil that can be burned in commercial boilers. The biggest impact project rose
has had, April says, is empowering people with a commonsense solution to an environmental problem.
Over the long haul, collecting one quart of oil at a time has had a tremendous impact and April
hopes this idea will spill over into other areas of recycling. With ear to the ground, I'm Linda Anderson.
I'm Peter Berley and the environment show wants to hear from you. Give us a call at 1-888-49-Green.
That's 1-888-49-Green. Leave a message and one of our producers will get back to you or leave a
comment that we can put on the air. Our email address is green at wamc.org. That's green at wamc.org.
You can visit us anytime in the internet where you can hear the environment show. It's at www.enn.com.
At daybreak, in farm fields in upstate New York, not far from where the Hudson River turns into the
Adirondack Mountains, a team of volunteers is gathering data to nominate this place as an important
bird area. The sun is just coming through the mist. Dew is dripping from the grass and white
fairy handkerchief spider webs are scattered across the fields. I'm with Jeff Wells, who directs the
New York State Important Bird Area Program for the National Audubon Society. Several yards into
the field, dim in the mist, are a couple of grasshoppers barrels. He says they're one of the most rapidly
declining species in North America. They're a little brown birds, about 3.5 inches long,
in non-descripted distance. Through binoculars, you see a beautiful mosaic of chestnuts,
browns and tans, bright yellow at the bend of the wing, and a single cream colored stripe
over the top of the head. They sing. Tix-Z. And they're not doing well. Why is that? They're declining
throughout the U.S. mainly because of the loss of their grassland habitats
in the east. A lot of it's because we're losing a lot of our farmland habitat to development,
or in some cases to abandon men of farms in certain areas. But in places like this area,
Washington County of New York State here, the birds are declining mainly because we're losing
habitat to development. We're standing at a site here where the land has already been
slated for development. There's signs up in four sail signs here. It's beautiful rolling
agricultural land, full of metal arcs and bubbling songs, the bobbling, but there'll be houses
up here probably in the next five or ten years all through this area. So that's the main cause
of decline. Farmland is really the last haven for most of these grassland birds here in New York
and throughout the northeast. In an effort to sustain bird populations, the National
Autobahn Society and a number of other birding organizations have set up the important bird area
program, or IBA. This is Fred Baumgarten, Autobahn's national coordinator for the effort.
Well, we use a process where volunteers, autobahn members, people in the birding community,
as well as land managers and landowners themselves nominate sites. We then have a review panel
made up of some of the top bird experts in the state. Review those nominations and make sure
that they do qualify according to the criteria we use as an important bird area and then produce
a list and some information on those sites which can be useful in focusing conservation efforts.
And that of course is the tough one. Once you've named an important bird area, what happens?
So far. Well, we are focusing on trying to develop conservation plans for those areas. So we
put a lot of our energy and emphasis on the follow-up on the what's next question. And we work in a
variety of methods, but first and foremost, it's reaching out to the land managers if it's a public
site or landowners if it's a private site and figuring out what are the issues and how can we
cooperatively maintain this area as an important bird area. Once a nomination is reviewed by a
technical committee and the area is designated as an IBA, it's no better protected than it was
before. But Bob Budlinger from the New York State Federation of Bird Clubs says IBA designation
can be the basis for collaborative efforts between environmentalists, local landowners, and local
government. I think the first and most important part of the important bird areas project is to
identify habitat and then let local government and state agencies and private conservation
organizations work with landowners, the agricultural community, developers, what have you.
In telling them what is needed and then there are a number of ways to protect habitat, whether it's
through conservation, easements, agricultural district, district tax relief, acquisition by
conservation based organizations of critical parcels, acquisition by state agencies. There's a
wide variety of tools that can be used to give some protection. 150 sites have been nominated so far
by citizens, local land trusts, and state and federal agencies. Jeff Wells, New York State Coordinator,
says the objective is to actually designate about 100. He's optimistic despite a general decline in
songbird numbers which has been going on for several decades. We've already seen examples
of sites that have been designated as IBAs in New York State where we've seen work progressing for
conservation where we've started involving local groups in the efforts there in a way that
hadn't happened before and we've brought sites to the attention of folks in the state and federal
agencies so that already we're seeing some results at certain sites where lands being protected and
lands managed in a way that's better for the birds. Unfortunately we've been seeing a decline in
songbird species. It seems to have been fairly persistent over the last 30 years. What's the
outlook for a future? I think this kind of proactive approach that we're taking here is the answer to
the problem. We have seen declines particularly in certain species like grassland birds and
scrubland birds and other species we haven't seen severe declines but we want to be proactive. We
want to keep common birds common and at the same time we have to look at some species like these
grassland birds that have continued to decline and are moving towards endangered and threatened
status but we want to be proactive about these species and there seems to be a growing ground swell
of support for this kind of activity. The important bird area program has been launched all over the
country. Autobahn's Fred Baumgarten says the plan is to designate important bird areas in all 50
states and in Canada and in Mexico.
Birders are just one example of the love affair between humans and animals.
Author Christopher Manas, his chronicle this relationship in his book Other Creations,
rediscovering the spirituality of animals from double-day books. He traced through the historical
record to find the many instances where animals were noted to have magical powers. He found that
in virtually all societies animals provided humans with wisdom and a link to the earth and the heavens.
Recently the environment shows Thomas Lally had a chance to speak with him.
I believe we marginalized animals and we haven't given much thought about it. Other societies
animals in the past animals have been central, central to their religion, central to their
economics, etc. I think one of our problems is we have animals have disappeared. They aren't
significant. They don't exist anymore. They are invisible. I think that happens at risk to our
spiritual well-being because so much of our history, so much of our religion depends on
and understanding of animals. Now some people might hear that and think, well,
I have a tremendous relationship with my dog and my cat and my daughter has obsessed with her
parakeet. They might say, well, what do you mean? We have marginalized our relationship with animals.
Yeah, and that's great. I think pets are wonderful. I think it's great that people in the
Americans do like animals. They like pets. What I'm talking about is wild animals, larger animals.
The animal do to be central to other central to every society prior to modern times.
By the way, most people in our society have had real contact with any animal larger than a lap dog.
Very few people have had contact with a truly wild animal. What they see are images of animals
on television and nature films, virtual animals, animals and zoos, but they don't see real animals.
And my central theme is that it is our relationship with animals which gave rise to some of the
central ideas, the central meaning to our religious existence. That's obvious in history where
animals were central to religion, but it's also important to Western religion, to Christian
and the monotheistic religions. The animals are central metaphor for understanding divinity.
So my point is that if we don't have contact with truly wild animals, if we don't meet animals on
their terms and we've completely marginalized them, we've lost the fundamental metaphors for
understanding our spiritual ideas. Now you've dissected this relationship a bit and
broken it down basically into several elements and some that I don't think a lot of people have
ever really considered. Probably the most surprising to me was the link between alphabets and
naming animals and you talk about naming or not naming specifically the bear. Why is that important
and what's the link with Yahweh? That's really fascinating. English language, all
Germanic languages don't have a name for bear. It's kind of an oxymoron for me to say that because
I'm using the word bear, but bear is a euphemism, means the brown one. Sometimes in the history of
Germanic people, bear was so important that you weren't allowed to name them. You would use
a circumlocution. You would say they are the brown thing over there. A lot of tribes, a lot of
primal tribes do that. Sacred animals aren't named. In Hebrew tradition, you don't name God.
It's not something you ever write. God's name is, you always leave a letter missing in Orthodox
Judaism, for instance, even in even in English. When you spell God, you put G slash G space D.
You don't write the name of God. It's just too powerful. Same thing happened with
in the Germanic tradition and almost every tradition where you simply didn't name certain
animals because there were two spiritually charged. They were too important. They were taboo.
Thomas Lally speaking with Christopher Manus, author of other creations, rediscovering the
spirituality of animals from Double Day Press.
Like many animals, humans like to sing. It helps us as we celebrate the good times or endure the
bad ones. Walk in Jim Stolts' song, Power in the Earth, was originally a Christmas hymn from the 1800s.
A hundred years later, the song was given new life when unions realized their protest songs
would be a lot more popular if they borrowed the melody from songs that everyone knew.
So when Walk in Jim Stolts became active in the environmental movement, he is the same strategy.
Here's Power in the Earth from the CD The Vision. It's on Wild Wind Records.
The power must be heard throughout this land, for the Earth now we must stand.
Come all you folks, from all over the land, sing out for the Earth. Come out and make a stand.
No more love canals, no more dine-sees. Come on, do your sharing with me.
There is power, there is power in the band-a-bulls, but here when we stand, land in hand, that's a power that's a power must be heard throughout this land, for the Earth now we must stand.
What gives us the right to soil and destroy, the Earth is our home, it isn't a toll.
Life has no place in a stripped-over land. Come on, do your sharing land a hand.
There is power, there is power in the band-a-bulls, but here when we stand, land in hand, that's a power that's a power must be heard throughout this land, for the Earth now we must stand.
Have you had enough destruction and rape of the corporate greed?
There ain't no escape. Quality of life means a world that is clean.
Come on, help us now, keep it green.
There is power, there is power in the band-a-bulls, but here when we stand, land in hand, that's a power that's a power must be heard throughout this land, for the Earth now we must stand.
Power in the Earth by Wachen-Gimm Stoltz. It's from the CD The Vision on Wild Wind Records.
Thanks for being with us on this week's Environment Show. I'm Peter Burley. If you need to cassette copies so you can predict your own weather and El Nino, call us at 1-888-49-green and ask for show number 395.
The Environment Show is a presentation of national productions which is solely responsible for its content.
Dr. Alan Shartough is the executive producer. Thomas Lally is producer and Stephanie Goyschman is the associate producer.
The Environment Show is made possible by the W. Walton Jones Foundation, the Turner Foundation, the J.M. Kaplan Fund and the Packard Foundation,
as well as Hemings Motor News, the monthly bible of the collector Karhabi, 1-800-CR-HE.
So long and join us next week for the Environment Show.
