Hello friends, it's the Environment Show and welcome.
Every day 150 species of plants and animals become extinct, even as we speak, yet how much
do we know of the science or the politics of preserving our biodiversity?
Not much, say two experts.
Also this time, the expedition on the road to Damascus, Damascus, Virginia, and forrester
Lynn Levine.
At first she did not hear the owls.
And then someone said, I heard an owl and I dropped all my things and I called out again.
And lo and behold an owl answered.
And we went back and forth 12 times.
I'm calling out in the owl responding back and forth to each other.
The Environment Show is a national production made possible by the J.M. Kaplan Fund of New
York.
This is Bruce Robertson.
When science and politics meet and agree there is progress on a given issue.
When science and politics disagree the stalemate that follows can actually exacerbate the
crisis at hand.
Which is the case in our efforts to preserve earth's biodiversity.
Whereas most of our crises have an extended time frame of 10 or more years before effects
are felt.
Dr. David Stedman says the biodiversity crisis is worsening even as you listen to this.
Right now a good estimate would be that somewhere between 50 and maybe 150 species are becoming
extinct on earth each day.
Now when you multiply that time 365 days in a year and then go to a decade or whatever
we're dealing already in extinctions that are numbering in the tens of thousands into
the hundreds of thousands.
And if you look at the rate most of these extinctions are occurring in tropical habitats.
Although extinctions are occurring all across the globe.
There's no ecosystem that's immune.
But when you start extrapolating out into the future and then look at the rate at which
habitats are being destroyed or modified.
We run the risk now of losing somewhere between a quarter and a half of all the species
on earth within the next 50 years.
Now to be sure we are not talking about the most common forms of plants and animals.
Although as in the case of the now extinct American chestnut tree this could happen.
According to Stedman we will be losing plants and animals we have never seen yet.
There's a lot of controversy today among scientists about how many species there are on
the earth.
Maybe the biggest variable being insects and a few other groups of invertebrates.
Some people would say well there are three or five million species on earth.
Other people would go as high as 25 or 30 million species on earth.
The trouble is that most of these kinds of little invertebrates are difficult to survey.
They are very difficult to identify.
Most of the species, certainly most of the species on earth haven't even been described
by scientists.
Don't even have a name on them.
You can find new species of round worms or beetles or all kinds of little soil dwelling
organisms in almost any backyard anywhere in the world.
You can find those things in the Bronx.
You can find them in Chicago.
You can find them in Bangladesh anywhere.
When we talk about extinction of species we tend to think of it in very unrealistic terms
because we think of large spectacular things like tigers or pandas or some large bird
that California conned or something like that that has a lot of popular appeal.
Those are the particular species that attract attention and therefore attract money.
But they are just the tip of the iceberg and most of the species that are in trouble.
In fact most of the species that are going extinct are species that you and I wouldn't recognize
and very few scientists would recognize.
And in fact a lot of these things just plain have never been described.
Stedman says this is not at all a case of what we don't know can't hurt us.
And as permanent this in itself is an overwhelming concept but the tragedy is at least twofold.
Not only do we lose an individual species the whole balance of ecology is upset.
There's a concept in ecology called keystone species which is a species upon which any
variety of other species depend and therefore you can have sort of a domino effect.
If you lose a species that initially it might seem to be a fairly benign loss and then
you might learn later that any number of other things up and down the food chains and food
webs and these very complicated trophic systems that you end up as a spin off losing a lot
of other things.
In fact Stedman.
I think in the last 20 years if we've learned one thing it's how little we really know
about the functioning of natural ecosystems.
We know all about all kinds of medical things and nuclear physics and we can send people
to the moon but you can go to a forest or a swamp or a lake or a river or a desert or
pick out the habitat and as far as actually really understanding what makes that ecosystem
tick.
What are the interdependencies of plants and animals?
We're in our really in our infancy yet and that's been a real stumbling block in designing
programs to save endangered species.
Stumbling block for scientists maybe but certainly for policymakers whose job it is to
formulate and enforce regulations based on our scientific information.
Environmental policymakers Patricia Rexinger says if we know little about the science of
biodiversity we know next to nothing about the politics of preserving biodiversity.
Says Rexinger we have not even agreed on basic terminology.
I think it's important to again stop and say what is it we want?
Do we want to go back to some pre-Columbian concept of what the nation looked like, what
the globe looked like?
Clearly we'll never get to that.
Humans are everywhere.
We can't reverse that.
We want to freeze so to speak the current biological diversity on the globe in this nation
in any particular state or area.
That's also highly unlikely since in addition to human forces there are natural forces,
succession, reforror station, affecting communities and their relationships.
What is it we're trying to achieve?
We have to know what type of biological diversity we're trying to get at.
Do we all want to go back to what it was like when we were teenagers or young children growing
up in our vision of what the nation looked like or do we want to project into the future
in terms of what we want?
Rexinger says not only do we disagree on what we want we are even unclear or actually
confused about what little progress we have made.
We're at the very early stages.
We're at the very, at the point where we still need to get a common understanding even
amongst the professionals of what we're trying to achieve.
And again the issue of quality of what is the quality of biodiversity, what is the scale
at which we're looking at?
Do we look at a migratory waterfall?
You have to look at it on a continental basis.
You know, a locally endangered salamander, you look at it on a local basis.
So the scale of biodiversity is also critical.
Though extinction has been a part of the cycle of life and death since the beginning of life
on Earth, it was the animal world that experienced the greatest change.
Today the plant kingdom is also suffering.
And Stedman says this is happening because of a relatively new and disturbing factor added
to the equation.
When you look at the extinction of the dinosaurs and the dinosaurs crash and burn and some other
species crash and burn in marine life.
But if you take a look at the fossil record of plants, the plants go right through unaffected.
As a result, the ecosystems rallied in relatively short time and in a few million years which
us seems horribly long, but in the geological record isn't that long.
You see reptiles recovering, the dinosaurs are gone, but other kinds of reptiles are evolving.
Mammals and birds start to explode.
And that begins the era that leads to where we are now.
And then about 10,000 years ago, maybe 11,000 years ago, you had this big extinction of
large mammals in North America.
Mammoths, mastodons, saber tooth tigers, camels, ground sloths, that sort of thing.
Something like 50 species of large mammals died in a very sudden period of time, about
maybe within a thousand years, all these big mammals died.
That coincided perfectly with the arrival of people in the new world.
Not only are presence, but also more importantly, our numbers have been the deadly factor.
The same imbalance is the determining factor even today in such sensitive areas as the
tropical forests where exploding human populations are literally smothering the landscape.
Yet if, as we have said, we know so little, scientifically and politically, how are we
to proceed, especially given that even as we speak, the crisis worsens.
Dr. Stedman says for now...
The basic conservation approach now often is just, hey, let's save it.
We set this land aside.
Admittedly, we don't know much about it.
But while it's still relatively natural, let's set it aside.
And just by doing that, just by protecting it somehow, we're going to preserve some
respectable fraction of the diversity of life there.
And then as time goes on, we can learn more about it and really come up with perhaps more
effective ways of dealing with that.
This in fact is what some nations have already done, says Rexinger.
Costa Rica, for example, has one of the most fascinating national park systems because
they have taken representative areas of all of the major ecosystems in their country
and sedimentary as parks.
I'm not sure we could say the same thing about our country.
We haven't set aside representative areas in our nation.
We have some wonderful national parks, but they tend to be extraordinary, not representative.
And unless we can, through our policies, make sure we get the full spectrum of areas,
you know, like the average stuff as well as the truly unique areas, then we're not going
to be able to protect all the species that are occurring out there.
Patricia Rexinger is wetlands program manager with the State Department of Environmental
Conservation in New York.
Dr. David Stedman is curator of birds with the State Museum of New York in Albany.
Perhaps there is also a human psychology factor involved here.
Could it be the concept of extinction of something permanently missed and gone is passing from
our vocabulary in this age of television reruns when we never miss our favorite program
if we record it on our VCR?
This is Bruce Robertson.
Keith Tundragg joins us now.
Keith is on trail coordinator for the seven member Sierra Club Centennial Appalachian
Trail Expedition, moving slowly northward along the trail.
This time they're in southern Virginia.
Keith, how's everybody this week?
I want to do a two bad roof.
We're in Damascus, Virginia.
Damascus has a reputation to be in the friendliest trail town on the Appalachian Trail.
We're four miles into Virginia and Virginia is the longest state in terms of mileage on
the Appalachian Trail, about five hundred miles.
We're going to be in the old dominion for a long time to come.
Just a few days ago you celebrated your most recent as you call them celebrations and
individual can make a difference with the title of the presentation.
Tell us about that.
It was a nice celebration here in Damascus held in their small city park.
We had speakers from the Appalachian Trail Conference, Southern Region, a Sarah Davis,
and then Harvard Airs, our coordinators spoke.
Talked a lot about John Neur and how John Neur had made a difference with the club
and did some quotes from him.
Then each of the hikers, the five of us, talked individually on what the hike has meant
for us and what the environmental movement has meant for us and how an individual can
help with that movement.
Terce Palmer, one of our hikers, talked about the grandfather mountain issue over a
North Carolina on the Blue Ridge Parkway and how an individual can help in trying to
preserve that.
I talked about wildlife habitat and the need for people to become involved to protect
that habitat and so on.
So each of us talked about how an individual person can get involved.
We mentioned recycling as another good area.
Curious, what have been the reaction, the remarks, so to speak, from the audience, those
who have gathered at this curiosity of a team coming through their town?
The mask was very receptive, believe it or not, when we came to town, some of the merchants
on Main Street had welcomed the air club hiker signs up.
A lot of the townspeople, not only from this town, but from surrounding areas were there.
They enjoy the idea of having hikers in, they're used to it.
They have a celebration later on next month called Trail Days in which they have hikers
come in.
So they're very receptive of it and receptive of the environmental message.
They were really pleased that we were there, listening intently to what we said and
and agreed.
So a very positive event from all standpoints.
We have reminded our listeners this expedition is in celebration of the 100th anniversary
of the founding of this Sierra Club founded by none other than John Muir, whose birthday
as we speak is coming up shortly.
John Muir born in 1838 Keith, what will you be doing in celebration of the founders
birthday?
I think that's day 38 on our schedule, Bruce, and we'll be leaving Damascus, Virginia
on that day and hiking 14 miles into the Mount Rogers National Recreation area.
Our celebration of Muir's birthday is going to be spent probably the best way a person can
spend it, and that's being out in the woods, being out in the wilderness, experiencing
nature.
This is John Muir, would of light.
All right, Keith, listen, we'll talk to you again next week and have a good time between
now and then.
All right, thanks a lot, Bruce.
Bye-bye.
Right now.
The expedition expects to hike the entire length of the Appalachian Trail arriving at the
summit of Mount Catadon in May and September.
The Sierra Club was founded on May 28th of 1892 by John Muir.
With a weekly report, this is Bruce Robertson.
Be listening next week at this time for more news.
Do you see that track?
What pattern do you think it is?
If you live in a rural area, you are as familiar with the quiet, the stars at night, and wildlife
that flies, runs, and buzzes around your home, as city dwellers are with the noise of street
traffic and the hustle on the sidewalk.
Yet for a surprising number living in the country, the natural world remains a mystery, sometimes
a scary mystery.
In the hills of Vermont, Ethan Feinsilver visited with forest ranger Lynn Levine, whose
series of nature walks helps us to see and know more about this wild, mysterious world.
When it comes to learning about nature, you can't have a more ideal situation than one
where students and teacher stumble upon a problem at the same time and then work at
solving it together.
That's what you have if you're learning animal tracking in the snow with Lynn Levine.
And that's something else.
No, it is.
It's a fair future, right?
What do you know?
It might have just hail, might not touch the little bird.
It's become clear to me that people don't understand our forests around here.
This season has been the first that Lynn Levine has been leading winter walks four times
a week for Mount Snow tourists and interested locals like Jessica Giles.
I didn't grow up in an area where there are any animals other than squirrels, so for me
it was really neat to see that there are different ways the animal was moved.
So our light was fascinating.
Not long enough though.
I could have been out there all day, aside from the fact I was getting hungry, but we ate
bark and...
So...
Lynn did have us eating yellow birch bark at the end of the walk, but before we even hit
the trails, we spent a full hour indoors first passing around Lynn's scat collection, then
getting a quick introduction to modes of animal locomotion, bounding, waddling, galloping,
and what these different tracks look like in the snow.
Only after that, where we finally driven out to the edge of civilization by a bus that
left us to fend for ourselves.
And it was then necessary for Lynn to explain, why she always carries a compass.
And what happens is if you don't have a compass, you tend to walk, you don't walk straight.
One eye is dominant over the other eye and you tend to walk in a circle.
So some people have more of a tendency to walk in circles than others?
Correct.
They've been saying I've been doing that for years.
The first track we found, we were able to identify as that of a walker because of the
pattern.
And in the dog family, because of the width of the track and tonal impressions, which
a cat doesn't leave because its claws retract.
But the way Lynn Levine proceeded from there for our next clue was quite interesting.
Now the way to tell animals, wild animals from domesticated ones, is by looking at
intention in the track, is by reading the track.
Do we have a coyote?
Do we have a fox?
Or do we have one of the many wonderful dogs?
German chef.
Right, do we have a German chef?
The only way to know that is by following the tracks.
To be able to pick up whether or not there's playfulness in this track and if there's playfulness
then you have a domesticated dog because they have the energy.
They're being fed.
They can just play.
So what you do is you find usually on a dog track just this very, very bouncy.
I mean I can feel that the energy in that track because it's running.
It's looping.
It lies down on both sides.
It does all those things.
I mean a fox or coyote.
It's just interesting in getting its next meal at this time of the year.
This animal's track was a straight, no nonsense line as far as we could check it out.
And the most likely wild animal we decided was a fox.
A walk in the woods that brings our attention to some of the activity there makes most of
us notice an embarrassing lack of curiosity we usually have about the world beyond our
roads.
Where do any of these animals go to sleep or to keep out of the rain or snow?
Do they have homes?
Exactly.
It's almost like most people haven't asked themselves the question even where it is.
And then it's not you just what you think about.
We don't come in contact.
It doesn't come out for some reason.
But one of the things I found just doing this program is that the experiences that people
have had with seeing an animal or finding its home have been peak experiences for them.
So I feel like a collector of everyone's stories because everyone wants to tell me what
they've seen.
And realize how important it is, whatever little kernel they've got.
And then the main notices that even people that live out in the country rarely take the
time to venture into the woods.
Even people that I know that were teachers from Brattleboro and people that lived in
Newfayne that still don't make, that still is still a scary, especially for women that
going into the forest alone.
So providing that, just that the time to let anyone do that is great.
An even more rare contact with the woods can be had in the full moonwalks Lynn Leeds on
the last one, the group of 20 had actual dialogue with the night.
I have a tape, an hour call, of a bar to hour call.
And I tried, we used it and there was no response.
We used it for about 10-15 minutes and then I said, I'll use my call.
So I called out.
It's who cooks for you, who cooks for you.
It's how we translate that into.
And we were ready to turn back because I didn't hear anything and then someone said, I heard
an owl and I dropped all my things and I called out again.
And lo and behold an owl answered.
And we went back and forth 12 times.
I'm calling out in the owl responding back and forth to each other.
An interesting personal note, Lynn Levine is a forester who did not grow up near the forest.
Right, I grew up in Brooklyn.
Yeah.
That's certain kind of neighborhood.
And I really didn't have much to do with nature.
Most of my younger growing up years and was trained to be an elementary school teacher because
that's what all women did.
That's what you're supposed to do.
It's become a teacher.
So this is, I mean, I'm in college from 69 to 73 and all my friends are all teachers,
every single one from beforehand.
So that was really, there weren't a lot of options laid out.
And so I, too, became trained to become a teacher.
After not enjoying teaching, Lynn did a lot of camping and worked for several conservation
groups before going to forestry school.
And now her regular job as a forester means she's hired to manage lands for timber.
I asked her about the apparent tension for an environmentalist cutting trees down for
a living.
We've managed the system for 200 years by cutting it down in a very careless fashion many
times.
And so now my job is, it's really the long-term management of it.
And what I like about it is that it's very gray to be a forester.
It's not black or white.
It's by going in and knowing that there's your cutting trees and there might be some
damage.
You have to work with that issue and try to make it the best possible rather than just
being an arboretum and watch the trees grow and everything is wonderful.
In addition to foresting, every time you see a full moon, you'll know Lynn Levine is
taking a group into the woods in Arlington, Vermont.
And she'll be starting fall foliage walks this year for the peak season in southern Vermont
and again doing the winter walks.
Amethan Finesilver reporting from the hills of West over Vermont.
And that's our report on the Environment Show.
This week the Environment Show is a program about the environment, the air, water, soil,
wildlife and people of our common habitat.
For a cassette copy of this program called 1-800-767-1929, this week asked for the Environment
Show Program Number 121.
The Environment Show is a presentation of national productions solely responsible for its
content, Dr. Alan Shartock executive producer, this is Bruce Robertson.
The Environment Show is made possible by the Jay and Kaplan Fund of New York.
