Re: [ECOLOG-L] Amazing Gorilla Footage....

[Amartya Saha]

I don't know specifically about Uganda, but oftentimes forest dwellers are 
ejected in the process of creating a protected area, and not given any viable 
alternatives, have no choice but to settle on the outskirts and somehow make 
ends meet. These people are then haplessly used by poaching mafia. Local 
conservation plans hinge upon developing income alternatives for them.
 
At the same time, as Taal points out, the mafia will always have ways to poach, 
as long as the demand stays strong. For instance it is known that rhino horns 
are sold in chinese medicine shops, but are there any agencies who can shut 
that down under CITES? Do governments care, and have the clout to enforce 
international laws inside a country which may lash back saying disallowing old 
codgers to get an illusion of youth with powedered rhino horn is meddling in 
cultural affairs? It seems like that's where. All action stops. Maybe 
subsequent generations may not use rhino horn, but by then the rhinos may be 
gone anyway...
Amartya  
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

-Original Message-
From: Taal Levi 
Sender:   "Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news" 

Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 13:18:35 
To: 
Reply-To: Taal Levi 
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Amazing Gorilla Footage

Hi Mike,

I'm not sure about making better local opportunities as a conservation strategy 
in this case. It's my understanding that gorilla poaching is driven by the sale 
of their parts in cities. It's difficult to imagine these enterprises unable to 
find a labor supply. Perhaps the stick would work better than the carrot. Some 
bioeconomic models of illegal hunting suggest it is more effective to penalize 
the market at point of sale rather than the poacher. I'm sure Uganda takes 
gorilla poaching very seriously already since they are a national treasure and 
source of tourism revenue. But what can be done about this?  Is there a role 
for conservation science?

Taal




On Aug 25, 2012, at 10:10 AM, "J. Michael Nolan"  
wrote:

> Cleaning out e-mails this morning. Found this from Uganda. 
> 
> More than amazing. Some have probably seen it before and it could even come 
> from one of these lists, my apologies.
> 
> Do understand some of the motives behind poaching. Just seems like we might 
> be able to create some options for local people that make their livings off 
> of killing these Animals. Also, not only locals, but just flat-out greedy 
> people trying to make some quick money.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/v/1eXS0o6r-Wk%26rel%3d0%26hl%3den_US%26feature%3dplayer_embedded%26version%3d3
> 
> Thank you and have a great day. Spectacular on the eastern shores of Lake 
> Michigan this morning!
> 
> Mike Nolan
> 
> --
> 
> If we are on another line or away from the phone, please leave your number, 
> best time to return your call and your e-mail address.
> 
> After hours and weekend phone appointments are available upon request.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> J. Michael Nolan, Director
> 
> Rainforest and Reef
> 
> **
> "Outstanding-Affordable Field Courses in Rainforest & Marine Ecology"
> 
> Destinations that we Specialize in: 
> 
> North AmericaAlaska (Southeast and the Interior), Hawaii, British 
> Columbia, the Florida Keys and Everglades National Park.
> 
> CaribbeanCuracao
> 
> Central AmericaBelize, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and 
> Panamá.
> 
> South AmericaBolivia, Brazil, Ecuador and The Galápagos Islands, Péru, 
> including Cuzco and Machu Picchu.
> 
> MexicoThe Baja Peninsula (especially during the Spring Whale Migration 
> and Breeding season).
> 
> East AfricaKenya, Tanzania and Zanzibar Island.
> 
> Australia and New Zealand.
> 
> Birding, Photography, along with Home and Garden Tours are available upon 
> request to Most Destinations that we offer.
> 
> The following "Research/Conservation Expeditions" are now also available upon 
> request...Endangered Species of Brazil; Macaws and Primates of the Peruvian 
> Amazon (Tambopata-Candamo Reserve Zone) and Endangered Sea Turtles of Costa 
> Rica (latinamericanseaturtles.org or widecast.org).
> 
> Spanish/Cultural Immersion Programs are available in Costa Rica, Panamá, 
> Ecuador, Péru, Bolivia and Spain.
> 
> Sea Kayaking is available in British Columbia, Southeast Alaska, Baja Mexico, 
> Belize and The Galápagos Islands.
> 
> References/Comments from past Group Leaders are at our Website, many more are 
> available upon request. 
> 
> Rainforest and Reef
> 161 Main St. 
> Coopersville, MI 49404 
> Local/International Phone: 1.616.604.0546
> Toll Free U.S. and Canada: 1.877.255.3721
> Fax: 1.616.604.0546
> Google Talk/MS IM/Skype: travelwithrandr
> AOL IM: buddythemacaw
> E-mail: mno...@rainforestandreef.org and travelwithra...@gmail.com
> Note: Please send inquiries to both e-mail addresses
> Web: http://rainforestandreef

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Ride the Train to ESA 2012 in Portland, OR!

[Amartya Saha]

Hello Jorge,
riding a train cross-country is extremely enjoyable, affords time for  
oneself and is also a great gesture.


But at the same time, unfortunately it is time consuming (5 days from  
Miami to Portland one way, difficult to take that much time off for,  
especially for those with families) as well as expensive ($638 one way  
seating only, unless one books 3 months in advance to get 50% off).  
Poor Amtrak.


As regards reducing the environmental footprint of a conference, that  
could happen if conferences got web-based, instead of one centralized  
place. There could be local conferences happening over the same period  
in major cities, linked by either real-time video, or archived videos  
of talks. There can be an online directory of posters, which people  
can browse at will, and contact authors by email (skype follow ups,  
whatever they organize personally).
This would certainly reduce the amount of travel, as well as enable  
far greater participation (way more global.. for instance a student in  
Lagos or Lima or Kolkata can access the portal).


I'm sure that is the direction as real-time streaming gets cheaper and  
more widespread. There would be increased energy costs in streaming  
and data warehousing, but that would be a blip in a world already  
bursting with online videos, etc.


Any discussion on this ?
cheers,
Amartya













Quoting Jorge Ramos :


Hello ESA 2012 participants,

 The ESA Student Section is happy to announce that one of its members,
Andrew Reinman, will be riding the train from Boston, MA to to Portland, OR
to attend the 2012 ESA annual meeting! He is doing this and inviting others
to do it to help reduce the environmental footprint of the meeting.

 To read more about him, his initiative, and how to meet up with him at a
train station, visit the link in the ESA Student Section website (
http://www.esa.org/students/section/node/457). You can also find his
contact info in the ESA-SS website and on the ESA-SS Facebook page (
https://www.facebook.com/groups/4239397781/)

 Stay involved and make sure you keep an eye out for Andrew at your nearest
train station!

Jorge

ESA-SS website: http://www.esa.org/students/section/
ESA-SS facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/4239397781/
ESA-SS twitter: @esa_students

--
Jorge Ramos
PhD Student
Wetland Ecosystem Ecology Lab
Arizona State University
WEEL website:  http://weel.asu.edu/





Research Associate
Southeastern Environmental Research Center
Florida International University

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Invasion, or progression?

[Amartya Saha]

Hi Steve and Ling, another example of a native becoming invasive is cattail 
(typha) in the phosphorus oligotrophic Florida Everglades. Usually present in 
low population densities, cattail populations take off with increased 
phosphorus concentrations in water and soil (usually anthropogenic). Yet 
another example is the spreading populations of Vouchesia divergens in the 
Pantanal that are associated with drier conditions over the past couple 
decades. 

A plant community is dynamic and responds to changes in both biotic and abiotic 
factors that affect ecosystem structure and function. Thus a species once 
present in small numbers can dominate the community for a while..
The other question, when does an invasive become native, goes back to how we 
define what is native, or for how long does a species have to be present in an 
ecosystem to get naturalized. For instance, cocos nucifera, the coconut palm 
ubiquitous to tropical and subtropical coasts all over the world.. It is still 
a matter of conjecture as to where coconuts palms originated. If they were 
dispersed by ocean currents, then I suppose they would be considered native 
wherever they occur. If man were the agent of dispersal, they would be exotics. 
If brought in by man thousands of years ago, they would be naturalized exotics. 
If they invaded and dominated upon arrival, they would be invasive exotics. An 
exotic or native can bide their time in low numbers, and with an environmental 
change, suddenly take off, thus earning the term invasive.
Regards, amartya 
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

-Original Message-
From: Steve Young 
Sender:   "Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news" 

Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 01:22:05 
To: 
Reply-To: Steve Young 
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Invasion, or progression?

Interesting question, can a native become invasive? I would suggest that in 
some instances this is the case. For example, eastern redcedar in the Central 
Prairie is native, but has now become invasive in many locations. The main 
reason is the lack of fire that used to occur naturally prior to settlement by 
Europeans. 

For those who want to know more, we will be addressing this topic at the NAIPSC 
later in June. I expect the discussion will be quite good. Maybe I'll post a 
summary to ECOLOG then.

Steve

___
Stephen L. Young, PhD
Weed Ecologist
University of Nebraska-Lincoln



-Original Message-
From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news 
[mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of ling huang
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 8:37 PM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Invasion, or progression?

Hi

I am a chemist and not an ecologist but I'm very interested in this thread 
since I enjoy the wetlands area close to Sacramento near the Davis Yolo 
Causeway. I wondered and am interested in this invasive or progression type 
question. I saw that there was a species called Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum 
salicaria) that was introduced in the 1800s (?) and is a wetland flower that 
has invaded wetlands. I suppose my question is how far do we go back to 
determine if a species is invasive. Is there a time or case when an invasive 
becomes a native? I did see this interesting online article where the question 
asked was "Can native species become invasive?"

http://ipmsouth.com/2010/11/23/can-native-species-become-invasive/

Thanks. Ling

Ling Huang
Sacramento City College
    

--- On Sun, 4/22/12, Amanda Newsom  wrote:

From: Amanda Newsom 
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Invasion, or progression?
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Date: Sunday, April 22, 2012, 3:40 PM

Very intelligent members of the public have asked me this question when they 
approach me in the field and I have some time to chat.  It's a great question, 
because invasions biology is attacked politically on this front, so it's one to 
which professionals really must craft a coherent response in friendly 
conversation.

Another point to consider is the evolutionary history of native vs.
introduced (non-native) species in any particular system.  One of the reasons 
non-natives are of concern is that they do not share evolutionary history with 
the native community, and this contributes to the unpredictable biodiversity 
loss cited by other comments presented here.
 This can also be discussed in light of the homogenization of life on earth, 
because there are many species favored, facilitated, or directly cultivated by 
humans that are now distributed worldwide.  Some of these species threaten 
regional biodiversity (Check out the book Ecological Imperialism for a really 
interesting perspective on colonialism as an ecological process via 
introduction of new dominant species).  There's a lot coming out now on 
evolution and invasive species as well that is, at least in part, reasonably 
accessible to a general audience or the academic in ecology/evolution who is 
wanting to step int

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Plant Physiology Drought tolerance Re: [ECOLOG-L] course and symposium on plant breeding for drought tolerance

[Amartya Saha]

Hi Wayne, an example icould be foodcrops such as rice that today have hundreds 
of varieties bred into cultivars over millenia. Plants that grew in drier 
regions are known (in agriculture) as being drought tolerant, relative to rice 
plants that have ocurred in wetter areas. 
Now not being an agricultural scientist, I have nothing to add about modern day 
genetic practices like inserting dryland rice genes to achieve drought 
tolerance in a 'super' plant. 
Cheers, amartya  


Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

-Original Message-
From: Wayne Tyson 
Sender: "Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news" 

Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 14:21:17 
To: 
Reply-To: Wayne Tyson 
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Plant Physiology  Drought tolerance  Re: [ECOLOG-L] course 
and symposium on plant breeding for drought tolerance

Ecolog:

What IS drought tolerance?

What evidence is there that plants can manufacture more biomass/crop yield 
on less water rather than to evade water deficits by continuing to survive 
by reducing biomass production?

WT

- Original Message - 
From: "David Inouye" 
To: 
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 1:49 PM
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] course and symposium on plant breeding for drought 
tolerance


> PLANT BREEDING FOR DROUGHT TOLERANCE
> Moisture deficits loom as one of the greatest challenges to future crop 
> production, both in rainfed and irrigated agriculture. Enhancing the 
> genetic tolerance of crops to drought stress, is considered an essential 
> strategy for addressing these deficits. To respond to the need for more 
> plant scientists trained in developing drought tolerant cultivars, 
> Colorado State University will offer a short course in Plant Breeding for 
> Drought Tolerance June 11-22, 2012.
>
> The course will end with a two-day symposium on Plant Breeding for Drought 
> Tolerance, which will be given June 21-22, 2012 and is open to the public. 
> Confirmed speakers include Drs. John Boyer, John Passioura, Eduardo 
> Blumwald, Tom Juenger, Amelia Henry, Sean Cutler and Jill Deikman.
>
> TARGET AUDIENCE
> The course is targeted to graduate students in the plant sciences, as well 
> as to professionals in the public and private sectors. It will provide 
> three transferable graduate-level credits.
>
> CONTENT
> The course will consist of classroom lectures, hands-on lab exercises, and 
> field research activities appropriate for a drought breeding and genetics 
> program. Course activities are designed around three modules: 1) Whole 
> Plant Physiology of Drought Stress, 2) Plant Breeding for Drought Stress 
> Tolerance and 3) Genomic Approaches to Drought Stress Tolerance.
>
> PREREQUISITES
> The course will be given in English.
>
> Participants should have a solid understanding of basic plant physiology 
> and genetics. Prior to the short course, students will review online 
> material on these topics to provide a common background in breeding and 
> physiology concepts.
>
> PROGRAM COSTS
> The cost of student tuition and fees is $1,800. Accommodations for room 
> and board are available on-campus for either $850 (double occupancy) or 
> $1,150 (single occupancy). This cost includes three meals daily. Guests 
> are also welcome to make their own arrangements for room and board. All 
> foreign visas and travel arrangements are at students' initiative and 
> expense.
>
> FUNDING
> Partial funding to develop the course was provided by a grant from 
> USDA-NIFA. No scholarships are available for the course.
>
> REGISTRATION AND INFORMATION
> Participants may apply online 
> (http://www.droughtadaptation.org) 
> through February 1, 2012.
>
> -
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1415 / Virus Database: 2108/4090 - Release Date: 12/19/11
> 

Re: [ECOLOG-L] overpopulation and the abuse of facts by religon

[Amartya Saha]

Quoting Christian Vincenot
"Religion
 is based on a process of belief that is TOTALLY antagonistic and
 incompatible with scientific reasoning and methodology. Our predecessors
 have learned to the cost of their lives how much religions have been
 deceiving and incompatible with a methodological scientific approach to
 the analysis of our world. This has been true since Copernicus and
 Galileo until nowadays.
 Therefore, I do not know how one can sincerely teach science and
 religion at the same time without seeing any internal conflict or
 contradiction."

Well, it may not be universally correct to say that religion is  
incompatible with scientific belief. For instance, conservation of  
ecosystems and ecosystem services have played a central role in  
eastern religions. In India, the origins of the Holy Cow arose largely  
because of sustainability concerns of supporting a large human  
population on the subcontinent. In the Western Ghats and the eastern  
Himalayas in India, sacred forests are often the only patches of  
relatively undisturbed forest remaining. I have done paired watershed  
studies in the Western Ghats hills and seen dramatic differences in  
streamflow and aquatic biodiversity between undisturbed valleys with  
sacred forests and valleys with degraded forests. A riparian tree,  
Terminalia Arjuna has ben historically considered holy in central  
India, so that people do not cut it down. I won't be surprised if such  
pro-conservation perspectives have existed in most parts of the world.  
Indeed, scientific progress over the last couple centuries has served  
to increase natural resource extraction and overconsumption globally,  
even though life expectancy has increased and societies are shedding  
many harmful taboos.


As regards the original thread of what we can do, it strikes me that a  
critical task is education and outreach by scientists to k12 schools  
and community organizations. Perhaps universities can include that in  
an academic's job duties, so as to allow time for a scientist (who is  
normally extremely busy) to connect with the public, design small  
projects in schools and co-lead then with school teachers.


best, amartya








Quoting Christian Vincenot :


Dear Emily,


I think that when we generalize and start debasing spirituality that
corresponds with an organized religion we lessen our arguments by
being ignorant to the fact that it is the Religion as an Institution
that has become corrupt and dogmatic, not necessarily the individuals.

In the case of the mainstream religions, the issues already appear when
reading the "holy" texts themselves. The institutions are only the part
of the war machine responsible for adapting and "interpreting the
metaphors" to have the groundless statements of the "holy" texts survive
the embarrassment of being proved wrong by science and common knowledge.
The problems are as much the "holy" texts, as the process of belief, as
the institution. All of them are incompatible with the scientific method.


It is true that many wars or hostilities have been based on religious
conflicts, or carried out in the name of a religion, but it is
ridiculous to say that religion is /based/ on being /antagonistic/ to
science. Religion and Science were born of the same Philosophical
questions, but diverged when the questions began to be asked in
different ways. "/Why/ does this exist" vs "/How/ does this exist?"

First, they are antagonistic for the reasons that I gave in all my
previous posts. Feel free to counter all my arguments one by one.
Second, it is not because they were born from the same curiosity and
tackle the same questions that they are compatible. The way that they
propose to study the issues is incompatible. As a consequence, religion
and science are antagonistic. To summarise the most obvious antagonism:
Religions claim to tell the "truth" (and refuse to discuss it), the
scientific method tries to uncover it (and encourages to challenge its
results).

Best regards,
Christian Vincenot

On 12/10/2011 12:20 AM, Emily Bingham wrote:

I think that this mass generalization of the use of the words
"religions" and "religious" are confusing the sentiment of this discussion.

On a whole, having spirituality in the form of a religious faith or
belief system does not inherently clash with having scientific
understanding.

I think that when we generalize and start debasing spirituality that
corresponds with an organized religion we lessen our arguments by being
ignorant to the fact that it is the Religion as an Institution that has
become corrupt and dogmatic, not necessarily the individuals.

christian says " Religion
is based on a process of belief that is TOTALLY antagonistic and
incompatible with scientific reasoning and methodology"

It is true that many wars or hostilities have been based on religious
conflicts, or carried out in the name of a religion, but it is
ridiculous to say that religion 

Re: [ECOLOG-L] EcoTone: Speaking of species and their origins

[Amartya Saha]

Dear Esat, Over the past three decades, there are hundreds of examples 
worldwide of exotic invasives negatively impacting ecosystems, and these span 
both plants and animals. 

Whether expensive exotic removal programs work is another matter, case-specific 
Often the focus is on removal that is hard to do, maybe even futile while there 
are hardly any efforts to prevent further introductions. 

Ecosystems have always been in flux, the ranges of organisms have always 
expanded. However the speed of man-caused introductions of exotic invasives 
does not allow natives adequate time to develop survival or coexistence 
strategies. Google lantana in india, water hyacinth, purple loosestrife, 
brazilian pepper, lampreys in great lakes, burmese pythons iand african 
jewelfish in everglades, nile perch in rift valley lakes, brown tree snake in 
guam, feral cats and songbirds, cane toadsthe list goes on and on.
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

-Original Message-
From: Esat Atikkan 
Sender: "Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news" 

Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 14:51:41 
To: 
Reply-To: Esat Atikkan 
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EcoTone: Speaking of species and their origins

Interesting points.
 
At the same time alien/introduced/invasivespecies that truly alter an 
environment, out compete others, and in general, lead to ecological mayhem - I 
am not aware of any examples outside of, maybe, humans.
 
There exists serious economics benefits to many in the realm of 'alien species 
battles'.  The lionfish, Pterois volitans and, possibly, P. miles, are a good 
example.  Even quasi-scientific articles continue to villify them, describing 
their voracious appetites and ability to out-compete all native species.  Yet 
stomach anlysis fails to support those contentions.  There is no question that 
it has successfully established itself, do date from New Hampshire to Colombia, 
throughout the Caribbean and it would be a miracle if it is eradicated.  But 
significant ecological perturbation has yet to be proven.  That does not stop 
dive shops, REEF, and a plethora of other organizations from putting together 
derbies, round-ups, and the like geared to the illusion that this is the way to 
eradicate the pest.  It should be noted that all that organize such events 
charge for it, thus deriving a benefit from the lionfish.  In areas where scuba 
diving was waning,
 the arrival of the lionfish has been a boost.
 
Thus, despite the generally accepted view that eradication is near impossible, 
it is turned into a cash cow - cash fish.
 
Indeed a fresh assessment of this issue should be welcome as if it is accepted 
that the 'Earth' is changing, why is it blieved the biota of the various 
localities will remain unchanged.  International trade, globailzation, and like 
activities are conducive to such introductions and it would be through such new 
thinking that the issue would receive a fresh understanding.
 
Esat Atikkan
 
 
 

--- On Fri, 6/10/11, Judith S. Weis  wrote:


From: Judith S. Weis 
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EcoTone: Speaking of species and their origins
To: Date: Friday, June 10, 2011, 2:30 PM


IMHO, they are attacking a "straw man." I haven't seen many scientists,
managers, policy-makers etc. getting all worked up about non-indigenous
species who integrate well into the environment, get a green card, pay
their taxes etc. The ones that are being attacked and for which they are
spending lots of money are the truly invasive ones that cause ecological
and economic damage - eating up everything in sight,  outcompeting native
species for food, space etc. - and generally taking over - affecting the
environment in negative ways.




> An essay published in the June 8 issue of Nature is causing something of a
> stir. Eighteen ecologists who signed the essay, titled "Don't judge
> species on their origins," "argue that conservationists should assess
> organisms based on their impact on the local environment, rather than
> simply whether they're native," as described in a recent Scientific
> American podcast.
>
> In the essay, Mark Davis from Macalester College, St. Paul, Minnesota and
> colleagues argue that adherence to the idea of non-natives as "the enemy"
> is more a reflection of "prejudice rather than solid science," wrote
> Brandon Keim in a Wired Science article. As the authors wrote, the
> "preoccupation with the native-alien dichotomy" among scientists, land
> managers and policy-makers is prohibitive to dynamic and pragmatic
> conservation and species management in a 21st century planet that is
> forever altered by climate change, land-use changes and other
> anthropogenic influences. As a result of this misguided preoccupation,
> claim the authors, time and resources are unnecessarily spent attempting
> to eradicate introduced species that actually turn out to be a boon to the
> environment; the authors cite the non-native tamarisk tree in the western
> U.S. as an example

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Communication Science to Public Plant Roots

[Amartya Saha]

There are many experiments with pots divided into wet/dry and nutrient 
enriched/depleted zones, and most of them show greater root growth and density 
in wetter, high nutrient zones. 
The idea of consciousness is an animal-centric one; plants must be just as 
conscious in their own way, as ultimately a part of consciousness is 
recognition and adaptation to the environment, allowing species survival and 
reproduction. 
Genetically programmed to seek water -- don't all organisms seek water ?
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

-Original Message-
From: "Pekin, Burak K" 
Sender: "Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news" 

Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 11:30:09 
To: 
Reply-To: "Pekin, Burak K" 
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Communication Science to Public Plant Roots

This seems to me more like a philosphical issue, rather than a scientific one. 
there are obviously several mechanisms that allow plants to actively "seek" 
water. However, unlike the mechanisms that allow an animal to seek water, such 
as detecting moisture in the wind using smell, they do not require a conscious 
desicion, i.e., the animal may decide to follow or not follow the scent, the 
plant does not have a choice. So the question is whether "seeking" requires a 
conscious desicion to be made by the individual. It could also be argued to 
what extent the desicions made by animals, such as humans, are conscious versus 
subconious and whether a subconcious desicion satisfies the definition of 
"seeking".

-Burak


Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Communication Science to Public Plant Roots

Well, I can't say what the narrator was basing his/her statement upon, but
it can be justified.  Roots are, for the most part, programmed to grow
downward (positive geotropism), and in many if not most soil environments,
water is more abundant at lower levels.  Thus, growing downward means
growing toward water.  (One situation where this doesn't hold true is right
after a rain, when the upper level of soil may be wetter then a lower
level.)

Additionally, roots (like all protoplasm-based structures) need water to
grow.  Thus, roots that are tentatively entering a wet zone (assuming it's
not too wet) will grow faster than roots entering a dry zone, thus setting
up a positive feed-back loop regulating root growth, which obviously has a
genetic component.

Finally, you may consider differential mortality of root cells in wet verus
dry soil regions as also being a genetic program that causes the root SYSTEM
to grow toward water.

I think this is enough to justify the statement.  Of course, the statement
is a bit misleading in that it may call up the image of a little root tip
sniffing first in one direction, and then in another, and finally saying,
"Ah, the water's over there; I'd better grow in that direction."  But this
sort of imagery often colors our understanding of mechanistic processes in
biology, even for scientists (for me, at least).

   Martin M. Meiss

2011/5/19 Wayne Tyson 

> Ecolog:
>
> I just surfed across a "science" program on the "History" channel. The
> narrator said "Plant roots are genetically programmed to seek water . . ."
>
> Will someone please inform me of the basis for this statement?
>
> WT

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Plant physiology roots water

[Amartya Saha]

Hello Wayne and Tom,

there are some studies in the agricultural literature on this  
phenomenon termed hydrotropism referring to the root cap's ability to  
sense moisture. For instance:


Delfeena Eapen, María L. Barroso, Georgina Ponce, María E. Campos and  
Gladys I. Cassab (2005) Hydrotropism:Root Growth Responses to Water.  
Trends in Plant Science

Volume 10, Issue 1, January 2005, Pages 44-50

On often comes across much denser root growth out to one side of a  
plant, if there is much more moisture in one side relative to the  
other side, like a dripping tap.


There are many more studies looking at root distribution between trees  
and shrubs/ grasses in savannahs, that takk about lateral spread for  
sparse water and nutrients.


Mycorrhizal associations, as I have read, are very important for  
nutrient aquisition, especially immobile Phosphorus. I wonder how  
important would they be as a water source; am not aware of any study  
that attempts to quantify how much of a tree's water budget would come  
from mycorrhizae as opposed to direct root uptake - interesting idea  
that ! I have heard about mile long mycorrhizal strands in the Sahara  
desert, where one expects that mycorrhizae can take advantage of dew  
at dawn better than roots can, owing to their finer thickness, net  
like structure and greater surface area.


Cheers
amartya

Visiting Research Associate
Southeastern Environmental Research Center
Florida International University
Miami, FL 33199



Quoting Tom Horton :


I will suggest that many plants partner with mycorrhizal fungi for
water and mineral acquisition. So the fungi access water and deliver it
via the hyphae directly to the plant hosts. Estimates vary, but about
80% of the world's plant species are mycorrhizal and consideration of
root physiology and soil interactions in the absence of the mycorrhizal
partners is probably misleading.

Tom


At 7:09 AM -0700 9/22/10, Wayne Tyson wrote:

Ecolog:

The following quote has come to my attention:

"To find water, a plant has to position its roots with just as much  
 precision as it arranges its leaves. If moisture is in very short   
supply, then a plant may have to drive a tap root deep into the   
ground to reach the water table. Some desert plants have had to   
develop root systems that are far deeper than they are tall and   
extend laterally a very long way beyond the furthest extent of   
their foliage. Even if the environment is well-watered, a plant may  
 still need to compete with others for this essential commodity, so  
 it positions a network of roots within a few inches of the soil   
surface, where it can gather the rain water before others can."   
(Attenborough 1995:48-51)


Attenborough, D. 1995. The Private Life of Plants: A Natural   
History of Plant Behavior. London: BBC Books. 320 p.


Can anyone attest to the accuracy of, or refute this statement,   
particularly with reference to a plant "finding" water,   
"positioning" its roots with "precision," "driving" a tap root to   
"reach" the water table, and "positions" a network of roots . . .   
"where it can gather the rain water before others can?"


WT



--
It was worth being a bubble just to have held that rainbow thirty seconds.
Carl Sandburg

Thomas R. Horton
Mail: 246 Illick Hall, SUNY-ESF, Syracuse, NY 13210
Office: 350 Illick Hall
Labs:  447 and 359 Illick Hall
Phone: 315-470-6794
Fax: 315-470-6934
http://www.esf.edu/efb/horton/




www.bio.miami.edu/asaha

Re: [ECOLOG-L] fixing peer review - elegant new proposal and petition

[Amartya Saha]

Its a good idea; however there is a possibility of the quality of  
reviews deteriorating, whereby reviewers may not assign the time and  
effort required for an indepth review, as their main aim would  be to  
get as many "PubCreds" as possible.

cheers
Amartya


Quoting Jeremy Fox :


The peer review system is breaking down and will soon be in crisis:
increasing numbers of submitted manuscripts mean that demand for reviews is
outstripping supply. This is a classic "tragedy of the commons," in which
individuals have every incentive to exploit the "reviewer commons" by
submitting manuscripts, but little or no incentive to contribute reviews.
The result is a system increasingly dominated by "cheats" (individuals who
submit papers without doing proportionate reviewing), with increasingly
random and potentially biased results as more and more manuscripts are
rejected without external review.

In the latest issue of the ESA Bulletin (July 2010, v. 91, p. 325), Owen
Petchey and I propose a classic solution to this classic tragedy:
privatizing the commons. Specifically, we propose that instead of being free
to exploit the reviewer commons at will, authors should have to "pay" for
their submissions using a novel "currency" called PubCreds, earned by
performing reviews. We discuss how this simple, powerful idea could be
implemented in practice, and describe its advantages over previously
proposed solutions.

The article is available at
.

Owen and I are very serious about wanting to see this idea, or a suitable
alternative, implemented. We have set up a petition at
. Please sign if you
support this idea, at least enough to want to see it further discussed. The
petition site also has a link to the article, and a blog where we'll be
updating on progress of the idea and responding to comments.

PubCreds are already set to be discussed by the ESA Publications Committee,
and by numerous other ecology journals. If you're as frustrated as Owen and
I by the recent deterioration of the peer review process, now's the time to
speak up and take action. Please sign the petition, and pass it on to your
colleagues and students.





www.bio.miami.edu/asaha

Re: [ECOLOG-L] A WARNING FOR PROFESSIONALS GOING TO THE UNITED KINGDOM

[Amartya Saha]

Arturo, may I add that Latin America is not much different -- I've had  
similar problems three times, once in Mexico, once in Peru and once in  
Argentina. Needless to say, I lost my tickets all three times. And  
being a student these were from my own pocket.


Come to think of it, India can be just as bad even for Indian  
nationals. I was refused entry at Bombay immigration on a flimsy  
pretext that i did not have my old passport showing departure from  
India 7 years prior. I had to grease palms to enter my old hometown.


I am lucky to have never encountered problems in more than thirty  
entries to the US or UK. Just luck.


In the end, immigration rules are getting ever more convoluted, and no  
two agents know the same, and to beat the chances of bad luck, one has  
to prepare ahead. There is a good website run by Delta


http://www.delta.com/planning_reservations/plan_flight/international_travel_information/visa_passport_information/index.jsp

but again, this won't have the lowdown on special things like  
researcher visas and voluntary sponsorship certificates; that one has  
to get from the concerned embassy or high comission, failing which,  
one has to offer white lies (like being a tourist instead of  
researcher or volunteer) to beat the inane system.


happy travels
cheers
Amartya





Quoting Arturo Restrepo :


David: No worries, if this make you feel better, the high likelihood of this
happening to any Latinamerican professional when enter to the United States
borders is very common.  Hard to believe when they ask you what is your
profession I used to respond Environmental scientist or ecologist, it looks
to me that they associate drugs with environmentalist movements.

Take it easy and enjoy travelling the world !

Arturo Restrepo

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 8:25 PM, David R. Anderson <
ander...@cnr.colostate.edu> wrote:


I flew to London-Heathrow a week ago on my way to Glasgow, Scotland where
I was to give a 2-dayworkshop, a day of consultation and a seminar.  The
University of Glasgow was to pay for my expenses and services and 41 grad
students, post docs, and faculty were registered for the workshop.  I was
detained at Heathrow by the UK Border Agency for nearly 5 hours.  During
this time I was searched, questioned, fingerprinted, photograhped and
moved from one secure room to the next -- like a criminal.  My carry-on
suitcase and leather bag with my workshop materials were emptied and
searched, along with my wallet.  I asked on 7 different occasions to be
able to call the US Embassy -- these requests were denied!  At the end of
this long process the agent announced that I was to be deported the next
day!   They claimed that I did not have a special visa or a "certificate
of sponsorship."  Indeed, I had neither; I had never heard of such
requirements for a US citizen.  I have spent 42 years working in
academic/science and have travelled to many foreign countries.  I have
never experienced such detention and deportation.

UK universities, travel agents, immigration attorneys, my US Senator's
office and others are now trying to unravel exactly what papers are
actually required.  This search has proven to be difficult for a number of
reasons.  This matter is important as all the UK universities have
academic visitors arriving daily for conferences, symposia, workshops, and
seminars, etc., etc. with countless agreements concerning reimbursments
and honoraria.  It seems that special documents are now required or one
faces deportation and all the related expenses.  I will post agian if I
learn more; in the meantime, professionals going to the UK should make
every effort to obtain the "required" documents.







www.bio.miami.edu/asaha

[ECOLOG-L] Re-creating coastal marl soils for greenhouse study

[Amartya Saha]

Hello all,
posting for a colleague.

"We are planning greenhouse studies to look at the effects of salinity on
plant growth and stomatal conductance. The native habitat of focal plants
has predominantly marl soils (coastal uplands in South Florida).

In the interests of uniformity and minimizing other variances, we  
would like to make a soil mixture mimicking marl soils, which are quite

clayey, with calcium that can ameliorate the effects of
salinity."

Thanks for any responses.
regards,
Amartya






www.bio.miami.edu/asaha

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Report Documents the Risks of Giant Invasive Snakes in the U.S.

[Amartya Saha]

Hello,
thanks for posting this.
Pythons have been gaining ground in South Florida, and this has been  
common knowledge amongst locals since at least the past decade.


Still, there are no controls on pet shops that offer exotic reptiles for sale.

If this report does not recommend the total ban on importing or  
breeding exotics, it is not of much practical use. As of now, almost  
all management involves killing these reptiles, an unethical practice  
("what gives us the right to kill another life form", etc)  if we do  
not have the cojones to oppose the powerful pet store lobby.


cheers
amartya



Quoting "=?windows-1252?q?asalzb...@herpdigest.org?="  
:



Report Documents the Risks of Giant Invasive Snakes in the U.S.
Released: 10/13/2009 12:00:00 PM
Contact Information:
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
Office of Communication
119 National Center
Reston, VA 20192Catherine Puckett (USGS) 1-click interview
Phone: 352-264-3532

Ken Warren (FWS) 1-click interview
Phone: 772-562-3909 x323

Linda Friar (NPS) 1-click interview
Phone: 305-242-7714


Five giant non-native snake species would pose high risks to the health of
ecosystems in the United States should they become established here,
according to a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) report released today.

The USGS report details the risks of nine non-native boa, anaconda and
python species that are invasive or potentially invasive in the United
States. Because all nine species share characteristics associated with
greater risks, none was found to be a low ecological risk. Two of these
species are documented as reproducing in the wild in South Florida, with
population estimates for Burmese pythons in the tens of thousands.

Based on the biology and known natural history of the giant constrictors,
individuals of some species may also pose a small risk to people, although
most snakes would not be large enough to consider a person as suitable prey.
Mature individuals of the largest species—Burmese, reticulated, and northern
and southern African pythons—have been documented as attacking and killing
people in the wild in their native range, though such unprovoked attacks
appear to be quite rare, the report authors wrote. The snake most associated
with unprovoked human fatalities in the wild is the reticulated python. The
situation with human risk is similar to that experienced with alligators:
attacks in the wild are improbable but possible.

“This report clearly reveals that these giant snakes threaten to destabilize
some of our most precious ecosystems and parks, primarily through predation
on vulnerable native species,” said Dr. Robert Reed, a coauthor of the
report and a USGS invasive species scientist and herpetologist.

High-risk species—Burmese pythons, northern and southern African pythons,
boa constrictors and yellow anacondas—put larger portions of the U.S.
mainland at risk, constitute a greater ecological threat, or are more common
in trade and commerce. Medium-risk species—reticulated python,
Deschauensee’s anaconda, green anaconda and Beni anaconda—constitute lesser
threats in these areas, but still are potentially serious threats.

The USGS scientists who authored the report emphasized that native U.S.
birds, mammals, and reptiles in areas of potential invasion have never had
to deal with huge predatory snakes before—individuals of the largest three
species reach lengths of more than 20 feet and upwards of 200 pounds. The
reticulated python is the world’s longest snake, and the green anaconda is
the heaviest snake. Both species have been found in the wild in South
Florida, although breeding populations are not yet confirmed for either.

Breeding populations have been confirmed in South Florida for Burmese
pythons and the boa constrictor, and there is strong evidence that the
northern African python may have a breeding population in the wild as well.

“Compounding their risk to native species and ecosystems is that these
snakes mature early, produce large numbers of offspring, travel long
distances, and have broad diets that allow them to eat most native birds and
mammals,” said Dr. Gordon Rodda, a USGS scientist at the Fort Collins
Science Center and the other coauthor of the report.

In addition, he said, most of these snakes can inhabit a variety of habitats
and are quite tolerant of urban or suburban areas. Boa constrictors and
northern African pythons, for example, already live wild in the Miami
metropolitan area.

The report notes that there are no control tools yet that seem adequate for
eradicating an established population of giant snakes once they have spread
over a large area. Making the task of eradication more difficult is that in
the wild these snakes are extremely difficult to find since their
camouflaged coloration enables them to blend in well with their surroundings.

“We have a cautionary tale with the American island of Guam and the brown
treesnake,” said Reed. “Within 40 years of its arrival, th

Re: [ECOLOG-L] 10 years without warming

[Amartya Saha]

"It seems that there are in the last 10 years the planet did not get warmer."

Thats an overly simplified statement that politicians love !

10 years is way too little time to search for a trend. Then these are  
AVERAGED temperature differences, ostensibly equally sampled all over  
the world. And we know that climate variables are rarely perfectly  
linear in their correlative or causative behavior, given the different  
time scales of various oceanic oscillations.
Meanwhile the accelerated melting of Himalayan and Andean glaciers  
continue, as evidenced by the highest snowmelt-fed stream discharges  
in recorded history (ok, thats also a blip, but at least spans more  
than a century in certain watersheds).


Cheers
amartya

Quoting Matheus Carvalho :


Dear list members:
It seems that there are in the last 10 years the planet did not get warmer.
See the last edition of Science, or try this link:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/326/5949/28-a?rss=1
Article title:
What Happened to Global Warming? Scientists Say Just Wait a Bit

Matheus C. Carvalho

Senior Research Associate

Centre for Coastal Biogeochemistry

Southern Cross University

Lismore - Australia





Veja quais são os assuntos do momento no Yahoo! +Buscados
http://br.maisbuscados.yahoo.com





www.bio.miami.edu/asaha

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Ecohydrology Ratio of water to biomass Re: [ECOLOG-L] Postdoc: Ecohydrology/Plant Water Use, Duke University

[Amartya Saha]

hello Wayne, this is a very interesting question - if i understand you  
correctly, you are enquiring into how much water an individual of a  
species has taken up in its lifetime (to date) and connecting this  
with the total biomass produced to date (including shedded leaves,  
sloughed off roots, fruits, etc).


Now this total biomass over lifetime estimate would be available only  
in a greenhouse setting.  So alternatively you seek to get an estimate  
of total water uptaken and relate that to dry biomass at an instant of  
time.


I imagine there would be a huge amount of intraspecific variation  
caused by the specific conditions of water and nutrients an individual  
may have encountered in its lifetime to date.


In addition, there would also be interspecific variation ( as you  
allude to while comparing cactus and corn), especially when comparing  
species in arid and moist environments, with a larger water to biomass  
ratio expected for aridland vegetation as compared to vegetation  
growing in humid climes.


this could be tied in with species level Water Use Efficiency, I guess.

cheers
amartya







Quoting Wayne Tyson :


Ecolog:

It depends upon how one defines "water use efficiency," I suppose, but
not in the "production" sense as commonly conceived in the in the case
of agriculture and horticulture, but I wouldn't want to rule those out
either. To put it in contrast, agriculture/horticulture tends to be
more concerned with the amount of production or keeping a plant in a
state of luxury consumption most of the time, whereas "wild"
self-sufficient vegetation is more "concerned" with survival and
reproduction.

To cite a couple of practical phenomena, consider "cattails" (Typha
sp.) growing at the edge of a body of water, and draw a graph, say, at
the top of the plants to indicate one rough measure of biomass; as
water intake declines, biomass declines (setting aside other
effects--O2, pH, nutrients etc.) for the moment). In a cultivated
field, one can observe similar variations due to water intake.

I hope this helps; I apologize for not being clearer--please continue
to ask for further clarification as necessary.

WT


- Original Message - From: "Samuel Pierce (spierce1)"

To: "Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news"
; "Wayne Tyson" 
Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 5:39 AM
Subject: RE: [ECOLOG-L] Ecohydrology Ratio of water to biomass Re:
[ECOLOG-L] Postdoc: Ecohydrology/Plant Water Use, Duke University


Just to clarify, you are asking about water use efficiency?


From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news
[ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson [landr...@cox.net]
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 11:01 PM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Ecohydrology Ratio of water to biomass Re:
[ECOLOG-L] Postdoc: Ecohydrology/Plant Water Use, Duke University

Ecolog:

Thanks to Adrian for the reference; however, for clarification, I am looking
for the RATIO of biomass to total water intake, not just water content at
any given moment. That is, the total water intake over the entire lifespan
of the plant compared to the dry biomass. For example, a cactus of a given
age would have a high ratio of total water CONTENT to dry biomass, but its
ratio of the total amount of water required to produce a given unit of dry
biomass might or might not be similar to that of, for example, a corn plant
or a redwood tree. My question is aimed at unearthing research of that
kind--or confirming whether or not such research has been done. I don't know
of any--that's why I'm asking.

WT


- Original Message -
From: "Adrian Harpold" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 5:31 PM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Ecohydrology Ratio of water to biomass Re:
[ECOLOG-L] Postdoc: Ecohydrology/Plant Water Use, Duke University


Wayne,

Check the World's water by Gleick et al.  It has a nice table with
various water contents.

Adrian

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Wayne Tyson wrote:

Ecolog:

I have not kept up to date in this area, but I hope someone will be kind
enough to help me facilitate the necessary work to rectify that, beginning
with answers to the following question:

1. Has anyone studied the ratio of total water intake to biomass exclusive
of water content? (For example, a cactus and a "corn" plant? I would be
most
interested to see graphic comparisons of a diverse and large number of
species. I am curious about the range of differences and the research
methodology.)

WT

PS: I have left the message below attached for reference; it stimulated
the
question, but there is no direct relationship.

- Original Message - From: "Will Cook" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 10:09 AM
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Postdoc: Ecohydrology/Plant Water Use, Duke University


[For more opportunities, please see the ESA Ecophys section website
http://www.biology.duke.edu/jackson/ecophys/postdoc.htm ]

Postdoctoral Position in 

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Recycling and the poor who do it

[Amartya Saha]

Thank you, Bill, for these stories.

Recycling is a private enterprise in india, run nationwide by  
thousands of small merchants who buy paper, glass, cans and hard  
plastics from an army of ragpickers hailing from the lowest castes. As  
the article mentions, these ragpickers, unfortunately, get paid barely  
enough for their next meal, surviving hand to mouth, living on the  
streets, yet providing a vital service to the cities, the environment  
and the economy. The article mentions a very practical idea for  
governments to bolster this recycling sector by supporting the  
ragpickers and ensuring that they are not at the mercy of global scrap  
prices.


The latter requires international cooperation, whereby reuse and  
recycling are given priority over mining/drilling/logging for  
production of virgin resources. Unfortunately, doing the latter in the  
third world is often more 'economical', since multinationals and  
certain manufacturing economies collude with corrupt third world  
governments into opening up their forests, in the name of  
'development', that is cheaper than recycling costs in the first world  
(primarily high labor costs).


Achieving a higher degree of recycling worldwide would require a  
combination of environmental disposal fees built into product prices,  
like a tax,  incentives for consumers to recycle, such as beer bottle  
refunds in many american states, government regulations to prevent  
collapsing scrap market prices and formalization of the developing  
world recycling sector.


While many ECOLOG_L folks might be more aware of dung beetles, most  
people in India and Brazil are JUST AS unaware of the ecosystem and  
economic services provided by the children of the damned.


Best,
Amartya




Quoting William Silvert :


When I saw this in yesterday's paper I wondered about posting it to the
list, since there is so much discussion about recycling. Then on the TV this
morning there was a story about waste collectors in Cairo who are being
devastated by government policy - they are members of the Christian minority
who feed pigs on waste and sell them as a large part of their income, and
the government had all the pigs killed to halt swine flu even though there
was no evidence of infection in Egyptian pigs. As a result, the edible
garbage is piling up in the streets and the vermin population is exploding.
And the children of the waste collectors are suffering from malnutrition
because the poverty of their families has gotten much worse.

The two stories point up a little-known aspect of recycling, that it is
largely the domain of the poorest and most despised members of society who
are at the mercy of forces beyond their control and subject to arbitrary
from government and from economic pressures. Yet they form an essential
component of the human ecosystem and play a vital role in recycling and thus
in resource management.

I suspect that the members of this list know more about dung beetles and
other detritivores than about the humans who have the same function. In Addo
Elephant Park there are signs all over the place warning drivers to slow
down and look out for dung beetles, but I have never seen any evidence of
similar concern for people who struggle to keep our cities clean. Maybe they
deserve some thought and attention.

Bill Silvert



August 5, 2009
NY Times Op-Ed Contributor
A Scrap of Decency
By BHARATI CHATURVEDI
Delhi, India

AMONG those suffering from the global recession are millions of workers who
are not even included in the official statistics: urban recyclers - the
trash pickers, sorters, traders and reprocessors who extricate paper,
cardboard and plastics from garbage heaps and prepare them for reuse. Their
work is both unrecorded and largely unrecognized, even though in some parts
of the world they handle as much as 20 percent of all waste.

The world's 15 million informal recyclers clean up cities, prevent some
trash from ending in landfills, and even reduce climate change by saving
energy on waste disposal techniques like incineration.

They also recycle waste much more cheaply and efficiently than governments
or corporations can, and in many cities in the developing world, they
provide the only recycling services.

But as housing values and the cost of oil have fallen worldwide, so too has
the price of scrap metal, paper and plastic. From India to Brazil to the
Philippines, recyclers are experiencing a precipitous drop in income. Trash
pickers and scrap dealers in Minas Gerais State in Brazil, for example, saw
a decline of as much as 80 percent in the price of old magazines and 81
percent for newspapers, and a 77 percent drop in the price of cardboard from
October 2007 to last December.

In the Philippines, many scrap dealers have shuttered so quickly that
researchers at the Solid Waste Management Association of the Philippines
didn't have a chance to record their 

Re: [ECOLOG-L] What's wrong with growth (was: ESA position on sustainable growth)

[Amartya Saha]

Hi Kelly,

the iphones, blackberries, laptops etc. that you mention are forming a  
NEW source of highly toxic waste (e-waste), that is shipped to africa,  
india and china, where barefooted pickers go through to extract  
circuits. New technology = increased problems here.


If western governments had the cojones, they'd insist upon reuse and  
recycling these. But... the hardware is now made in the third world,  
and how would companies be "profitable" if people didn't replace their  
cool hardware for the new, latest ubercool versions ? That takes  
political will to enforce, and an enlightened public to support this,  
and maintain and repair their old hardware.


the following video on youtube beautifully illustrates the chain of  
resources and impacts of ANY product.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLBE5QAYXp8&feature=fvw

You're also right in that third world environmental pollution,  
sanitation and indeed, population growth are huge problems, that need  
strong political will to tackle. But therein lies the weakness of a  
democracy, it is rendered powerless if the bulk public are unaware.  
comes down to education...as there will always be greedy growth  
mongerers wishing to line their own pockets.


cheers
amartya













Quoting Kelly Stettner :

Wayne: I love your enthusiasm and support for the "sparks" that   
ignite conversation and imagination!

 
Joe: Thank you for your "humble opinion," you invite me to clarify   
and ask more questions.  You note two points about economic growth:

 
1. "Economic growth", as commonly used, means that every year the   
human species creates more "economic activity" than the year before   
(fueled by growth in both population and per-capita consumption).


2. "Economic activity" inevitably involves consumption of resources,  
 so that means every year we convert more land to human use,  
generate  more electricity, cut more trees, mine more minerals and  
fuels,  manufacture more goods, produce more pollution, catch more  
fish,  etc.  So clearly there has to be a limit at some point.

 
Joe, Since I'm not an economist, I must ask questions in order to   
understand.  I see what you're saying in both of the above points;   
unlimited "taking" is short-sighted and self-defeating.  However,   
can the growth and activity you describe not be coupled with   
activities that replenish what we consume?  We cut trees and mine   
the earth ~ but we can also replant and learn ways to harness the   
energy we need from a variety of resources.  I know that much of our  
 technology seemed like science fiction just ten or twenty years   
ago.  iPhones, blackberries, laptops ~ even digital watches were   
fantasy before they became reality.  Is there reason to believe we   
can't figure out how to replenish the resources we use, use them   
more efficiently, engage in utilizing other resources we hadn't   
tried before (Sea-floor vents?  Algae?  Kudzu or Japanese knotweed?   
 Something on Mars on the moon?), and find ways to lessen our impact  
 on the planet?  Green roofs,
 companion gardening, rain barrels, etc are all low-tech, old ideas   
that could be just the beginning ~ and could also fuel the economic   
growth of our society.  Businesses are cropping up all over the   
place to explore these ideas.

 
I also see economic growth in terms of those nations with big   
problems: I'm thinking about improving pollution and sanitation and   
waste issues in places like Africa and India and China.    
Environmental degradation isn't just a Western problem; I think it's  
 even more critical of an issue in less-developed areas of the   
world.  Change in those places will take more than a few years,   
it'll take a change in government before any real environmental   
issues are recognized and addressed.  The issues of population,   
sanitation, poverty and pollution in those areas of the world are   
far more complex than I can understand at this point in my life, but  
 I feel strongly that the developed nations need to recognize that   
Third World pollution & waste are a huge "elephant in the room."


A few more cents' worth,
Kelly Stettner
Director
Black River Action Team
www. BlackRiverActionTeam. org
 

--

Date:    Wed, 29 Jul 2009 20:26:38 -0700
From:    Wayne Tyson 
Subject: Re: ESA position on sustainable growth

Forum:

I find myself in agreement with almost all "sides" of this discussion; it is
healthy, stimulating, alive--as it should be.

I am greatly encouraged that this Forum, fine as it is, is undergoing
likewise a process of refinement, and I welcome the array of voices that
provide great illuminating sparks.

Gratefully,
WT

"'Tis friction's brisk rub that provides the vital spark!" --Unknown

--

Date:    Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:21:12 -0700
From:    joseph gathman 
Subject: What's wrong with growth, (was: ESA position on sustainable growth)

Kelly 

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Re ESA Position Statement

[Amartya Saha]

Dear Nadine/ESA,

thank you for your post. I was quite puzzled to read

"We all agreed that an ESA statement

needed to highlight the conflict between two fundamental truths:

1. Humans in the developing world have a moral right to try to 
improve their well being.
2. There is a finite capacity of the planet to support humans and 
increasing resource consumption and waste production will degrade 
the planetary carrying capacity."


There is no mention of the developed world vis a vis truth no.2

Then, I am doubtful that no.1 can be considered a "truth". First world  
models of development are in most cases inapplicable to the third  
world. For instance, mechanized agriculture makes sense in the  
sparsely populated wide open spaces of the new world, while this would  
render millions of small farmers landless in the third world. Prior  
"development" projects ( whether agribusiness or large scale  
hydroelectric power) have usually benefitted a few, while  
marginalizing millions.
It is the few who now clamor loudest for SUVs, hybrid cars and other  
material trappings of the west. While hybrid cars are better than  
SUVs, a mass transit system is far greener on a per capita basis.  
Improving living  conditions in developing countries requires  
protecting land, water and  air resources, providing education and  
primary healthcare to all, and not just indiscriminately manufacturing  
more hybrid cars for the haves.


Lastly, it should not be the role of ESA to offer a compromise; that is the
role of the government. ESA is the premier source for information on
ecosystem impacts.

Best,
Amartya


Quoting Nadine Lymn :


Dear All:

In a recent correspondence with an individual concerned about ESA's   
  position statement, ESA Board Member Josh Schimel points out that   
  the Governing Board took very seriously its task of representing
 10,000 ecologists and carefully deliberated in issuing the ESA 
statement.  With his permission, I post Josh's correspondence below.


Nadine Lymn
ESA Director of Public Affairs



The ears were not deaf. On the contrary, they were wide open. We 
heard and agreed with many of the fundamental points Brian, you and   
  others had been making. But those weren't the only messages coming  
   in and we had to balance those different perspectives. The 
discussion at the Governing Board meeting was extended, thoughtful,   
  and analytical. There are a number of extraordinarily insightful   
and   concerned people on the board. We all agreed that an ESA   
statement   needed to highlight the conflict between two fundamental  
 truths:


1. Humans in the developing world have a moral right to try to 
improve their well being.
2. There is a finite capacity of the planet to support humans and 
increasing resource consumption and waste production will degrade 
the planetary carrying capacity.


Thus, we felt that the statement had to argue that we needed to 
balance those conflicting truths. As ecologists, we can and should
 focus on the second--managing the carrying capacity, but we can't
 tell poor people that they may not improve their living conditions.  
   There are ethical boundaries just as there are ecological 
boundaries. We didn't feel that we could cross one while arguing 
that we must not cross the other. So, the key front section starts
 by highlighting that conflict, and personally I think it does it  
well:


---
The Sustainability of Economic Growth
At present, economic growth is a double-edged sword: Although it 
enhances the standards of living in the short-term, it can degrade
 the ecological infrastructure needed to sustain long-term welfare.   
  This dichotomy may be humanity's central challenge in the 21st 
century-sustaining living standards and spreading the benefits of 
economic development to the large fraction of humanity still mired
 in poverty, while preserving the ecological life-support system on   
  which future welfare depends.

-

The whole document is a major redraft from the initial one, which 
many were unhappy with because a) it focused too much on the right
 to develop, b) didn't emphasize the carrying capacity issues 
adequately, and c) read too economic-speak rather than 
ecological-speak. I.e. we were concerned about the same core issues   
  you and others were highlighting, partly in response to your  
input.The current document focuses on the risks to ecological  
systems  (and   thus the long-term well being of humanity) and the  
need to  manage   them rationally. Those are appropriate messages  
for  ecologists to   make.


However, and this may be where the apparent disagreements arise: 
does "economic growth" necessarily require increased resource 
consumption and environmental degradation? The economists, at least,  
   argue that some types of economic activity actually redu

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Sea-Level Rise Revised

[Amartya Saha]

whether its 10 or 20 feet
is immaterial to most of the world's poor
constrained to live on the coastlines of the earth

they'll drown or be refugees

while experts and scientists
while continuing to theorize and chatter
will shift to higher ground

cheery news ?
seems like we have blinkers on
while sitting on the branch
we saw upon





Quoting William Silvert :


This cheery news seems inconsistent with recent reports of large areas
of ice breaking off from Antarctica. Perhaps someone knowledgable who
is not an "expert" (fanatic) but knows what he is talking about could
clarify the situation. Someone who is neither using fear and terror to
get research funding nor trying to cut up Al Gore into bite-sized
chunks to feed to the exploding population of polar bears.

In any case, there are a lot of threats ahead of us, and temperature
increases and sea level rise are only some of them. Others, like
dissolved CO2 in the oceans, are serious and not so controversial.

Bill Silvert

- Original Message - From: "James T. Conklin (BSME UMD 1958)"

To: 
Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 3:19 PM
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Sea-Level Rise Revised



Experts have cut the sea-level rise forecast IF the West Antarctic ice
sheet were to collapse due to Global Warming.  The forecast has been
revised to 10 feet in 500 years, or 0.24 inches per year.*

I recall that a sea-level rise of 20 to 50 feet had been predicted by Al
Gore and other Global Warming "experts" (fanatics) within decades.  I also
recall that the Antarctic ice sheet has been getting thicker, i.e.: not
melting.

My advice to people who have been traumatized by Al Gore's dire Global
Warming and Sea-Level Rising warnings is to start worrying about their
gums.

* Research by U.K. Natural Environment Research Council and the Colorado
University Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Science and
published in the journal Science 5/15/09.





Department of Biology, University of Miami
www.bio.miami.edu/asaha

[ECOLOG-L] The mirage - ECONOMIC growth, population and a couple of stories

[Amartya Saha]

Its very true that most of the world's urban population is utterly  
clueless about the magnitude of the problems in EVERY ecosystem on  
earth, and not just marine.


However, to quote Sarah "It is all a

mirage.Economy, economics, economic growth, is artificial. It is a mirage.
It is something we made up. It is not real."


I think economics is, unfortunately, VERY real. Conservation of  
ecosystems, national parks, protected areas and the exploitation of  
natural resources are all directly linked with human needs, both basic  
and luxury. In the end, humans are part of the world too, and their  
actions directly impact all other forms of life.
Its time that a course embracing both perspectives are taught to  
school children right from first grade, so that they understand what  
are the ecological costs of say, a plastic water bottle, or a can of  
tuna, or transporting organic apples from washington to florida, or  
the costs of airconditioning or needless packaging, or what happens to  
the batteries and computers when we junk them. And then raise  
awareness of ecosystems, with case studies of community-based  
conservation in other countries. Unless most people are aware of such  
effects, we'll be on the same consumption-based trajectory we are  
currently on, never mind all the carbon neutral rock concerts and even  
recycling.

Cheers
amartya



Quoting Lyndell Bade :


Amen to that, Sarah.  Those are the problems that scare me senseless and
keep me lying awake at night.

The fall-out of the marine food web crashing and ocean acidification (among
other problems) is so monumental that I don't think we can even grasp an
eighth of the potential overall impact on the planet.  There's so much we
still don't know about our oceans--species, networks, and processes--that we
barely have an inkling of the consequences of what we're presently doing
(pollution, overfishing everything, especially sharks), never mind what
we're considering doing (deep sea drilling, mining, increased whaling).

We just have to keep working to bring about the day that *we all* understand
that humans are just a part of the environment.  I have to focus on that or
I end up crying into my beer...

Cheers,
Lyndell


On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Sarah Frias-Torres <
sfrias_tor...@hotmail.com> wrote:


Brian and all,People talk about economy as if it was a living entity. "the
economy is fragile"... " we must revive the economy", etc. It is all a
mirage.Economy, economics, economic growth, is artificial. It is a mirage.
It is something we made up. It is not real. Yet, we are more respectful of
the economy than we are of the planet we live on.The current "world crisis"
is also a mirage. It is a crisis generated by greedy banks and investors,
those that traded with "futures" and money that did not exist, and at the
end, it has impacted the pockets of the many hard-working people, which will
have to pay the mistakes of a few, with real money.The true crisis, the ones
I'm really scared about, are yet to come. When drinking water becomes
scarce, when basic crops (wheat, rice, etc) become scarce due to a
significant reduction of pollinating honey-bees, major disease on the now
almost clonal crops, or both; when ocean acidification (due to global
climate change) begins to impact the marine food web, and I could go on and
on.These are the true crisis. The systematic shut-down of our life-support
system.it is a possible future, unless we stop thinking of ourselves as
the center of the universe, and start looking beyond our navels into the
wide world. The day we understand it is not "us" and "the environment". That
"we" are an insignificant part of the environment. That day, we will learn
to live sustainably.I hope the day arrives, but for now, I doubt it will.





Sarah Sarah Frias-Torres, Ph.D.
Marine Conservation Biologist
Ocean Research & Conservation Association
1420 Seaway Drive, 2nd Floor
Fort Pierce, Florida 34949 USA
www.oceanrecon.org







PhD candidate
Department of Biology, University of Miami
www.bio.miami.edu/asaha

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Obama - good news for ecologists?

[Amartya Saha]

I"m optimistic too, maybe support for ecological research and 
restoration may increase; however I"m also aware that the reality of 
reducing the national carbon footprint is a huge challenge, essentially 
requiring a reduction in per-capita energy (and resource) use. One of 
the ways to do so in an average American city  (NYC, Boston and Chicago 
excepted) is to invest in mass transit, so that it becomes a practical 
option. But given the collosal national debt, with certain lobbies 
opposed to pulling out of the various wars etc, where is the money going 
to come from for this ? The public should not just look to Obama, they 
have to look at  themselves first, to see how and where they can reduce 
resource use.

Cheers
Amartya




Alison Munson wrote:
>From a cooler northern perspective: 

 

Many of us were as glued to the screen as Americans last evening. 


I am just RELIEVED that the Bush years are almost behind (can you
minimize the rest of the damage he is trying to do before leaving?)

I believe it will be easier to advance real response to climate change
in the next years, world-wide. I don't underestimate the importance of
the US agenda to Canadian policies; we will have to keep up to any
progress to the south, even though our conservative government has been
trying to block progress on an international level. I am not sure this
will be possible without the moral support that was present from the
Bush administration.

 


I am elated. Maybe this was driven by personal economic reasons in some
large part (among other good reasons), but honestly, today I don't care.


All the best for the next years with Barak. We are watching with
fascination. 

 

Alison 
  

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Insecticide Decimates Tadpole Populations Through the Food Chain

[Amartya Saha]

Hi Paul,

what the study showed is that sublethal doses of malathion can 
negatively affect leopard frog tadpoles by affecting their food chain. 
Sublethal to leopard frogs, but lethal to zooplankton.  Its a matter of 
insecticide/weedicide CONCENTRATIONS. Yes, it can be that in the field, 
such concentrations are often lower than in the U Pitt tank study. 
However there can be (and will be) instances where this concentration 
may be reached or even exceeded, depending on topography/drainage, 
rainfall and a host of other factors. Even with low concentrations, 
there can be accumulations over time, which can then lead to a lag time 
between application and observable effects. By then the momentum of 
negative effects can be too high, and too late to reverse conditions, so 
that the hundreds of leopard frogs that were flushed by a t-storm in MN 
may not happen a few (?) decades from today...


The message I got from this study is that concentrations lower than lab 
determined lethal doses can harm the organism in question, by also 
harming the ecosystem - kind of an urging for ecotoxicology to put more 
emphasis on ecosystems and not just organisms in isolation.


Hmm.. now what Monsanto says, well, lets say they would not wish to saw 
the branch they're sitting on, would they..


Cheers,
amartya


Paul Cherubini wrote:

Dr. Rick Relyea wrote:

  

Pitt Research Shows That Low Concentrations of Common Insecticide
Can Decimate Tadpole Populations Through the Food Chain



Dr. Relyea, your study did not show that any routine, legally compliant
applications Malathion insecticide (such as the aerial applications typically
used for mosquito control) can decimate tadpole populations through the
food chain in a natural wetland system. It also did not demonstrate these
routine applications are capable of wiping out the zooplankton in
natural wetland systems, causing surface dwelling algae to grow rapidly
hence preventing sunlight from reaching the bottom-dwelling algae, which
tadpoles eat.

Instead, your studies were conducted in small, confined cattle tanks
http://www.chronicle.pitt.edu/?p=660 Monsanto has previously
pointed out that "It is not unusual for studies conducted in artificial
systems to demonstrate greater toxicity than studies conducted under
actual environmental conditions." A detailed rebuttal response from
Monsanto to your Roundup herbicide work can be found on Monsanto's
website:http://www.monsanto.co.uk/news/ukshowlib.phtml?uid=8800

  

Leopard and wood frogs naturally range across North America,
including Pennsylvania and the Northeastern United States. Once
plentiful, leopard frogs have declined in recent years.



Ironically, leopard frogs are still very abundant in regions of the USA
where Roundup herbicide and insecticide use has been very high
such as around the Roundup Ready soybean and corn monocultures
that cover ~70% of the land mass of southern Minnesota and Iowa:
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k75/4af/frogb.jpg

Example: Just two months ago during an evening thunderstorm I saw
hundreds of leopard frogs hopping across the farm roads in southern
Minnesota (Klossner, Minnesota) and hundreds of them ended up
being smashed by cars. I've experienced the same phenomenon along
the farm roads of Iowa many times.  The chemical giants like Monsanto
and Dupont could make a documentary film for the public and
academic community substantiating this abundance if they wanted to.

Paul Cherubini
El Dorado, Calif.
  

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Salix success? Success of exotics?

[Amartya Saha]

Salix spp can tolerate soils flooded for several months at a stretch  
(depending on species). I"m guessing here... high latitudes have large  
areas that are poorly drained. High altitudes also have their share of  
lake margins, riparian margins and bogs...

Roots adapted to anaerobic environments can be part of the story.


Quoting Geoffrey Patton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

 Why do so many exotics species become alien pests? We are all aware  
 of the explanation for that success being the lack of predatory   
species. Is this all there is to the story? Could their longer   
evolution in their "homeland" have given them genetic advantages? Do  
 as many New World species become invasive exotics in the Old World?


Geoff Patton
 --- On Sat, 8/23/08, David Inouye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: David Inouye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Salix success?
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Date: Saturday, August 23, 2008, 11:20 PM

What makes Salix (willows) so successful at high latitudes and high
altitudes?  Unusual physiological traits?









PhD candidate
Department of Biology, University of Miami
www.bio.miami.edu/asaha

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Ecosystems and faux ecosystems Re: [ECOLOG-L] Wetland creation

[Amartya Saha]

Hi Bill, the answer might depend on the spatial extent and intensity of 
the fire ( assuming that the fire happens in a fireprone ecosystem, 
where fires have been natural occurances as well), if there has been 
active fire suppresion in the area allowing fuel buildup, and so on. If 
an arson fire got out of control and burned a whole ecological reserve 
down, including islands of vegetation that are normally safe from 
groundlevel fires, then it would be destruction. Whether that 
destruction is reversible would depend upon the success of species 
coming in from the surroundings to recolonize.
Now, if this supposedly arson fire were actually caused by lightening, 
and if the area has seen fire suppresion for decades, the fuel buildup 
could cause a much hotter fire than normally would be the case. Then it 
would also be seen as destruction ( the management leading to fire 
suppresion ). If the area has had no intervention in the form of fire 
suppresion or hydrological modifications leading to drier conditions, 
then it would be a natural process...


To Jer's comment
"Find out which ecosystem we have degraded/destroyed most over the years 
and you will probably find the ecosystem most often "restored"."


Its a bit hard to do that, since barring a few isolated spots on the 
globe, almost all ecosystems have been degraded/destroyed, and not much 
restored.


And to the original idea of thread,  i do not know the extent of 
artificial wetlands, but like Wayne, I'd like to point out that too 
often the general public ( developers, polititians and the like ) glibly 
equate a created wetland with one that has been in place for centuries 
or even longer. Rarely can an artificial wetland approach the species 
diversity and resilience of a natural wetland (in the same bioregion) in 
the early ( read that as 20 years, my guess), and the rate at which 
diversity builds up would depend on the existence and proximity of other 
wetlands for colonizing species to arrive, succession to take place, 
hydrological inputs and outputs that maintain the wetland ( as opposed 
to succeeding to a bog and then land ), and so on...there lies the most 
severe criticism of the "no net loss" policy of wetland mitigation.
I"m not against artificial wetlands, indeed they have tremendous use in 
wastewater treatment and habitat creation, but quite often the language 
equating different forms of wetlands is diffuse.


cheers
amartya

William Silvert wrote:
A question comes to mind. If an area is burned to the ground as a 
result of human carelessness, would we consider it degraded or 
destroyed? But if we then find that the fire was actually started by 
lightning, and the natural cycle that involves the return of nutrients 
to the soil and even the release of seeds that only sprout when burnt, 
would we change our view?


Bill Silvert

- Original Message - From: "JEREMIAH M YAHN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 1:55 PM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Ecosystems and faux ecosystems Re: [ECOLOG-L] 
Wetland creation



Although I do enjoy and agree w/ Wayne's definitions, I think perhaps 
we have lost the way of the original post.  I certainly do not have 
the answer nor the free time to pursue the answer, but I would imagine 
that there would be some value in looking into what we have lost over 
the years. Find out which ecosystem we have degraded/destroyed most 
over the years and you will probably find the ecosystem most often 
"restored". 

Re: [ECOLOG-L] how to preserve water samples long-term

[Amartya Saha]

Hello Aaron,
since you would be measuring TOTAL N and P, and not the various forms of 
N and P, I"d think that as long as you kept the waters refrigerated, and 
the bottles sealed with parafilm to prevent evaporation/leakage, these 
nutrient values would not change as the bottle would be a closed system. 
I could be wrong however, and would be very interested to hear more 
knowledgeable comments on this.
As regards DOM, I do not know if some of the OM may sediment out. My 
guess is that the pondwater samples would have some suspended solids as 
well, and that there may be bidirectional reactions of precipitation / 
adsorption of OM onto the matrix provided by fibers etc.

I'd be interested to know what others think of this !
Thanks,
Amartya



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Dear ecologgers,

I am the midst of collecting water samples from ponds and would like
to know if there is an acceptable long-term storage method for the
samples.  I would like to assay total nitrogen, phosphorous, DOM, lignins,
phenolics and lipid content.  My thought was to acidify the solution to
~pH 2 and freeze at -20 C.  However, this is a solution recommended for
only a month (and only for some of the chemical assays), and I want to
preserve the samples a maximum of three months.  Can anyone suggest a good
preservation method?

 Thank you,
 Aaron Stoler

 Department of Biology
 University of Pittsburgh
 Pittsburgh PA 15260
 Phone: 410.365.7700
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

Re: [ECOLOG-L] wetland acreage

[Amartya Saha]

To add to the thread, I suppose these dams are no more than 150 years 
old at most ? So the wetlands created by placing the dam are not very 
old, thereby quite possibly not as species-rich as a natural wetland
Furthermore, the original (pre-dam) ecosystem being a running water 
system, its restoration can have greater ecological value, since there 
are few locations on the landscape where streams can naturally exist., 
ie, basically along local topographic lows. There is also the river 
continuum concept whereby removal of artificial barriers to water flow 
can have an impact far beyond the immediate stream reach.


However its possible that these particular artificial wetlands could be 
important sites of refuge for wetland spp that managed to arrive there 
-- as Sharif mentions, it would be good to actually examine the wetlands 
in question, and then decide. Generally speaking, stream restoration 
could provide more ecological diversity, as its technically easier to 
create a wetland elsewhere (in theory at least), but the benefits and 
costs could vary from case to case.

Cheers
Amartya


Sharif Branham wrote:

Hello Andy,
 
I think the question should be about the quality of the wetlands that are being replaced. Wetlands that are created as a result of roads or other engineered surfaces are not equal to a natural wetland as far as habitat value is concerned. One could do an analysis of the wetland that is to be displaced by breaching the dam to see if the quality of the habitat that will be lost is equal, less than or greater than the habitat that will be enhanced by breaching the dam.  You could consider the quantity and diversity of the species that benefit from each habitat type. You could even look at ecological services being provided by the wetlands versus what will be gained by breaching the dam.  I hope that helps you get at the essence of the argument.
 
Sharif> Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 12:50:53 -0400> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [ECOLOG-L] wetland acreage> To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU> > I have been discussing the merits of stream restoration with some > colleagues and I've been fussing over the potential loss of wetlands > as a result of the removal of dams. My stream-oriented friends have > been asking why I've been worried about the loss of what amounts to > artificial wetlands in the first place? Aside from the fact that > they're typically considered jurisdictional, it got me wondering if > we (collectively) have any idea whatsoever how many wetlands in the > landscape are artificial? In other words, how many wetlands exist > because of human activities, such as roads, railroads, and the like? > (Let's keep mitigation, stormwater, and treatment wetlands out of the > discussion for now.) Anyone have a clue?> > Thanks.> > Andy Cole> > > > Charles Andrew Cole, Ph.D.> Associate Director> Center for Watershed Stewardship>!

 Penn State University> 301a Forest Resources Laboratory> University Park, PA 16802> 
814-865-5735> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > http://www.larch.psu.edu/watershed/home.html

_
Use video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live Messenger.
http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_messenger_video_042008

Re: [ECOLOG-L] McDonough - I don't think so

[Amartya Saha]

Hi Jane,
Robert's point was about the resources taken to manufacture a new car, 
hybrid or whatever.. all the metal, glass, plastics, chemicals etc, 
mining those, energy costs to manufacture them, pollution costs to the 
environment and so on, When one discards an old car and goes for a 
hybrid, one has to add all the above costs to the benefits of lower 
emissions per mile.  Its not just C emissions that accompany the 
manufacture of a car, there is a bunch of other externalities if one 
were to track.
Of course, given the necessity of driving for most (In the US), one 
can't run an old car forever, unless one is a mechanic, understanding 
and taking care of every strut, wire and screw. Maybe the breakeven in 
terms of environmental costs of continuing with the old car vs. a hybrid 
may happen in 10 years, I do not know, and its very difficult to put $ 
costs anyway to damage to habitat done by resource extraction 
(mining,drilling etc) and pollution. Thats the emerging field of natural 
resource economics ( thats been emerging for at least trhe past 10 years 
as i'm aware of)..

cheers
amartya



Jane Shevtsov wrote:

Hi Bob,

Can you please cite some numbers to back up your claim? 30 MPG is pretty
good (although old cars tend to be worse from the point of view of toxic
emissions), but every examination I've seen of the question of whether the
improved efficiency of a hybrid offsets the C emissions due to its
manufacture has concluded that the hybrid is better than keeping the old
car. (I guess that might not be true if you do very little driving.)

Jane

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Robert Fireovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

  

McDonough is like the Toyota ads that would seduce me into trading in
my 1994, 30 mpg Prism for a brand new Prius. Considering the
quantities of non-renewable natural resources that are extracted,
transported and transformed into a new car (and the amount of Nature
that is destroyed in its wake), I would have to own the Prius for
over 50 years to "pay back" that resource debt and generate any net
improvement in my environmental footprint.

Young people love (and have taught me the power of) You-Tube. Have
them watch this short spot, "The Story of Stuff," to see what I
mean... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqZMTY4V7Ts

- Bob Fireovid




W. McDonough and M. Braungart's Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the way we
  

make


things (2002) might be interesting for your summer reading list.  They
suggest a proactive approach to environmental issues that is refreshing,
maybe even hopeful.
  




  

Re: Calculations in MS Access

[Amartya Saha]

Hi Norm,
I"ve calculated means in Access for datasets having 200,000 records 
(rows) and have had no problems. Haven't used Access for larger 
datasets; instead i have used MS FoxPro, which is a really good product, 
robust and with its own programming front-end.
In my opinion, Access is more like a household database system, since it 
has very limited data query facilities. Although it employs SQL to 
access records, one cannot do much more processing, unlike in FoxPro 
where one can write programs to carry out complicated batch operations. 
It all depends on what one needs to do with the data.
I am aware that Excel had some strange bugs, but have not heard the same 
about Access. Perhaps you can check in online Access forums.
cheers
amartya
Norm Leonard wrote:
> Does anyone know whether MS Access has (or has had) any of the same 
> issues with calculations as MS Excel?  Once upon a time, Excel was not 
> to be trusted, even when the operation was as simple as calculating a 
> mean or standard deviation.  Now I am trying to work with a very large 
> data set (> 2.5 million records) in Access.  I would like to know 
> whether this group thinks the means calculated by Access can be 
> trusted.  Thanks in advance for your comments.
>
> Norm Leonard
> Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources
> University of Georgia
> Athens, GA
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   

Re: ecological "footprint", 3rd world vs. 1st world

[Amartya Saha]

Hi Kelly, 

I agree that the 1st world has taken the lead in designing environmental regs
for land, water and air quality protection, many of which serve as models for
'developing' nations. 

However, the efficacy and implementation of these regulations in the FIRST
world
 is another matter.  For instance, we have yet to be able to design efficient
riparian buffers for controlling nonpoint pollution in streams. A lot of the
regulations are watered down by compromise to the point of being meaningless,
such as the 'no net loss' policy for wetland mitigation, that equates a natural
wetland with its centuries of community development with one that is created
with a bentonite liner. There are numerous such examples we all know. 

And then practically the entire manufacturing sector and toxic waste disposal
has been *conveniently* shipped to the third world. 

"We are cutting down on
> everything from fertilizer-use to driveway car-washing, improving our
> agricultural practices (no more cows wading in streams, etc.) and our stream
> bank care."

I have to absolutely disagree with this. The hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico
is growing, precisely due to fertilizer runoff throughout the Miss. watershed.
The everglades is undergoing plant community changes due to fertilizer runoff
from Big Sugar. 
Driveway car washing -- the third world does not even know what this is. Cars
there are washed with a bucket and a rag. 
Stream bank care -- if this was happening in any significant scale in the 1st
world, freshwater aquatic biodiversity would not be declining. Clean water is
admirable, and a first step, but it is not enough. National parks need to
include the river continuum concept. and so on.

Having said all this, I have also pointed out in an earlier email, that from a
planet Earth perspective, there are TWIN problems, of not just overconsumption
in the first world, but also population in the third world along with rising
urban consumption there. I am not just pointing fingers at the
first world. The mess is increasing everywhere. And as long as the defense
budget far outweighs the combined budget for environmental management,
education, healthcare and so on, there is not much hope of arresting the
dialectical fate of any civilization or dominant species. 

regards
amartya




Quoting Kelly Stettner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Osmar makes some excellent points: even though 1st worlders can lay claim to
> the highest material consumerism, we can also lay claim to the highest rate
> of governmental beauracracy (sp?) when it comes to pollution caps,
> environmental controls, waste water treatment facilities, and the skills,
> education and abilities to take care of our resources.  We don't have
> villages where people defacate in the streams.  We are cutting down on
> everything from fertilizer-use to driveway car-washing, improving our
> agricultural practices (no more cows wading in streams, etc.) and our stream
> bank care.  1st worlders lead the way in research and technologies that
> improve our ability to care for the natural world -- each of you posting from
> a 1st world country is living proof of that.
>
>   Respectfully,
>   Kelly Stettner
> 
> 
> Black River Action Team (BRAT)
>   45 Coolidge Road
>   Springfield, VT  05156
>   [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> http://www.blackriveractionteam.org
> 
> ~Making ripples on the Black River since 2000! ~
> 
>
> -
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
> 

Re: N/P Ratios and Algal Growth

[Amartya Saha]

Hi Todd,
there is a classic paper by GW Schindler in the 70s about P limitation in lakes,
and if i remember right, there were some N:P ratios alluded to there. IN another
book by Wetzel, there were N:P ratios of 23 and above.. this is for the water
and not any organism tissue.
I have also heard that usually marine systems are N limited and not P limited,
which would mean that freshwaters (often P limited) would have ratios higher
than Redfield's.
Best,
amartya


Quoting Todd Shuskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Once again, I am asking for assistance from the list (I hope I can actually
> give rather than take someday on this list).  I teach High School biology and
> I am involved in research looking at the effects of watershed management on
> the ecology of downstream aquatic communities. I am looking for literature or
> other information about the effects of N/P ratios on algal growth. I know
> Redfield has the ratios at 16:1 for marine systems but are they the same for
> freshwater?
> 
> Thank you again for your time,
> Todd
> 
> "Nothing shocks me. I'm a scientist."
> - Indiana Jones
> 
> Todd Shuskey
> Perry High School
> 33 Watkins Avenue
> Perry, NY 14530
> (585)237-0270 x 1100
> 

Re: population control

[Amartya Saha]

Quoting Osmar Luiz Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>  But I've not seen in that quiz questions about if the shanty town you live
> was built over a former pristine rainforest bush, how many trees must be
> down to build your wooden house and what the oxygen dissolved rate in the
> water of that river which you and your family deject your feces. This
> certalinly will improve the footprint of the poor third world kids.

After people moved out of caves and trees, EVERY single house that man has
built
 anywhere in the world HAS displaced something-- forest, natural grassland,
desert sand habitat, whatever. The point is that a third world shanty has a
much lower PER CAPITA space usage than say houses in American (or Brazilian)
suburbs.
And they are not heated or centrally airconditioned, to the point where folks
wear shorts while its -30 degrees outside, or folks cuddle up in bed with
blankets with the AC full blast while its actually nice and cool outside. Not
that I am advocating favelas, but Cara is right that the per capita footprint
in the third world is a lot less.

I'd like to add that this is especially true of the old world.
which has had a high population for the last several millenia, unlike latin
america which has been *colonized* and "settled" only in the last 400 years (
from a land transformation point of view).

Twin problems face the earth --- the third world's high population and the
first
world's high level of consumption. None of these have easy fixes. 

Population control requires widespread education along with economic
opportunities, and even then a huge population like India or China has a
momentum associated with it. 

The first world's high consumption. Again this is not easy to fix, unless cities
are radically redesigned and public mass transit improved, gasolene taxed,
people give up unsustainable practices of central AC/heating, lawns, the whole
consumer culture, and pretty much harken back to the pre industrial age.
Some folks advocate alternative energy use ( like biofuels ) but lets not kid
ourselves, there has to be a REDUCTION of resource use. not substitution. 

Can or will this be done ? Unless humanity as a whole gets more savvy, and maybe
they will in a generation or two, there is not much hope of moving away from a
mad max scenario. 

regards
amartya




>  You should make all the questions. That `footprint quiz` could made first
> world people feels guilt. But again your eco-attitudes will be useless and
> short-reached if population in the tropics still rises at the rates they
> are.
> Osmar
> 
> >
> >
> > - Original Message - 
> > From: "Cara Lin Bridgman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 
> > Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 2:29 PM
> > Subject: Re: population control
> >
> >
> >> Idiocracy, then, gets back to the 1920's and 1930's ideas of eugenics
> >> and 'propagation of the fit' (lampooned by Dorothy Sayers in her book
> >> Gaudy Night): educated people must reproduce to make sure we still have
> >> smart people on the planet--as if all the poor people were stupid.
> >>
> >> So far, I've really only see one or two comments on the relative weights
> >> of ecological footprints between those in first world countries deciding
> >> not to have kids and those in third world countries having lots of kids.
> >>Most any bunch of third world kids will have a whole lot smaller
> >> ecological footprint than most any first world kid or non-child-bearing
> >> first-world adult.  A year or so ago, here on Ecolog, this point was
> >> raised.  First world ecological footprints are huge compared to third
> >> world ones--even with 'only one' long-haul flight a year (that one
> >> flight adds a whole planet to an ecological footprint:
> >> www.myfootprint.org).
> >>
> >> So, the third world may be making most of the babies, but it is the
> >> first (and second) world that is doing most of the consumption and is
> >> the driving force behind most ecological disasters from mountain top
> >> removal for coal to logging for living room furniture to wars for oil.
> >>
> >> The arguments about having kids to maintain social security are not any
> >> different from the arguments about having kids to take care of you in
> >> your old age.  In the third world, kids ARE social security.  The point
> >> I've always wondered about is this: what sort of social security will
> >> these kids have?
> >>
> >> CL
> >>
> >>
> >> Please note my new-old email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> ~~
> >> Cara Lin Bridgman
> >>
> >> P.O. Box 013  Phone: 886-4-2632-5484
> >> Longjing Sinjhuang
> >> Taichung County 434
> >> Taiwanhttp://megaview.com.tw/~caralin/
> >> ~~
> >>
> >> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> >> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 30/11/2007 / Versão: 
> >> 5.1.00/5175
> >> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com

Re: Population control

[Amartya Saha]

Oh well. Here's that old north vs south debate again. Yes, things would be
extreme if all 500 million individuals had the resource usage of the first
world. 
As regards the lady who decided to be childless, its her trip and no one has any
business passing judgements on that. But if she were indeed serious about
reducing her carbon footprint, she'd reduce much more if she left cushy London
and went and lived in a third world town. Better, a third world farm. That
includes giving up long haul flights once a year...
cheers
amartya





Quoting Lela Stanley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Matheus does raise a point that is rarely discussed even here and virtually
> never by (American) politicos. The human footprint would still be
> problematic with a smaller global population, but it would be made vastly
> more bearable if we weren't multipying quite so fruitfully. I've seen
> estimates (possibly in The World Without Us?) of a global human carrying
> capacity at 500 million to 1 billion individuals- numbers which are unlikely
> to be reached through even the most heartfelt birth control campaigns. All
> the same, between a thoughtful, systematic reduction of population -
> including measures such as, yes, some people not having kids - and a grand
> Malthusian crash, I know which I'd vote for.
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/28/07, Mike Marsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > All of the people who believed that they could help to save the planet
> > by not having babies lived their life span and died. The rest of the
> > world's population went ahead and had babies. As the genetic (and
> > cultural) lines of those believers in birth control perished, the human
> > population grew even faster.
> >
> > Mike Marsh
> > -
> > Matheus Carvalho wrote:
> >
> > ... to reduce her CO2 footprint.
> >
> >
>
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=495495&in_page_id=1879
> >
> >
> 

Re: Pressure chamber

[Amartya Saha]

hello, wrapping parafilm several times around the stem has worked for me for
really thin stems, or even blades of bamboo leaves. If you don't have parafilm,
maybe you can use regular scotch tape, or any rubbery/plastic stuff that can
increase the diameter of the stem while also allowing some compression fitting
to the hole. 



Quoting Judy Che-Castaldo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Hello,
> 
> I am a graduate student learning to use a pressure chamber to measure plant
> water potential.  My plant of interest is Thlaspi montanum montanum
> (Brassicaceae), which has a very thin stem.  The stem is so small that gas
> is leaking out of the (already very tiny) hole in the rubber stopper that
> fits around the stem.  It is leaking at such a high rate that it has
> drastically reduced the number of measurements I can take using my small
> portable tank of gas.
> 
> Has anyone else encountered this problem or has suggestions as to how to
> prevent leaks in the stopper?
> 
> Thanks,
> Judy
> 

Re: Equilibrium/Steady State and Complexity/Evolution

[Amartya Saha]

What you describe, Dr Aney, is an idealized world. Its too wonderful. I really
wish your world could come to pass in the future. Oregon and Northern Calif
have some small communes of like-minded folks striving to live thus. But
society-wise, its unrealistic in my opinion. 

Also "But the first world
> economies can at least boast that their output of greenhouse gases and other
> atmospheric pollutants is being reduced and stabilized to levels near those
> that existed prior to civilization."

Where did this come from ? Firstly I doubt that levels have come to
pre-industrial era, much less the pre-civilization epoch. Secondly, the
majority of the products in first world supermarkets ( especially the US ) come
from the third world, and this has shifted the production of effluent and gases
to the latter. As long as per capita consumption remains high, and energy/waste
handling tech not significantly different from present day, how can there be any
 reduction in global emissions ? Thirdly, public transit in the US keeps getting
slashed, forcing people to drive (except the NE corridor and certain small
communities ). And so on and on and on...

cheers
amartya



Quoting "Warren W. Aney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Andrew says, "The problem is that there is nobody anywhere in the world who
> can
> envision a practical, politically feasible, and equitable version of
> where we want to be."
> 
> And Maiken says, "But to me predictions of extremely gloomy futures seem to
> be counter-productive to stimulate productive changes."
> 
> So how about if we all try to envision a future that is both bright and
> feasible?  I'm willing to try to do my part in starting this process
> (warning, this is pretty long, and it's aimed primarily at the U.S.
> situation):
> 
> First, I would hope to see an economy and population that is stabilized and
> optimized world wide.  One in which wealth and amenities are fairly
> distributed across urban, suburban and rural communities.  Where
> economically and socially viable communities are well dispersed around the
> world, and each such community has its own stable economy based on a clean
> and sustainable industry.  And less than half of the world’s population
> lives in metropolitan areas or communities of over 100,000 population.
> 
> Second, each and every future community is served by a passenger transport
> service such as a rail or bus line.  All city and town neighborhoods have
> walking distance access to parks, schools, libraries, places of worship and
> small shopping centers.  All city and town neighborhoods are interlaced and
> connected by walking and bicycle paths as well as roads.  Long haul freight
> moves primarily by rail and water.  Even in what we is now the first world,
> what we call alternative transportation has become preferred transportation
> and freeways are becoming an anachronism.
> 
> Third, each and every community has its own public school, public parks,
> places of worship and full-service, locally-owned businesses.  Each
> community has its own medical and dental service center or clinic.  This
> means area residents can take care of all their ordinary needs and wants
> without leaving their own community:  they can shop locally for groceries,
> clothing, hardware, building supplies and farm equipment; they can obtain
> routine medical, dental and veterinary care; they can attend the worship
> center of their choice; they can check books or DVDs out of a well-stocked
> local library; they can bank locally; and they can read a local newspaper,
> listen to local news on the radio, watch regional news on TV, and get
> meaningful news via computer.
> 
> Fourth, I would see distinct town and urban boundaries with little or no
> urban sprawl.  Rural small acreage home sites are primarily found in
> clusters on land that has low value for agriculture, forests, wildlife or
> recreation.  And these rural small acreage home developments pay full cost
> for infrastructure services such as roads, utilities, mail and parcel
> delivery, police and fire protection and school transportation.  This does
> not mean that we are not honoring and supporting our farming families, but
> it does mean that the rest of us are not subsidizing non farmers who choose
> to live in a rural setting.
> 
> Fifth, large numbers of food-producing family-owned farms are close enough
> to population centers to provide easy and cost-efficient commercial
> interaction.  These farms provide products that can be bought in urban
> stores as well as in farmers’ markets and at farm site stands.  Also, a
> large part of the grocery products sold in even the biggest cities are grown
> and processed within the region.  A family can eat well year-round without
> ever buying a product grown outside the region.
> 
> Sixth, high quality wildland recreation is available within 2 hours travel
> of everyone’s home – recreation such as hiking, camping, fishing, hunting,
> bird watching and boating.  Nearly 

Re: Considering growth, and inertia

[Amartya Saha]

"Or do we take the Garrett Hardin way, and advocate 
> for his infamous lifeboat ethic...lets save ourselves and let the 
> rest of the world drown? "

We in the first world have access to lifeboats ( except inner cities and
hillbillies). Most of the third world won't. When water shortage results from
frequent droughts, flow modifications, deforested watersheds, pollution,
withdrawals, whaterer, the urban folk will get their bottled water from
elsewhere, no worries for at least a decade or two. The rural poor will parch,
dehydrate and return to the soil. 
The same applies to other resources. Mad Max was kinda ahead in this
vision...the collapse of civilization followed by energy wars.

And then where or for how long can our lifeboats sustain us ? Questions we'd
better not face. Lets party while the going is good !

cheers
amartya



Quoting Ashwani Vasishth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> I just heard Bill McKibben talk about his new book, Deep Economy.  So 
> I'm thinking about growth and growth-related issues.  Just wanted to 
> say, apropos the earlier exchanges, that I know very well that 
> growth--or, rather, a certain kind of growth--is likely the key 
> source of a complex of problems we face.
> 
> But then I came home and reread a news story I'd flagged for one of 
> my news groups, about how the number of people with cancer on the 
> planet will, inevitably, double over the next 25 years.  Simply 
> because the population will have grown to 8 billion plus.
> 
> Its like watching the Titanic in the long period of time after they 
> spot the iceberg, realize they're going to hit it, and then are 
> helpless to do anything about changing course--for all the ringing of 
> the bells and the spinning of wheels.  There's an inertia in the 
> system.  The moment of that inertia makes some portion of the future 
> effectively inevitable.  Nothing that we can do, nothing short of 
> massacre and mayhem, is going to change the population increase over 
> the next couple of decades.  Now what is to be done?  What price zero 
> growth then?
> 
> We've got one more doubling coming up.  No maybes about it.  The only 
> question is, can we lighten our tread enough to accommodate that 
> coming increase?  Or do we take the Garrett Hardin way, and advocate 
> for his infamous lifeboat ethic...lets save ourselves and let the 
> rest of the world drown?  Again, remember the Titanic.  There's a 
> horror on that path too.
> 
> Regards,
> -
>Ashwani
>   Vasishth[EMAIL PROTECTED]  (818) 677-6137
>  http://www.csun.edu/~vasishth/
>  http://www.myspace.com/ashwanivasishth
> 

Re: Consumer Choice & the Environment

[Amartya Saha]

Its great if our own decisions significantly lower the net environmental
impact.
However just choosing what car we drive, wearing sweatshirts at home in the
winter and switching to a diet based on grains and low on meat/fish and
veggies/fruits (growing lettuce in Calif is not exactly environmentaly
friendly), while commendable, would not seriously reduce the impact we have. 

Today we have a lot more appliances in our houses and we use a lot more
resources than before the industrial revolution, or even 100 or 50 years ago.
Thats true even in third world cities and towns. We have fridges and ovens, TVs
and electronics, motorcycles and cars, books and papers, food related
packaging, and now computers and mobile phones, just to name a few. 

Each fridge has exacted an environmental cost ( mining for metal, energy for
manufacture and transport, pollution from manufacture, energy for operation and
final disposal of chemicals). Such is more or less true for every item. Ideally
if we reuse and recycle, and get alternate ecofriendly energy, and implement
measures to curb pollution perhaps the cost would not be as high as it really
is. I can't help wondering that our use of resources just keeps increasing, not
only on a per capita basis but also spreading throughout the rural tropics. It
requires a months stay in a third world village to see how many thousand times
more resources we urban folk consume. As I am doing here sitting in this
freezing airconditioned windowless room in lovely miami typing this email. 

Even if we all drive hybrid cars, or that run on biofuel, we know that a better
alternative is rail based mass transit. However, the fact that we are all much
morte mobile than 100 years ago ( including jet travel ) means that our impact
grows more and more. I don't intend to sound pessimistic, just that the field
of
matural resource economics hasn't yet matured enough to quantify impacts. And we
cannot go back to the pre-industrial age. 

ãmartya






Quoting Wendee Holtcamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Interestingly about littering... a lot of otherwise non-litterers throw out
> orange peels, bananas, and other biodegradeable things. However in
> reality... this attracts wildlife to the roadside to eat said food items,
> increasing roadkill which not only kills wildlife but puts human lives in
> danger! Something to think about. 
> 
> I heard of this logic from the infamous Dr Splatt, a high school teacher who
> does "roadkill science" with his students (http://roadkill.edutel.com/).
> They go out and monitor roadkill and correlate it with various factors. The
> above was based on one students's study years ago showing an association
> between roadkill and litter. I thought that was interesting and now I tell
> everyone that likes to throw food out the window!
> 
> Abut the book - the thing that struck me was that something like 64-87% of
> all environmental impacts (air and water pollution, land alteration and
> global warming) were caused by 3 conglomerated categories - transportation,
> home operations (energy, AC/heating, etc), and food. The rest were all
> relatively small in comparison. So the driving we do, the type of car we
> drive, the energy (green) and energy efficiency of appliances and the food
> choices we make were presumably the most important. 
> 
> Wendee
> 
> ~
> Wendee Holtcamp, M.S. Wildlife Ecology 
> Freelance Writer-Photographer
>http://www.wendeeholtcamp.com 
>  Bohemian Adventures Blog  
> 
> http://bohemianadventures.blogspot.com
>  ~~~
>   CRIKEY! 
> 
> 
> I do think that sometimes people get really upset at things that don't 
> really matter when you look at the big picture.  For example, sometimes when
> 
> I am driving down the highway and I am finished with my pop, I throw the can
> 
> out the window on to the side of the highway.  I realize that this is really
> 
> rude, and it probably upsets a lot of people, but does it reallly have any 
> environmental impact at all, relatively speaking?
> 
> I am of course joking... (SNIP)
> 

Re: Why is the public not as concerned?

[Amartya Saha]

Thanks for sending the link to the survey. I was quite surprised that the survey
had no questions on whether one can reduce one's own ecological footprint. It is
easy to blame someone else, be it president Bush or american business. But one
appears to forget that american business (or international) would grind to a
halt if consumers (we) did not buy their products. Or call out for a change.
Such as the tremendous amount of packaging in the food industry. 
Some other roles can be attributed to the government, such as creation of
functional mass transit systems. 
But the way the survey has been compiled, it appears to have entirely missed the
point as to how the public may be involved with the deteriorating environment.
Another flaw is that the survey fails to list some of the major issues of
environmental degradation. climate change is not the only one...
cheers
amartya




Quoting Carol Boggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> For a summary and the results of Jon Krosnick's study, see
> http://environment.stanford.edu/news/environreport.pdf
> 
> Carol Boggs
> 
> At 08:51 AM 11/30/2006, Felix Martinez wrote:
> >I left out the punch line deliberately more because I am afraid that I
> >will misrepresent the results of Dr. Krosnick's study.  But a the
> >request of some here is an attempt to summarize.
> >
> >The public is aware of and understands climate change and global
> >warming.  They are also concerned about its implications.  However, they
> >are also concerned about things that are of immediacy to their lives,
> >such as having a job, being safe from crime, having access to health
> >care, etc.  These issues take precedence over climate change not only
> >because they are of immediate importance, but because they also have
> >concrete solutions that the public understands, perceives can be readily
> >implemented and do not necessarily have a dramatic impact on current
> >lifestyles.  The public also sees climate change as an issue that is for
> >government to address, not itself personally.  Similar to the lack of
> >interest in voting for the reason that a single vote will not making a
> >difference.
> >
> >Another interesting tidbit was public perception of scientists.  People
> >believe that we do know what we are talking about, but they also believe
> >that we are human just as they and can make mistakes in judgment, data
> >uncertainty issues aside.
> >
> >--
> ><>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
> >
> >Felix A. Martinez, Ph.D.
> >
> >NOAA/NOS/NCCOS
> >Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research
> >N/SCI2, SSMC4 Rm. 8326ph: 301-713-3338 x153
> >1305 East-West Hwy.   fax: 301-713-4044
> >Silver Spring, MD 20910   email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >Note: The content of this message does not reflect any position of 
> >the U.S. Government or of NOAA unless otherwise specified.  The 
> >information therein is only for the use of the individuals or 
> >entities for which it was intended even if addressed 
> >incorrectly.  If not the intended recipient, you may not use, copy, 
> >disseminate, or distribute the message or its content unless 
> >otherwise authorized.
> >
> ><>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
> 

Re: On Plagiarism

[Amartya Saha]

I agree that paraphrasing requires one to understand the material one
references, as well as express it more concisely ( in the interests of space
).

However, sometimes I have come across papers where the authors misinterpreted
the original results or ideas, and thereby this misinterpretation was carried
forward in their paraphrasing. This could be dangerous, especially if someone
else were to quote the misinterpretation.

Well this is a completely different issue, but about education in the Orient, I
don't know if its mostly memorizing. My undergraduate institute heavily
focussed on understanding basic principles and applying them. But again perhaps
thats a basic difference between engineering and biology.

Thanks for your views.
amartya



Quoting Cara Lin Bridgman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> My students are bright enough to produce whole papers from carefully 
> selected quotations.  If they included citations and quotation marks, 
> they are not plagiarizing, but neither are they writing.
> 
> In science, we are biased against quotes.  This is because we 
> paraphrase.  This isn't just to provide smooth transitions between cited 
> ideas.  Paraphrasing is evidence we understand what we read.
> 
> In the Orient, so much of education emphasizes memorizing.  Their test 
> questions tend more towards 'Quote ABC on XXX.'  I don't think this 
> proves we understand ABC's ideas on XXX.  So many of my own high school 
> and college test questions were 'Explain XXX using your own words."
> 
> CL
> 
> Amartya Saha wrote:
> > Hello all,
> > for quite some time i have had some confusion over quoting literature, and
> > perhaps this plagiarism thread could offer some ideas..
> > 
> > If one were to quote a paper, i have heard that one is NOT supposed to
> directly
> > lift a sentence or para or any parts thereof, even though the paper would
> be
> > quoted as a reference. Instead, one has to paraphrase the same in one's
> own
> > words.
> > Is this true ? If so, the logic fails me. How does it matter if one
> rephrases
> > the sentence, when the idea or result has been copied ( and referenced of
> > course ).
> > 
> > Thanks for any views
> > amartya
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Quoting Abraham de Alba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > 
> >> Dear Ecologgers:
> >>
> >>It might seem odd to say this, but the problem is
> >> that in our education (as in yours) knowledge has been
> >> at the top, NOT values (or ethics for that matter).
> >>
> >> But then again, japanese (that supposebly do stress
> >> values before knowledge) also have been known to trip
> >> on plagiarism.
> >>
> >> So I guess a simple problem has complex social
> >> solutions (nothing new there).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Abraham de Alba Avila
> >> Terrestrial Plant Ecology
> >> INIFAP-Ags
> >>  Ap. postal 20,
> >>  Pabellón Arteaga, 20660
> >>  Aguascalientes, MEXICO
> >>  Tel: (465) 95-801-67, & 801-86 ext. 118, FAX ext 102
> >> alternate: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> cel: 449-157-7070
> >>
> >> __
> >> Do You Yahoo!?
> >> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> >> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> >>
> > 
> 
> -- 
> 
> ~~
> Cara Lin Bridgman
> 
> P.O. Box 013  Phone: 886-4-2632-5484
> Longjing Sinjhuang
> Taichung 434
> Taiwanhttp://web.thu.edu.tw/caralinb/www/
> ~~
> 

Re: On Plagiarism

[Amartya Saha]

Hello all,
for quite some time i have had some confusion over quoting literature, and
perhaps this plagiarism thread could offer some ideas..

If one were to quote a paper, i have heard that one is NOT supposed to directly
lift a sentence or para or any parts thereof, even though the paper would be
quoted as a reference. Instead, one has to paraphrase the same in one's own
words.
Is this true ? If so, the logic fails me. How does it matter if one rephrases
the sentence, when the idea or result has been copied ( and referenced of
course ).

Thanks for any views
amartya



Quoting Abraham de Alba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Dear Ecologgers:
> 
>It might seem odd to say this, but the problem is
> that in our education (as in yours) knowledge has been
> at the top, NOT values (or ethics for that matter).
> 
> But then again, japanese (that supposebly do stress
> values before knowledge) also have been known to trip
> on plagiarism.
> 
> So I guess a simple problem has complex social
> solutions (nothing new there).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abraham de Alba Avila
> Terrestrial Plant Ecology
> INIFAP-Ags
>  Ap. postal 20,
>  Pabellón Arteaga, 20660
>  Aguascalientes, MEXICO
>  Tel: (465) 95-801-67, & 801-86 ext. 118, FAX ext 102
> alternate: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cel: 449-157-7070
> 
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 

Re: Environmentalist definition? Re: env science programs

[Amartya Saha]

if related to conservation of ecosystems or biodiversity, environmental studies
programs ought to include a field component with grassroot NGOs, for students
to get an exposure to the realities of implementing conservation plans, and the
difficulties that do arise ( socioeconomic, cultural, political, financial).

cheers, amartya


Quoting Loren Benton Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

 
> In short, I contend that while environmental science programs should
> surely be rooted in science, this doesn't mean that environmental
> studies programs cannot have strong science components nor that science
> programs are any better or more important than other, more
> interdisciplinary programs that emphasize many ways of approaching
> environmental questions. 
> 

Re: young scientists ability to publish compromised by page charges to authors

[Amartya Saha]

quoting Haas
At least one of the North American bird journals asks that if you don't
> have grant funds to cover page charges that each author chip in at
> least $50 personally to help offset publication costs, and this seems
> quite reasonable to me"

A reasonable sum of money, as long as one is not in a developing country!

This raises a related issue, in that the mainstream international journals
include research from authors belonging to the developed world. Third
world researchers cannot afford to publish in these journals.
At the same time, obscure national journals from third world countries do
not feature in any database search as they may not be online. Quite often
it is difficult to even know of work being carried out in africa, asia and
latin america by local universities, if results were published in such
journals, which feature work of similar quality, but are unknown outside
their respective countries.

regards,
amartya