I was hoping that the newly elected President Obama would call a halt to the building of the border fence in Texas. I know he has a lot to think about, but building a fence along a border with an important environmental river riparian zone . . . Between the environmental damage, and the cost, this is SUCH a bad idea. I hope someone will get the word to him that this is a waste of tax payer money as well as damaging to fragile ecosystems.
Border Wall in the News Blog
Nature.org
The Brownsville Herald
US Customs and Border Protection Fencing Construction Status 1/2/2009
Showing posts with label environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label environment. Show all posts
Friday, January 23, 2009
Sunday, May 25, 2008
Sepulveda Basin Wildlife Reserve
When my daughter was a student at Pepperdine, she lived one year in the San Fernando Valley in Encino. When we visited here there I discovered a wonderful area for nature photography: The Sepulveda Basin Wildlife Refuge.
The Los Angeles Parks website provides a wonderful history of how this refuge came to be and how much work has been put into providing habitat.
My memories are that it was a wonderful place. Near one of the major water treatment plants and along a natural waterway, Los Angeles has created a wonderful greenbelt area. As part of the water treatment plant, a beautiful Japanese garden was built with beautiful walkways, waterfalls, a pavilion and wonderful plants. The Nature Preserve consists of several ponds and lakes, walkways, and various habitats. I enjoyed watching white pelicans landing and fishing, cormorants, herons, egrets, and ducks along the water. I never got a chance to explore the treed areas for songbirds.
Nearby is Balboa Park with Lake Balboa now called Anothony C. Beilenson Park. I was amazed at this wonderful lake and recreation area all watered by reclaimed water. I would love for my home area, Hutto to do something as creatively beautiful when they build their next needed (soon) sewage treatment plant.
I've had the headlines from the Los Angeles Times on "My Yahoo" page since Debra was in college. So when I saw the Sepulveda Basin Wildlife Reserve in the headlines, I had to read the story.
While I understand the traffic issues in the Los Angeles area, it sure seems a shame to me to destroy part of this wonderful natural area just to add more traffic lanes or a different artery. I believe that people benefit from time they spend in nature whether it is in their gardens in their backyard, in a city park, a forest, near a stream, the ocean, or a wildlife preserve. The Sepulveda area was set aside long ago, while there was still open space. Now, open space in the LA area is at a premium. Houses and apartments surround this park and wildlife area.
I don't live out there, I don't have influence out there, but I sure hope that the plan that would leave this wildlife area intact is the one that is used.
The Los Angeles Parks website provides a wonderful history of how this refuge came to be and how much work has been put into providing habitat.
My memories are that it was a wonderful place. Near one of the major water treatment plants and along a natural waterway, Los Angeles has created a wonderful greenbelt area. As part of the water treatment plant, a beautiful Japanese garden was built with beautiful walkways, waterfalls, a pavilion and wonderful plants. The Nature Preserve consists of several ponds and lakes, walkways, and various habitats. I enjoyed watching white pelicans landing and fishing, cormorants, herons, egrets, and ducks along the water. I never got a chance to explore the treed areas for songbirds.
Nearby is Balboa Park with Lake Balboa now called Anothony C. Beilenson Park. I was amazed at this wonderful lake and recreation area all watered by reclaimed water. I would love for my home area, Hutto to do something as creatively beautiful when they build their next needed (soon) sewage treatment plant.
I've had the headlines from the Los Angeles Times on "My Yahoo" page since Debra was in college. So when I saw the Sepulveda Basin Wildlife Reserve in the headlines, I had to read the story.
While I understand the traffic issues in the Los Angeles area, it sure seems a shame to me to destroy part of this wonderful natural area just to add more traffic lanes or a different artery. I believe that people benefit from time they spend in nature whether it is in their gardens in their backyard, in a city park, a forest, near a stream, the ocean, or a wildlife preserve. The Sepulveda area was set aside long ago, while there was still open space. Now, open space in the LA area is at a premium. Houses and apartments surround this park and wildlife area.
I don't live out there, I don't have influence out there, but I sure hope that the plan that would leave this wildlife area intact is the one that is used.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Polar Bears
From Reuters: Alaska to sue to block polar bear listing
Not even the scientists can predict what will really happen in terms of global warming. But there is too much evidence from the melting of the ice sheet in Greenland (New York Times) to the escalating ice loss in Antarctica (Washington Post) for us not to recognize that our polar regions are in trouble. Polar Bear International has some good information on the current status of polar bears. Studies seem to show that the population has declined and that cub survival rates are down.
The polar bear is already listed as a "vulnerable species" on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) Red List of Endangered Species. The Alaska governor is worried that if the United States lists it on the federal endangered list that it will impact development in Alaska.
With the price of oil going up at such a rapid rate, there will certainly be a hue and cry for further oil exploration in Alaska. While some of that would help the local economy (and perhaps the national economy as well), Alaska is a priceless national treasure. So much of Alaska is pristine, undeveloped wilderness. At some point in time, the world needs to wean itself from its dependence on the fossil fuel, petroleum. When push comes to shove, humans are inventive, creative, and capable. Sooner or later we have to move to alternative fuels. If we go ahead and drill for oil in Alaska wilderness areas, it only postpones the inevitable. The arctic tundra is fragile, growing seasons are short. Land that is disturbed will take a very long time to recover its natural vegetation. If we resist the urge to drill in these pristine areas, perhaps the new technology will be forced to be developed more quickly.
Not even the scientists can predict what will really happen in terms of global warming. But there is too much evidence from the melting of the ice sheet in Greenland (New York Times) to the escalating ice loss in Antarctica (Washington Post) for us not to recognize that our polar regions are in trouble. Polar Bear International has some good information on the current status of polar bears. Studies seem to show that the population has declined and that cub survival rates are down.
The polar bear is already listed as a "vulnerable species" on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) Red List of Endangered Species. The Alaska governor is worried that if the United States lists it on the federal endangered list that it will impact development in Alaska.
With the price of oil going up at such a rapid rate, there will certainly be a hue and cry for further oil exploration in Alaska. While some of that would help the local economy (and perhaps the national economy as well), Alaska is a priceless national treasure. So much of Alaska is pristine, undeveloped wilderness. At some point in time, the world needs to wean itself from its dependence on the fossil fuel, petroleum. When push comes to shove, humans are inventive, creative, and capable. Sooner or later we have to move to alternative fuels. If we go ahead and drill for oil in Alaska wilderness areas, it only postpones the inevitable. The arctic tundra is fragile, growing seasons are short. Land that is disturbed will take a very long time to recover its natural vegetation. If we resist the urge to drill in these pristine areas, perhaps the new technology will be forced to be developed more quickly.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
La Jolla Seals - Legal Problems
It's a cold, gray day here in Central Texas. As I've gotten to feeling better, I've been back at my computer more. Next week, I'll be working on the photos from last year to put in my portfolio for the NANPA summit. I've been browsing some of my internet bookmarks - the Yellowstone Newspaper and today one of the pages about the La Jolla Seals.
The controversy out there continues. The news articles say that the court has ruled that the seals must go.
I read a lot about both sides of the controversy last spring. That wonderful retaining wall that lets you get so close to the seals to enjoy them and to photograph them was built with a generous donation from Ellen Browning Scripps with the intention of creating a permanent children's pool - a safe place for children to enjoy the ocean water. And for generations, people came with their children and shared the beach with the seals. The wall had to be altered when a child got caught in one of the openings where the sea water washed through the wall back out to sea. When those holes were closed, the waves deposited a lovely sand beach where the pool was. And the seals found a great place to haul out, to rest, and to give birth to their babies.
As the number of seals grew on the beach, some safety issues caused a closure of the beach for human use. More seals came. Many people enjoy the seals. They enjoy getting such an intimate look at the life cycle of these amazing sea creatures. Others remember the days when humans also used the area. The conflict about the usage of this area has become heated. One group wants to protect the seals - the other wants to evict the seals. It has gone to court. Right now, the courts are not ruling in favor of the seals' use of the beach - because of the laws that were made when the wall was built back in the 1930's.
There is no way to know what Ellen Browning Scripp would think about today's situation. Would she be angry that her children's pool is unavailable for children to swim in because of the seals or would she be happy that children can enjoy the area in a different way - being up close and personal watching seals and their babies.
I'm sure these seals can find a new home if they are forcibly evicted. I hope it won't happen during baby seal season. I wish it would not happen at all. If they have to find a new home, it won't be where so many people can enjoy watching baby seals being born, making their way across the beach for their first swim, or the bonding between mom and pup.
I hope someone can find a legal solution so this wonderful seal rookery can continue to thrive.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Wind energy
I confess I was glad to see this article: All UK homes could be wind powered by 2020 yesterday as I was reading the news on My Yahoo.
Growing up in Amarillo, I remember when the first wind powered generator was put up in Bushland. It was a large 2 bladed turbine. Many times you drove by and the blades were either still or were gently turning as the wind blew. Eventually, more designs appeared nearby. And the Amarillo area has so much wind year round that it is not surprising that wind farms are being built in the area.
My grandfather bought farm and ranchland in the 1950's and 1960's. One of them is in an area where wind farms are going in. My first thoughts have been that I am eager to see these on my land. After all, wind does not produce carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases - it is a "clean" source of energy.
But I've been surprised to learn that wind energy is not being welcomed everywhere. I've tried to do some research. But . . . it is hard to fully believe information coming from a wind energy company's website. They do have a vested interested in promoting wind energy.
The main concern seems to be the deaths of birds and bats. And at one particular wind energy area, this has been a major problem. The problems at Altamont Pass have been widely reported. The combination of early wind turbine designs and its location on a pass which is also a major migratory route for predators have made it and wind energy controversial for those who love birds.
This article: Putting Wind's Impact on Birds into Perspective gives a bigger picture of the impact of wind farms on birds.
But I still don't have enough information. Are the newer designed wind turbines safer for birds? What elevation do migrating birds chose to fly? (I know migrating geese fly very high in the sky - I've seen them) For my own personal land - which birds will be affected? Most of the birds are ground birds - larks, sparrows, curlews, quail, etc. I don't think the Texas Panhandle has large populations of bats like we do here in Central Texas.
There are so many issues here: impact on wildlife, future energy needs, global warming, and even world peace. I'm naive - I don't want to believe that the only reason we have soldiers in Iraq is because of the oil found there. But . . . for many reasons, I believe it is important for our country to be able to provide for its own energy needs without relying on imported oil.
I also hear that we have foreign companies wanting to come in and build wind generators and run wind farms. Not to be negative to foreign investment, but with all the jobs that are migrating overseas, surely we have enough American companies working on wind energy.
Does wind energy need more regulation? Probably - we need things like site corridors, bird migration corridors.
But it is so easy to be negative against something. And if we don't change our energy consumption and production, we won't have enough energy in the future.
Complicated issue - no doubt, but I hope that all the groups interested in this issue can learn to work together for what is best for everyone - clean energy, environmentally safe, minimal impact on wildlife and the esthetic issues.
Growing up in Amarillo, I remember when the first wind powered generator was put up in Bushland. It was a large 2 bladed turbine. Many times you drove by and the blades were either still or were gently turning as the wind blew. Eventually, more designs appeared nearby. And the Amarillo area has so much wind year round that it is not surprising that wind farms are being built in the area.
My grandfather bought farm and ranchland in the 1950's and 1960's. One of them is in an area where wind farms are going in. My first thoughts have been that I am eager to see these on my land. After all, wind does not produce carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases - it is a "clean" source of energy.
But I've been surprised to learn that wind energy is not being welcomed everywhere. I've tried to do some research. But . . . it is hard to fully believe information coming from a wind energy company's website. They do have a vested interested in promoting wind energy.
The main concern seems to be the deaths of birds and bats. And at one particular wind energy area, this has been a major problem. The problems at Altamont Pass have been widely reported. The combination of early wind turbine designs and its location on a pass which is also a major migratory route for predators have made it and wind energy controversial for those who love birds.
This article: Putting Wind's Impact on Birds into Perspective gives a bigger picture of the impact of wind farms on birds.
But I still don't have enough information. Are the newer designed wind turbines safer for birds? What elevation do migrating birds chose to fly? (I know migrating geese fly very high in the sky - I've seen them) For my own personal land - which birds will be affected? Most of the birds are ground birds - larks, sparrows, curlews, quail, etc. I don't think the Texas Panhandle has large populations of bats like we do here in Central Texas.
There are so many issues here: impact on wildlife, future energy needs, global warming, and even world peace. I'm naive - I don't want to believe that the only reason we have soldiers in Iraq is because of the oil found there. But . . . for many reasons, I believe it is important for our country to be able to provide for its own energy needs without relying on imported oil.
I also hear that we have foreign companies wanting to come in and build wind generators and run wind farms. Not to be negative to foreign investment, but with all the jobs that are migrating overseas, surely we have enough American companies working on wind energy.
Does wind energy need more regulation? Probably - we need things like site corridors, bird migration corridors.
But it is so easy to be negative against something. And if we don't change our energy consumption and production, we won't have enough energy in the future.
Complicated issue - no doubt, but I hope that all the groups interested in this issue can learn to work together for what is best for everyone - clean energy, environmentally safe, minimal impact on wildlife and the esthetic issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)