No, not at all. Why, then, does the revenue from the sale of motor vehicle license plates (in Pennsylvania) go into a pot known as the "Wild Resources Conservation Fund?"
This is especially egregious because it is the automobile, and our society's century-old addition to it, that has destroyed so much of Wild Nature (and continues to).
Go a hearty walk.
Burn some calories, not gasoline.
Showing posts with label habitat destruction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label habitat destruction. Show all posts
Thursday, July 9, 2015
Monday, October 6, 2014
Forest fragmentation in Vermont
I wrote this column earlier this year. Afterwards, nothing changed. The bulldozers keep on churning.
The Cornell Lab of Ornithology: “Forest fragmentation occurs when large, continuous forests are divided into smaller blocks, either by roads, clearing for agriculture, urbanization, or other human development. Ornithologists suspect that fragmentation harms many woodland birds by increasing their susceptibility to predation and nest parasitism.
“Predators such as jays, crows, raccoons, and cats, as well as the parasitic Brown-headed Cowbird, typically are not abundant in extensive forests. But when a forest is fragmented, predators and cowbirds gain more access to the woodland. The importance of large areas of continuous forest for maintaining forest-interior bird species has been demonstrated in the eastern United States during the past 15 years.”
The chopping (literally) of forests into smaller blocks is a top cause behind population declines of many native North American birds. They include the state bird of Vermont, the Hermit Thrush.
“Forest fragmentation remains an important conservation issue for many species of wildlife, including the Hermit Thrush, which prefers large tracts of forests,” wrote ornithologist Douglas P. Kibbe in “The Second Atlas of Breeding Birds of Vermont.”
The rate at which fragmentation is occurring is substantial greater in Pennsylvania. I know there are some folks in Harrisburg who understand the threat to the commonwealth’s natural heritage. But I’d bet that none sit in the legislature or statehouse.
The wildlife-unfriendly issue of “forest fragmentation” just
went before the Vermont Senate in Montpelier in the form of legislation to stop
it in the Green Mountain State.
Too bad, though, for the state’s natural heritage that in
the end corporate powers won and the legislation was tabled.
But, the very fact that proposed legislation focused on the
issue is remarkable. The Vermont Senate may have set a “Ripley’s Believe It Or
Not” record as the first state legislative body anywhere in the U.S. to address
the issue.
“A proposal to limit forest fragmentation was thwarted by
developers who oppose using the state’s land and development laws as a tool to
keep woodlands intact, according to the lead sponsor of the bill that was
gutted on the Senate floor Wednesday,” the Web-based news magazine VTDigger reported March 19.
“There’s nothing ‘complicated’ about stopping forest
fragmentation,” one Vermonter commented. “This is just another episode of
legislators kow-towing to the corporate interests that make campaign
contributions.”
State Sen. Peter Gailbraith wrote, “The Audubon Society
points out that Vermont has the most diversity of bird species of any state in
the continental U.S., and the reason is our large inter-connected forests. The
(Gov. Peter Shumlin) administration has itself identified fragmentation as the
number one threat to biological diversity in our forests, and yet neither the
administration nor the legislature is willing to do anything to prevent it.
This is a tragedy.”
Galbraith also noted that the legislature’s nod to “study”
the issue is only cover. “A study is the legislature’s way of killing a
proposal while pretending to the voters that it is concerned about the issue.”
The bill would have required development already undergoing
the Act 250 review process to maintain forest integrity, VTdigger reported. “If development must alter forests, the
developer could purchase a conservation offset at another site to balance the
impact.”
Act 250, a state Website explains, is “Vermont’s development and control
law, established in 1970. The law provides a public, quasi-judicial process for
reviewing and managing the environmental, social and fiscal consequences of
major subdivisions and development in Vermont through the issuance of land use
permits.”
Converting
large, continuous forests into smaller woodlots (islands) has many negative
impacts, especially on bird species whose reproductive success plummets in
fragmented landscapes. The Cornell Lab of Ornithology: “Forest fragmentation occurs when large, continuous forests are divided into smaller blocks, either by roads, clearing for agriculture, urbanization, or other human development. Ornithologists suspect that fragmentation harms many woodland birds by increasing their susceptibility to predation and nest parasitism.
“Predators such as jays, crows, raccoons, and cats, as well as the parasitic Brown-headed Cowbird, typically are not abundant in extensive forests. But when a forest is fragmented, predators and cowbirds gain more access to the woodland. The importance of large areas of continuous forest for maintaining forest-interior bird species has been demonstrated in the eastern United States during the past 15 years.”
The chopping (literally) of forests into smaller blocks is a top cause behind population declines of many native North American birds. They include the state bird of Vermont, the Hermit Thrush.
“Forest fragmentation remains an important conservation issue for many species of wildlife, including the Hermit Thrush, which prefers large tracts of forests,” wrote ornithologist Douglas P. Kibbe in “The Second Atlas of Breeding Birds of Vermont.”
The rate at which fragmentation is occurring is substantial greater in Pennsylvania. I know there are some folks in Harrisburg who understand the threat to the commonwealth’s natural heritage. But I’d bet that none sit in the legislature or statehouse.
Wednesday, August 13, 2014
Vermont lawmakers take on issue of forest fragmentation
I wrote this column earlier this summer
The wildlife-unfriendly issue of “forest fragmentation” just
went before the Vermont Senate in Montpelier in the form of legislation to stop
it in the Green Mountain State.
Too bad, though, for the state’s natural heritage that in
the end corporate powers won and the legislation was tabled.
But, the very fact that proposed legislation focused on the
issue is remarkable. The Vermont Senate may have set a “Ripley’s Believe It Or
Not” record as the first state legislative body anywhere in the U.S. to address
the issue.
“A proposal to limit forest fragmentation was thwarted by
developers who oppose using the state’s land and development laws as a tool to
keep woodlands intact, according to the lead sponsor of the bill that was
gutted on the Senate floor Wednesday,” the Web-based news magazine VTDigger reported March 19.
“There’s nothing ‘complicated’ about stopping forest
fragmentation,” one Vermonter commented. “This is just another episode of
legislators kow-towing to the corporate interests that make campaign
contributions.”
State Sen. Peter Gailbraith wrote, “The Audubon Society
points out that Vermont has the most diversity of bird species of any state in
the continental U.S., and the reason is our large inter-connected forests. The
(Gov. Peter Shumlin) administration has itself identified fragmentation as the
number one threat to biological diversity in our forests, and yet neither the
administration nor the legislature is willing to do anything to prevent it.
This is a tragedy.”
Galbraith also noted that the legislature’s nod to “study”
the issue is only cover. “A study is the legislature’s way of killing a
proposal while pretending to the voters that it is concerned about the issue.”
The bill would have required development already undergoing
the Act 250 review process to maintain forest integrity, VTdigger reported. “If development must alter forests, the
developer could purchase a conservation offset at another site to balance the
impact.”
Act 250, a state Website explains, is “Vermont’s development and control
law, established in 1970. The law provides a public, quasi-judicial process for
reviewing and managing the environmental, social and fiscal consequences of
major subdivisions and development in Vermont through the issuance of land use
permits.”
Converting
large, continuous forests into smaller woodlots (islands) has many negative
impacts, especially on bird species whose reproductive success plummets in
fragmented landscapes. The Cornell Lab of Ornithology: “Forest fragmentation occurs when large, continuous forests are divided into smaller blocks, either by roads, clearing for agriculture, urbanization, or other human development. Ornithologists suspect that fragmentation harms many woodland birds by increasing their susceptibility to predation and nest parasitism.
“Predators such as jays, crows, raccoons, and cats, as well as the parasitic Brown-headed Cowbird, typically are not abundant in extensive forests. But when a forest is fragmented, predators and cowbirds gain more access to the woodland. The importance of large areas of continuous forest for maintaining forest-interior bird species has been demonstrated in the eastern United States during the past 15 years.”
The chopping (literally) of forests into smaller blocks is a top cause behind population declines of many native North American birds. They include the state bird of Vermont, the Hermit Thrush.
“Forest fragmentation remains an important conservation issue for many species of wildlife, including the Hermit Thrush, which prefers large tracts of forests,” wrote ornithologist Douglas P. Kibbe in “The Second Atlas of Breeding Birds of Vermont.”
The rate at which fragmentation is occurring is substantial greater in Pennsylvania. I know there are some folks in Harrisburg who understand the threat to the commonwealth’s natural heritage. But I’d bet that none sit in the legislature or statehouse.
Monday, February 3, 2014
A good walk yields surprises
Parking,
roads, sprawl housing and highways equal traffic congestion.
That’s what
I see daily on one particular highway in Vermont.
And just as
I used to do while walking along Route 93 in and near Conyngham, Pa., I look closely
at each passing car to determine how many people are in it. My conservative
estimate is this: Only one of every 99 motor vehicles that zips past me as I
walk the shared walkway/bicycle path has more than one person – the driver –
inside the cab of the hurtling 2,000-pound hunk of steel, plastic and glass.
That tells
me this: There is no ride-sharing or carpooling to speak of. Vermonters, just
like most Americans across the land, are true believers in the “freedom to
pollute” philosophy I first heard about while a college student at Idaho State
University in the early 970s.
(I write to
air some personal thoughts, not pass on those of any organization).
After having
my new passport photo taken at the town hall in early July (yes, Vermont has
“towns;” Pennsylvania has one, Bloomsburg), I walked across the street to the
Williston library to get a new library card. And it will let me borrow books
from other local libraries, like the one in Essex Junction village to the
north, which I actually live closer to and can walk to, not drive.
I could walk
as well to the Williston library, but doing so would pose all sorts of safety
hazards – all created by the absence of sidewalks or walkway.
When parking
at a grocery store two miles from home, I always shake my head in wonderment at
the home builder’s sign stuck into the turf across the road I just traveled,
for that is a perfect example of what helps generate more vehicular traffic in
the first place: Sprawl development.
It’s the
same “highway-leads-to-sprawl-and-more-cars” situation I saw for years snaking
across the Nescopeck Creek valley outside Conyngham.
Yes, I know
everyone deserves a nice home. It’s American, after all. But yet I see, while
walking, more than a few nice places for sale these days, both in Williston and
in Essex Junction. It was much the same situation in the Hazleton area during
my two decades there.
How about we try and get people into these
existing houses before more natural land is chewed up for a new sprawl
neighborhood and its attendant automobiles? Will there be yet another “meadows”
development in Sugarloaf? It’s inevitable, I guess.
So, I offer
some suggestions: Put walkways, bicycle paths and sidewalks at the top of the
funding heap. And remember that spending less on roads means more for public
health and environmental mitigation.
Don’t allow
any more trees to be felled. Trees native to Pennsylvania (just as those native
to northern New England) are carbon dioxide sinks and yield oxygen in the
bargain.
The
objective of our municipal planning staffs should be to give people the freedom
to move about freely without the burden of enormous gasoline and automobile
expenses. What could be more American than that?
P.S. Experts recommend at least 2½
hours of moderate activity (such as brisk walking, brisk cycling, or yard work)
a week. It's fine to walk in blocks of
10 minutes or more throughout your day and week. If you're worried about how
brisk walking might affect your health, talk with your doctor before you start
a walking program. Daily dog walks are also a great way to keep up your walking
routine.
And walking helps you meet other folks.
You can’t do that when behind the wheel of your car, truck or SUV.
You can read more at http://www.fletcherallen.org/health_information/?id=tp23026
Vermont, I
grant, is a leader in alternative transportation choices, but widening highways
or building new ones simply to relieve congestion does not work – regardless of
the state.
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Ecology lessons from the Cold War
The headline alone snared me to read this article as I am a Cold War veteran (7 years in Strategic Air Command out of an Air Force career of 26 years). The awful truth is, however, that the losses of biodiversity (our natural heritage) continue to escalate into what is universally called the sixth great extinction crisis. I saw if for myself this morning in the Adirondacks of New York State; and the 6 million-acre Adirondack Park is now more than half public land. But still, even in a concisely protected place like that, the losses continue -- all of them due to the human community's inability to even consider living modestly and in concert with the land.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)